panel hand - turn - panel review
 

You actually call and utg calls behind. 3 to the turn for 5.25 bb.

(3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]) T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Utg checks, emp bets, hero?

Turn:

Panelist One:

<font color="red"> Even though hero improved his hand, this isn't a place to raise. EMP's second donk into two callers very strongly suggests that he has a hand of some sort. You also have to worry about weak UTG calling along on the dry board. Hero has 5 outs to win and is getting 6:1, often 7:1 if you expect UTG to come along again. I'm not a fan of making loose turn calls. You can try to argue that you'll make up a bet or two when the bad players bet into you and call your raise on the river if you improve. But in my mind, it's bad because you don't know that UTG is in and you don't know that bad EMP will bet into a paired board or QJT board, so you will be short sometimes.
</font>

Panelist Two:

<font color="green"> We hit one of the cards we were looking for so folding is definately out of the question. Raising is certainly a possibility since the UTG limper called the flop bet. It is possible that our pair of tens is good but the pot will only be about 7 big bets when it gets to him if we decide to just call. It seems unlikely that he has any kind of legitimate draw so at best he is breaking even should he call the turn with a 5-outer. If we knew that he had more outs against us we would want to raise and make him pay the maximum. But when he has 5 or less outs he will probably fold for two bets (and not make a mistake) or call one bet and not make too much of a mistake. The other downside to raising is that he might have a jack (that he will not fold). So the "raise for protection" argument doesn't really hold any water for this hand.

OTOH we could raise here if we felt that it had value. I think that it probably does and a good side effect is that we will charge the most to anyone who happened to pick up an OESD on the turn. So if we are raising for value then I like it. That said I don't mind just calling either since the pot hasn't gotten to a point where weaker draws can call correctly.
</font>

Panelist Three:

<font color="blue"> We hit out T and have middle pair (I just noticed that I didn't assing any outs to the T on the flop, fortunatly, it wouldn't have changed my answer). I have no idea what emp has. He could be betting middle, top or maybe even bottom pair (who knows, he could have A high).
We could raise, which will probably make UTG fold and emp call (if he raise, I'm done with the hand).
Or we could call, which gives a better chance of UTG calling.

I think raising is our best option here. We will risk an extra bet compared to calling, but we will probably get UTG to fold and we also have the chance of getting emp to check to us on the river. Also, we don't risk having UTG hitting on the river.

</font>

Panelist Four:

<font color="purple"> Calls. This was probably the worst card we could have gotten. EMP could be on middle or bottom pair which puts us ahead, but it's also possible we are behind to a J. The pot is getting big enough I don't want to fold for one bet but I think raising here is spew.

</font>

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

I would like a turn raise if we didn't have to call a 3bet. Unfortunately getting 10:1 I would have to be pretty sure I'm crushed (meaning frequently up against 2 pair or better) to fold to a 3bet. Our hand is too good to fold just yet (even if we have to fold to a river bet, it's because emp will frequently check the river after getting called twice with his A4 or whatever).

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

I'd still fold.

EMP is a fish, right? I doubt he's firing two bullets with nothing. I don't think a fish would fire again with a 7 with 2 flop callers and another overcard for him to worry about. I assume we're drawing to two pair/trips, and 6.5-1 isn't enough.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

Unreal. We have at best 5 outs and we're getting 6 to 1. But we are so macho that having made a raise PF and fiddled a call on the flop, now we're thinking of *raising* because we have to fight for this pot. I wouldn't even be here but if I was, I'd fold without a second thought. I missed my BD draws and paired the wrong card. Mostly my opponent will have a jack and I am going to pay a minimum of two big bets to find out that I had no business staying in this pot.

What I want to know is, why bother learning about pot odds etc if I ignore them when it suits?

I suspect this hand has been chosen because we river something though or our opponent chose this hand to bet bottom pair all the way, so all those who think there is anything to do here but fold will be rewarded. But I sincerely hope not. Most times, raising PF, calling flop, raising turn, calling river will cost 4.5BB. My way would have cost 1SB. I like my way.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

Another split panel. Two of them don't seem to even know what they want to do. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Again, any sort of postflop read on EMP would mean we can stop simply speculating that his flop donk = a good hand. It's a vital element missing from the hand. Is Fuji purposely not giving it to us?

Would a raise/fold suck here? The average bad player (which we have to assume EMP is - see above) won't 3-bet without a really great hand, at which point we can safely get away from it, while if he just calls/checks the river we see the showdown for the same price as if we'd just called down (which I assume the panelists are generally advocating).

