NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

Villian is unknown.

Looks like I have to give him credit for a set here considering the limp/call preflop and the relatively dry board; or am I being too nitty?

Calling the min-raise to reevaluate on turn is fine, no?

Poker Stars - No Limit Hold'em Cash Game - $0.25/$0.50 Blinds - 9 Players - (LegoPoker HH Converter)

SB: $56.55
BB: $38.65
UTG: $69.15
UTG+1: $47.00
MP1: $11.25
MP2: $37.80
MP3: $20.45
Hero (CO): $50.00
BTN: $29.25

Preflop: Hero is dealt A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (9 Players)
UTG folds, UTG+1 calls $0.50, 2 folds, MP3 calls $0.50, <font color="red">Hero raises to $3.00</font>, 3 folds, UTG+1 calls $2.50, MP3 folds

Flop: ($7.25) 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 Players)
UTG+1 checks, <font color="red">Hero bets $5.00</font>, <font color="red">UTG+1 raises to $10.50</font>, Hero calls $5.50

Turn: ($28.25) 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 Players)
<font color="red">UTG+1 bets $25.00</font>,

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

This is played fine. I think I fold turn.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

check behind flop. Do not feareth the 5 outers. If he checks turn bet 1/2 pot for value, if he leads you simply call.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

AC,

If we check behind on flops like this with the goods, doesn't it kinda ruin our ability to c'bet with air on the same kind of flop?

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
AC,

If we check behind on flops like this with the goods, doesn't it kinda ruin our ability to c'bet with air on the same kind of flop?

[/ QUOTE ]


Against regulars maybe, but he is an unknown. And the multi-tabling regulars may not even be paying attention to this hand. Also it is the rare full ring nit that will check/raise your CB's with air. And the others are too dumb to fathom your pot control checking behind with AA "omgz he didn't protect his hand!!"

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

Also his most likely hand is a pocket pair to limp/call. If that's the case he's either got a set or drawing to 2 outs. It seems standard way ahead/behind to me. I would also like to see showdown to get info on this unknown player. I fear what is unknown.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also his most likely hand is a pocket pair to limp/call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this against an unknown.

I'm not hell bent on betting flop being better then checking, but I do know I'd puke if the turn came a ten, jack, queen and villain bet into me.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is played fine. I think I fold turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also his most likely hand is a pocket pair to limp/call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this against an unknown.

I'm not hell bent on betting flop being better then checking, but I do know I'd puke if the turn came a ten, jack, queen and villain bet into me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he could have QJ,QT,KJ,JT. These aren't more likely than a pocket pair. But if you are going to put him a range of just about everything then it should be even more important to you to want to see what he limp/calls in EP. And checking the flop will get to showdown most cheaply.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
check behind flop

[/ QUOTE ]

Results oriented, betting here is soooo standard, and checking should be done rarely for metagame purposes agains't regulars.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
check behind flop

[/ QUOTE ]

Results oriented, betting here is soooo standard, and checking should be done rarely for metagame purposes agains't regulars.

[/ QUOTE ]
Results oriented? Hardly. I think checking behind on a dry board like this is a great line here for the reasons mentioned.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

You are in position on a dry flop, agains't an opponent who is most likely to be bad (this is 50nl). The reasons stated strike me as a joke almost.

"And checking the flop will get to showdown most cheaply."

SOOO nitty, you have a great hand, you should be concerned about getting to a showdown cheap when A) You are OOP B) Your opponent had shown strength, and you have a decent but not great hand. Get some money in when you have control of the pot.

"I would also like to see showdown to get info on this unknown player."

Similar to the other point, why would you "waste" aces trying to get information on your opponent? It is bad to play a hand extremely meekly because you don't know your opponent.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
You are in position on a dry flop, agains't an opponent who is most likely to be bad (this is 50nl). The reasons stated strike me as a joke almost.

"And checking the flop will get to showdown most cheaply."

