Quote Originally Posted by drtofu66
Because I had the best hand at that point and didn't want to let him make an easy fold if he was bluffing. If he's bluffing he views the minraise as weak (as in this case) and he pushes for me. Given the size of his reraise I thought that was likely to happen. If he's got a lower set he pushes anyway. If he's got some TPGK or 2 pair hand he's practically drawing dead; with a minraise to his reraise he at least calls (I don't see him laying down to a minraise after that healthy raise with either of those hands) but *might* find a fold to a push. The only other thing I thought he might have was Asxs (which I've seen 25NL players push on the flop anyway) and I just wanted to keep the pot alive and growing. My plan loses a lot of juice if a spade comes on the turn, but what the hell-- I'll take that chance with top set here.

Maybe that line of thinking's dumb and if there are flaws in it, I'm sure open for discussion.
I'm definately not in the camp of saying minraises always suck etc. Here are my thoughts on this:

On some occassions, it might indeed be the best line to take. This might be one of them. The "flaw" of this, is a metagame one mostly. If an aware player sees through your habit of minraising your monsters because you want others to come over the top of it, this is going to work to your disadvantage in the future. If it always means the same thing when you take a certain line, you become predictable, which is just as bad as it gets in poker. Ofcourse, your opponents would need to be aware.. at the lower stakes not too problematic probably. You'll more likely get horribly owned at higher stakes with subtle predictability in your plays.