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
Another split panel. Two of them don't seem to even know what they want to do. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Again, any sort of postflop read on EMP would mean we can stop simply speculating that his flop donk = a good hand. It's a vital element missing from the hand. Is Fuji purposely not giving it to us?

Would a raise/fold suck here? The average bad player (which we have to assume EMP is - see above) won't 3-bet without a really great hand, at which point we can safely get away from it, while if he just calls/checks the river we see the showdown for the same price as if we'd just called down (which I assume the panelists are generally advocating).

[/ QUOTE ]

im pretty sure that if i gave you a bunch of info on the villains that the answers would be boring and all the same.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
Again, any sort of postflop read on EMP would mean we can stop simply speculating that his flop donk = a good hand. It's a vital element missing from the hand. Is Fuji purposely not giving it to us?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I think some are assuming that this is a typical micro bad player (too loose, too passive) while others might be thinking of a 40/1/1 player. I defintely assumed EMP was a fish. Stakes might matter if there are no stat reads.

[ QUOTE ]

Would a raise/fold suck here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think we can raise/fold, since we have 5 outs vs two pair and we'd be getting at least 10-1.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
Unreal. We have at best 5 outs and we're getting 6 to 1. But we are so macho that having made a raise PF and fiddled a call on the flop, now we're thinking of *raising* because we have to fight for this pot. I wouldn't even be here but if I was, I'd fold without a second thought. I missed my BD draws and paired the wrong card. Mostly my opponent will have a jack and I am going to pay a minimum of two big bets to find out that I had no business staying in this pot.

What I want to know is, why bother learning about pot odds etc if I ignore them when it suits?

I suspect this hand has been chosen because we river something though or our opponent chose this hand to bet bottom pair all the way, so all those who think there is anything to do here but fold will be rewarded. But I sincerely hope not. Most times, raising PF, calling flop, raising turn, calling river will cost 4.5BB. My way would have cost 1SB. I like my way.

[/ QUOTE ]
wow dude, at least read the reads he gave in the first post. also, realize that most of the time you dont end up in a hand like this, and this is why the hand is interesting.

"5 outs at best" notrly.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, basically, you're just going to assume whatever means you can raise or call. We don't know much about our opponent, although we all know that the default is that they don't bet if they don't have TP, but you're assuming *based on absolutely nothing* that he has a pair that you beat.

I think it's a characteristic of the fish that they take the most positive view of their cards. Well, they think, I have bottom pair and it might just be good. So they call down.

Well, he mostly has a jack. The times he doesn't, I can live with.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unreal. We have at best 5 outs and we're getting 6 to 1. But we are so macho that having made a raise PF and fiddled a call on the flop, now we're thinking of *raising* because we have to fight for this pot. I wouldn't even be here but if I was, I'd fold without a second thought. I missed my BD draws and paired the wrong card. Mostly my opponent will have a jack and I am going to pay a minimum of two big bets to find out that I had no business staying in this pot.

What I want to know is, why bother learning about pot odds etc if I ignore them when it suits?

I suspect this hand has been chosen because we river something though or our opponent chose this hand to bet bottom pair all the way, so all those who think there is anything to do here but fold will be rewarded. But I sincerely hope not. Most times, raising PF, calling flop, raising turn, calling river will cost 4.5BB. My way would have cost 1SB. I like my way.

[/ QUOTE ]
wow dude, at least read the reads he gave in the first post. also, realize that most of the time you dont end up in a hand like this, and this is why the hand is interesting.

"5 outs at best" notrly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I read the reads. He said the guy was bad. Nothing more than that. He didn't say "bets bottom pair" or anything like that. Like I say, you guys just assume that bad means that he will play in whatever way allows you not to fold. God forbid you should actually give up on a pot!

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

[/ QUOTE ]

party gives you 20 seconds to settle your dilemma miles. what do you do when you here the beep beep beep and ppl are typing "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz" in the chat?

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

I'm done, next hand please.

Even if utg overcalls and the house takes no rake, the pot is 7.25 if I call. (I'm not even considering a raise.) If I count my 2 T's and 3 Q's as full outs I'm not getting the odds to call if I think I'm behind and I don't have many reasons to believe I'm ahead here. I think it's too likely that we're dominated here to continue.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, basically, you're just going to assume whatever means you can raise or call. We don't know much about our opponent, although we all know that the default is that they don't bet if they don't have TP, but you're assuming *based on absolutely nothing* that he has a pair that you beat.