SOOO nitty, you have a great hand, you should be concerned about getting to a showdown cheap when A) You are OOP B) Your opponent had shown strength, and you have a decent but not great hand. Get some money in when you have control of the pot.

"I would also like to see showdown to get info on this unknown player."

Similar to the other point, why would you "waste" aces trying to get information on your opponent? It is bad to play a hand extremely meekly because you don't know your opponent.

[/ QUOTE ]
Best of luck.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

FWIW I checked behind with a few overpairs/tptk with a,k in a session I just completed and was shocked at how light I got looked up. Maybe there's something to this. Drawless boards obv.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

I don't get whats with that comment? This is just a discusion, you can keep your condescending comments to yourself.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

does anyone fold on the flop? mini raises are usually lure bets and u have to fold most of the time on the turn unless u hit a set. I almost never see a mini raise on the flop then have villian give up on the hand.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

against an unknown there is no reason to check this flop, that is ridiculous. you are betting here for value from a K and from villains who like to float flop cbets. to call the turn you need a read that says he would do this w/tpgk (since AK is unlikely here).

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
against an unknown there is no reason to check this flop, that is ridiculous. you are betting here for value from a K and from villains who like to float flop cbets. to call the turn you need a read that says he would do this w/tpgk (since AK is unlikely here).

[/ QUOTE ]


So you want to extract value from top pair. Is that the reason the bet here? Are we going to value bet all streets if blanks hit swelling the pot on each street? Or are we going to bet flop and turn and then check river UI? Are we going to make a value shove for stacks on the river?


And I really am not being results oriendted just because villian happened to get check/raised here, that is absurd. This is just a routine line I take in these situations.

If we're not going to push river for value vs his range then that means we are only going to be putting 2 bets in. If that's the case then why not put them in on turn and river and keep the pot small at the same time. Big pots are for big hands and a single pair is not a big hand, even AA.

At the same time we can induce bluffs from underpairs that don't want to give up. If we CB flop those hands will either just fold (loss of value) or they will trickily check/raise (tough spot). If opponent is a donk he will also be check/raising top pair here and unwittingly outplaying you.

Checking behind flop here DOES extract max value from villian's range as he will only be calling with top pair. We lose bluff induction from everything else. But even if he does have top pair we can still get value bets in on turn and river if he checks again.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

I am planning on going to bed, so we will see how long this is.

[ QUOTE ]
So you want to extract value from top pair. Is that the reason the bet here? Are we going to value bet all streets if blanks hit swelling the pot on each street? Or are we going to bet flop and turn and then check river UI? Are we going to make a value shove for stacks on the river?

[/ QUOTE ]

K well you blew that out of proportion, he never said anything about trying to play AA for stacks. But I will try and answer the questions 1-by-1. Betting here is to attract value from top pair, and to get the money in when you are reasonably sure you have the best hand. No one said anything about betting the turn. How NL works is that many pots go, raise pre, c-bet flop, check turn and bet river. If you bet the turn you usually get quite a few decent hands to fold, going losely by the baluga theorem. I wouldn't love shoving the river for stacks vs an unknow, but I wouldn't hate it either. Def depends on how we get there. But if it gets checked to us 3 times, you can be fairly confident you are ahead, and this is 50nl give people chances to make mistakes.

[ QUOTE ]
And I really am not being results oriendted just because villian happened to get check/raised here, that is absurd. This is just a routine line I take in these situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

It shouldn't be, at 50nl you will find quite a few villians willing to play for stacks with tptk type hands. And you lose a lot of value checking the flop, as well as giving hands that would have called a bet a free chance to catch up. Checking the flop with tptk type hands is a signifigant mistake. Decent opponents will realize that a check on the flop, and then a bet on turn, followed by a bet on the river is usually a decent hand. I.E if someone is bluffing they will use their momentum to bet the flop, tring to take the pot away. Waiting to raise when they do not have momentum is worse, thus makes less sense to be a bluff. I am much more likely to call a river bet in the situation above(bet,bet,check,bet), than I am if it goes (bet,check,bet,bet).

