would you have called this river bet?

[DimitriT]

Not much of a read. The call didn't feel right since he suddenly woke
up when the river hit. But I want to know who would have laid down the hand at that point:

PokerStars Game #1901660187: Hold'em No Limit ($0.05/$0.10) - 2005/06/14 -
23:02:02 (ET)
Table 'Amnestia' Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: MookMonster ($8.65 in chips)
Seat 2: DimitriT ($18.95 in chips)
Seat 3: spidey37 ($3.20 in chips)
Seat 4: robash ($3.10 in chips)
Seat 5: macraf0419 ($1.25 in chips)
Seat 6: 1name1 ($15.05 in chips)
Seat 7: iamjosh ($2.50 in chips)
Seat 8: Dwreck ($3.90 in chips)
Seat 9: GROVER3 ($2.90 in chips)
iamjosh: posts small blind $0.05
Dwreck: posts big blind $0.10
MookMonster: posts big blind $0.10
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to DimitriT [Js Kc]
GROVER3: folds
MookMonster: checks
DimitriT: calls $0.10
spidey37: calls $0.10
robash: folds
robash leaves the table
macraf0419: folds
1name1: calls $0.10
iamjosh: calls $0.05
Dwreck: checks
*** FLOP *** [Tc 4s Jh]
everybody joins the table at seat #4
iamjosh: checks
Dwreck: checks
MookMonster: checks
DimitriT: bets $0.50
spidey37: folds
1name1: calls $0.50
iamjosh: folds
Dwreck: folds
MookMonster: folds
*** TURN *** [Tc 4s Jh] [Ks]
DimitriT: bets $1
1name1: calls $1
*** RIVER *** [Tc 4s Jh Ks] [Ts]
DimitriT: checks
1name1: bets $3.10
DimitriT: calls $3.10
*** SHOW DOWN ***
1name1: shows [Jc Th] (a full house, Tens full of Jacks)
DimitriT: mucks hand
1name1 collected $9.35 from pot
GROVER3 said, "nice"
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $9.80 | Rake $0.45
Board [Tc 4s Jh Ks Ts]
Seat 1: MookMonster folded on the Flop
Seat 2: DimitriT mucked [Js Kc]
Seat 3: spidey37 folded on the Flop
Seat 4: robash folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: macraf0419 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: 1name1 (button) showed [Jc Th] and won ($9.35) with a full house, Tens
full of Jacks
Seat 7: iamjosh (small blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 8: Dwreck (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 9: GROVER3 folded before Flop (didn't bet)

[biondino]

I would have folded. His betting up to that point was consistent with having a ten, and yours wasn't aggressive enough to dislodge him even if that was all he had. Why didn't you bet more on the turn? And why did you check on the river? And then why did you only call after his bet? That river bet is enormous for a fish - it screams a good hand, and two pairs wasn't likely to be up to it.

Sorry to be critical, but I don't think you played the hand well, and I don't think he played the hand misleadingly. What's your thoughts?

[DimitriT]

The flop bet was a typical strong bet at this table. Were only talking
.5/.10 here. Most raises were .30 so .50 was not a weak bet.

Same is true for the turn. Here I could have come out stronger but $1 is
almost pot sized.

The check on the river is for two reasons. At this point I'm not sure I
have the best hand and I want to limit my loss. I put him on a draw
early on so when the K hit and he called I suspected he had made it
with AQ. The other reason is that if he had missed his draw he would
have folded anyway so why risk the chips.

Now going over the possible hands he could have had I realize the river
should have shot any chance of me winning that hand. I was hoping he
had QK and was on the draw and that the K gave him TPGK. Other possibilities was AJ, but his call on the K was wrong. He would be protecting AA or KK with a raise on the flop. When he bet on the river
I thought AT? But that would mean he called with J and K.

I agree that I needed to fold the river bet. I just couldn't put him on JT.

Don't be sorry. I'm here for criticism otherwise I would have gone to the bad beats forum

[DaHorror]

I don't think your play was terrible.
I would have folded this one at the river because I did put him on 10-something - but not necessarily J-10.

The only thing I see that is questionable is the check against the river. If you had him on a straight, you might have lost a little less by betting $1 - $1.50 then fold when he reraised you. I have a hard time doing this for the same reason that you quoted. And because of the damn bluffers all over the place in the .05/.10 NL games. Of course then it all depends on whether or not you have them labelled as a bluffer.

He basically slow-played 2 pair, probably putting you on an overpair (doubtful with no preflop bet) or more likely J-Respectable Kicker.
You both had the same # of outs, right?
He just got lucky in the end.

[biondino]

Your reasoning's fine, and obv you know the table better than I do. And your flop bet was okay too. But after that, with draw possibilities arising, I'd have put more effort5 into making him fold, which is why I suggested a higher bet. And his raise on the river (which you'd have got regradless of whether you checked or bet) was the final clue. So I think although we would each have had differing reactions up to the river, it seems to be consensus that folding was the only option.

Psychologically I can totally see why you didn't, but it still doesn't make it right (even with the benfit of hindsight).

[Rondavu]

I would have put him on a full house. The difference being I would have thought it was 4's over 10's. He called your flop bet like he was slow playing a set of 4's. The K came completing a straight draw so he just went into call down mode, and then the board paired and he went nuts.

Obviously my read was wrong, since he didn't protect two pair on the flop. The result was the same however. he just had a different full house.

I would have folded to a huge bet thinking full house. Given the bet size I would have made the crying call as you did with a strong two pair.