I think it's a characteristic of the fish that they take the most positive view of their cards. Well, they think, I have bottom pair and it might just be good. So they call down.

Well, he mostly has a jack. The times he doesn't, I can live with.

[/ QUOTE ]

dr

what do you think he thinks hero has? if you guessed overcards, you are correct!

fuji

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

[/ QUOTE ]

party gives you 20 seconds to settle your dilemma miles. what do you do when you here the beep beep beep and ppl are typing "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz" in the chat?

[/ QUOTE ]
obviously you realize that i would never have reads at the table that equated perfectly to the vague reads you have given me to work with in this post.

either way, the typical behavior imo, with all of this players good hands, is that he would check the flop. i do not expect him to have a very strong J if that's what he has. i expect him to have one pair a majority of the time, and there are many 3x, 7x, and pocket pair hands that i am now ahead of on the turn. i do not see why he would slow down just because he got called and a pretty raggy turn fell. so, i feel like im ahead of this player pretty often.

i'd raise this hand given the information you've given me.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

i'd look for reasons to raise as this is almost an ideal card situation for a free showdown raise. the biggest factor working against that is that EMP may donk the river with a worse hand and the pot would be pretty large by that point. UTG is a concern. I think the key is to determine if he'd fold a pair+gutshot. if so, we will be able to fold him a very large portion of the time. if 3-bet by EMP HU, i think we'd have to let it go figuring a set or two-pair will cut too much into our 5 outs.

at game speed, i would probably just call. this is where the odd read is really starting to break down when it used 'bad' to describe him and made no mention of aggression/donk-factorness. I want to solidify my read. knowing what a player like this donks with is really valuable, especially one that I'll be hunting in the future.

a bit wishy washy of a response.. but i am pretty sure i'd call at game time. if i were never playing another hand again and had no incentive to try to get an extra read on this great villian, then i'd raise b/c i think that will have more value, especially if UTG will fold a hand as strong as a pair+gutshot.

(hopefully constructive) comments on panelists:
one:
panelist one wasn't clear, but it sounds like they recommended a fold. (I'm not a fan of making loose turn calls. You can try to argue that... But in my mind, it's bad...). however, this is inconsistent as they counted a T as .5 outs on the flop discussion and the rainbow T is the best T possible.

two:
"So if we are raising for value then I like it." I'd like to see more of a commitment to your choice. Do you think there's value in it, etc. You also talked about 5 outers a lot, but didn't mention the potential gutshot that many connector type hands may have now. Given the 'weak' read on UTG, he might fold a pair+gutshot which actually has a lot of outs vs our hand.

three:
"We will risk an extra bet compared to calling, but we will probably get UTG to fold and we also have the chance of getting emp to check to us on the river."
What if EMP donks the river? What if UTG stays in? Do you ever bet the river UI. I wasn't too clear on what your full plan was. The response seemed focused on what we hope will happen (UTG folds, EMP calls and checks river), but a raise like this needs to plan if its for a free showdown or for protection (but not necessary folding for one more bet).

four:
I felt for sure pFour was going to want to raise after the post on taking control of the hand. I like a turn raise much better than a flop raise. I'm curious how this panelist will compare the two when the hand has played out and all comments have been posted.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

[/ QUOTE ]

agree completely about the dilemma.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

btspider

i think the comments on the panelists is a good idea. note that there will be a post of the final review of the hand done by the panelists where actions may change.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
What I want to know is, why bother learning about pot odds etc if I ignore them when it suits?

[/ QUOTE ]

b/c we might have the best hand. the best hand doesn't need outs.

[ QUOTE ]
I suspect this hand has been chosen because we river something though or our opponent chose this hand to bet bottom pair all the way, so all those who think there is anything to do here but fold will be rewarded. But I sincerely hope not. Most times, raising PF, calling flop, raising turn, calling river will cost 4.5BB. My way would have cost 1SB. I like my way.

[/ QUOTE ]

higher variance doesn't mean less EV. we wouldn't call riv if we raised the turn. it'd be a free showdown raise for most suggesting it.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
btspider

i think the comments on the panelists is a good idea. note that there will be a post of the final review of the hand done by the panelists where actions may change.