[ QUOTE ]
If we're not going to push river for value vs his range then that means we are only going to be putting 2 bets in. If that's the case then why not put them in on turn and river and keep the pot small at the same time. Big pots are for big hands and a single pair is not a big hand, even AA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aces and other big pairs do best on the flop, every street you give free to an opponent gives him a chance to suck out on you. If you routinely do this vs mid pairs you give them an extra 5% a street, at no gain to yourself. I think you are over-estimating pot control in this situation as well. Pot control is vs people who can lay down decent holdings to pressure, and won't get in big pots without the goods.

[ QUOTE ]
At the same time we can induce bluffs from underpairs that don't want to give up. If we CB flop those hands will either just fold (loss of value) or they will trickily check/raise (tough spot).

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree that they will either fold/check-raise the flop. This is an extremely dry flop, and I can see someone check-calling the flop with a few underpairs. I would like to say I don't think our hand is a bluff-catcher, which seems to be how you classify it. You are ahead of hands he will value bet, and only behind certain hands, you don't need to play this hand passive and afraid.

[ QUOTE ]
Checking behind flop here DOES extract max value from villian's range as he will only be calling with top pair. We lose bluff induction from everything else. But even if he does have top pair we can still get value bets in on turn and river if he checks again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only be calling with top pair?(what?!?!) I disagree with essentially the entire last paragraph. Playing the hand as you described is good only agains't set miners. Regular opponents will call you down with more holdings. It is much more likely that villian has a top pair type hand then a set, you realize that right? I can't do any hand distribution of the top of my head, but if he limp calls KJs,KQs,KQ,and with 66,99(hands that call you on the flop, and furture bets,Obv only a part of his range). Then numerically he is much much more likely to have an okay king than to have a hand that beats us, and playing optimaly agaisn't a small part of his range and badly agaisn't the majority is a large mistake.

Side Note: Rainstlix you have the pleasure of being the first person I have ever censured on the internet, and I won't be reading any of your responses.

Note #2: Ya it came out pretty long, I will answer the inevitable flames in 8 hours or so.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

"It shouldn't be, at 50nl you will find quite a few villians willing to play for stacks with tptk type hands. And you lose a lot of value checking the flop, as well as giving hands that would have called a bet a free chance to catch up."

So we want to play for stacks since unknowns will stack off with top pair? If that's the case then why fold to the turn lead? He has at most 5 outs to catch up.



"Aces and other big pairs do best on the flop, every street you give free to an opponent gives him a chance to suck out on you. If you routinely do this vs mid pairs you give them an extra 5% a street, at no gain to yourself."

No they do better on the turn when your equity is better. You also have to bet less to make it incorrect for draws to call profitably as they will have less implied odds with only 1 street of betting remaing. And I don't see how you can see that there is no gain. Here is an examaple.

Villian limps 5 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 5 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] and calls your AA raise.

Flop: K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]


Villian checks, you bet, villian folds.


Scenario #2

Flop: K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]


villian checks 55, you check behind


Turn: K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]


Villian leads. Hero calls.

Which scenario is more likely to occur, the bluff induction scenario or one where he spikes a set on turn?

And if he checks turn than we can bet for value and he will still probably call with 55, but we won't already have a big pot on by the turn with only one pair. This is all dependant on stack size of course. If villian has 40bb then I would just CB flop. He is more likely to call with an UI pocket pair on the turn than on the flop because he knows he only has 1 more street to get to showdown against your AQ or whatever he puts you on by checking the flop.


A unknown will not know you have an overpair/tptk when you check this flop because they are usually obsessed with protecting their hands. You keep referencing a decent player in your opponent description type, but this is an unknown.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
AC,

If we check behind on flops like this with the goods, doesn't it kinda ruin our ability to c'bet with air on the same kind of flop?

