Planning for Dummies

[bhaley66]

Why would we expect him to "lead some hands that we beat a lot"? Wouldn't being so passive, signal that he is only raising strong hands? Obviously he did check down a nut hand; but prolly wouldn't do it a lot?

[pdk1010]

Why would we expect him to "lead some hands that we beat a lot"? Wouldn't being so passive, signal that he is only raising strong hands? Obviously he did check down a nut hand; but prolly wouldn't do it a lot?

i feel like villain leading here is more a sign of his hands weakness then strength...his thought process when he has the nuts is to slow play and try to loltrap us.

him leading is like telling us that he doesnt value his hand as a nut made hand or anything even close imo

some percentage of the time he might be leading monsters but in most cases i agree with my original range but again i suck so im interested to hear ur thoughts on this

[JKDS]

Reads and stats dont give as much information as ppl think. At best, they describe a general tendency of the opponent to behave in a certain fashion, but that doesnt limit him to always acting in that manner. Sample sizes are also fairly small for these so they arent necessarily reliable anyway.

With that said we know this guy is a passive player...but that doesnt stop him from leading with A7 on the ATx board as opposed to check calling. Fuck, he can even fold it sometimes. He could also lead AA or TT sometimes..we dont really expect it..but he can.

So when we have TPGK and a loose passive bets the pot into us on a ATx board...folding is really really hard and is almost always not going to be correct (consider that he rarely has AA, or AK, we block AT, and theres only 3 combos of TT and 44 compared to how many Ax Tx and other hands he might have). On the other hand, more information is probably needed about his leading range to make raising profitable...so calling and re-evalutaing the turn is clearly best.