[/ QUOTE ]

post it in SSSH too.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

The T has done nothing for me. I just don't put the emp player on anything less then top pair. MUBS maybe, but seeing a horrible player donk 2 straight streets leads me to beleive I am beat. I have no issues releasing this hand. By my estimate the pot is 5bb. I lost both my draws, so really on 5 cards help me. 2 Tens and 3 queens. If emp is holding JT or QJ, I'm really up a creek. I fold.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

If anything, this exercise has shown us how vital reads are.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]

post it in SSSH too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Post the stakes if you're going to post it in SSSH.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

post it in SSSH too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Post the stakes if you're going to post it in SSSH.

[/ QUOTE ]

stakes are relatively unimportant imo.. what do you think changes from 1/2 to 5/10 in how this hand should be played?

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What I want to know is, why bother learning about pot odds etc if I ignore them when it suits?

[/ QUOTE ]

b/c we might have the best hand. the best hand doesn't need outs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, as I say, the fish always believe they might have the best hand. They call us down with middle pair to our great delight, and they believe they're winning. I am trying to not be a fish, not talk myself into joining them.

My opponents tend to be passive if they're useless. If they donk it into me when I've raised, I credit them with top pair on a flop like unless I have a read. I might be folding the best hand from time to time but I'm not losing much because I will generally be right. These guys love to check and call! They don't like betting out. They like to be winning before they do.



[ QUOTE ]
I suspect this hand has been chosen because we river something though or our opponent chose this hand to bet bottom pair all the way, so all those who think there is anything to do here but fold will be rewarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me either. But of course we should not learn the results.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I sincerely hope not. Most times, raising PF, calling flop, raising turn, calling river will cost 4.5BB. My way would have cost 1SB. I like my way.

[/ QUOTE ]

higher variance doesn't mean less EV. we wouldn't call riv if we raised the turn. it'd be a free showdown raise for most suggesting it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm fully aware that you have to accept variance if you want to make value. I'm suggesting it simply is not +EV to try to power a pot away from a guy who likely has us beat.

And we are not taking a free showdown at the river. We are "betting for value"!

The panel have simply decided that "bad" means "will bet any piece of the board or nothing at all. Once you've made that decision, it's easy to spew bets in this hand.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, basically, you're just going to assume whatever means you can raise or call. We don't know much about our opponent, although we all know that the default is that they don't bet if they don't have TP, but you're assuming *based on absolutely nothing* that he has a pair that you beat.

I think it's a characteristic of the fish that they take the most positive view of their cards. Well, they think, I have bottom pair and it might just be good. So they call down.

Well, he mostly has a jack. The times he doesn't, I can live with.

[/ QUOTE ]

dr

what do you think he thinks hero has? if you guessed overcards, you are correct!

fuji

[/ QUOTE ]

You read his mind? Jeez, if I could do that, I wouldn't be in this forum struggling to learn poker!

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
The panel have simply decided that "bad" means "will bet any piece of the board or nothing at all. Once you've made that decision, it's easy to spew bets in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what do you do - assume that a single donk means villain has a hand that beats anything but a miracle catch?

Unfortunately, this whole process is based on purposely withheld information. We're told villain is "bad," but not told whether that's bad-passive or bad-aggressive.

Here's my assumption, based on Fuji's flop call, as well as the fact that (I presume) there's a river: villain is laggro and could very well donk with air as long as an A or K didn't flop.

Does this change anything for you?

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What I want to know is, why bother learning about pot odds etc if I ignore them when it suits?

[/ QUOTE ]

b/c we might have the best hand. the best hand doesn't need outs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, as I say, the fish always believe they might have the best hand. They call us down with middle pair to our great delight, and they believe they're winning. I am trying to not be a fish, not talk myself into joining them.

[/ QUOTE ]

sounds like you are overcorrecting and becoming too weak-tight then. when you play 10-max micro, you tend to lean on flushes/straights to drive your winnings. once you move up and/or try 6-max, you really have to play the more marginal situations since those sources start to dry up.

none of the decisions are easy one way or the other. its important to recognize its close rather than this results oriented thinking of you'd lose 1 SB while the looser TAG's here would have lost more.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what do you think he thinks hero has? if you guessed overcards, you are correct!

fuji

[/ QUOTE ]

You read his mind? Jeez, if I could do that, I wouldn't be in this forum struggling to learn poker!

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not mind-reading. It's standard hand-reading. Even loose-passive fish will occasionally know enough to take shots at a pfr on a super-ragged flop.