[/ QUOTE ]
With that flop and heads up, I'm almost always going to cbet here against any player whether I have top pair, over pair, set, or air. It's partly for metagame reasons. Until someone plays back at me I will continue to cbet at every opportunity. I'm a pretty tight/patient player, so I look for opportunities like this to appear LAGgy.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

These spots suck in my opinion. Player dependent, but I think I would call down in this spot. On a dry board like this, you might try to take this pot away from the CO raiser. Raise for information to see if your hand is good. AK, QQ, JJ are just as likely in this spot as well as QK. Also, some other weak hands as well.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

Also, any player might take this line thinking the cutoff range of raising is quite large. And unless the raiser has AK, AA, KK or 99, he might fold to this play. Which makes it even harder to fold. Plus, at this level, QQ is a monster hand on this flop.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

I think checking behind on this flop is fine, as is betting. It sort of depends on villain, how I've been playing my other hands this session, etc. I lean toward betting (because I'm so aggressive on the flop that it's just natural and my opponents expect it). However, if I've checked behind a lot of flops recently (I sometimes take a check behind, bet turn line with AK), I'll do it here.

I actually think that betting and checking behind are very close in value, so I prefer to make my decision based on meta game and how this line will affect other lines I may take later in the session.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

I agree Jeff that it is quite close. And I certainly wouldn't want to flame Roger Manfield for saying the flop should usually be bet. My flop AF is 4.66 so it's not like i'm some obsessive pot control freak.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

I feel more for Slaters line. I often check behind on drawless or small drawing boards when I am WA/WB against 1 opponent unless villain has prooved to be a calling station with something like KQ or KJ (in this specific case).

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
"It shouldn't be, at 50nl you will find quite a few villians willing to play for stacks with tptk type hands. And you lose a lot of value checking the flop, as well as giving hands that would have called a bet a free chance to catch up."

So we want to play for stacks since unknowns will stack off with top pair? If that's the case then why fold to the turn lead? He has at most 5 outs to catch up.



"Aces and other big pairs do best on the flop, every street you give free to an opponent gives him a chance to suck out on you. If you routinely do this vs mid pairs you give them an extra 5% a street, at no gain to yourself."

No they do better on the turn when your equity is better. You also have to bet less to make it incorrect for draws to call profitably as they will have less implied odds with only 1 street of betting remaing. And I don't see how you can see that there is no gain. Here is an examaple.

Villian limps 5 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 5 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] and calls your AA raise.

Flop: K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]


Villian checks, you bet, villian folds.


Scenario #2

Flop: K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]


villian checks 55, you check behind


Turn: K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]


Villian leads. Hero calls.

Which scenario is more likely to occur, the bluff induction scenario or one where he spikes a set on turn?

And if he checks turn than we can bet for value and he will still probably call with 55, but we won't already have a big pot on by the turn with only one pair. This is all dependant on stack size of course. If villian has 40bb then I would just CB flop. He is more likely to call with an UI pocket pair on the turn than on the flop because he knows he only has 1 more street to get to showdown against your AQ or whatever he puts you on by checking the flop.


A unknown will not know you have an overpair/tptk when you check this flop because they are usually obsessed with protecting their hands. You keep referencing a decent player in your opponent description type, but this is an unknown.


[/ QUOTE ]

alternatively, on the flop villain checks, we bet villain calls. villain checks turn, we check behind. then on the river we either bet when checked to or we call villain's bet. this line is completely standard-- flop cbet, check turn for pot control, value bet river.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

I get that you'd check flop to get value from pp, but what yould you do if you held AQ on K high flop. I would bet it and thats why I have to bet AK or AA hand (basicly hand that hits). How can i cbet flops that miss me and check flops that I hit?

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

"alternatively, on the flop villain checks, we bet villain calls. villain checks turn, we check behind. then on the river we either bet when checked to or we call villain's bet. this line is completely standard-- flop cbet, check turn for pot control, value bet river."

But in this scenario the pot is already bigger by the turn. And since the pot is bigger going into the turn it now makes a possible donk bet by villian all the more perplexing. So if both lines offer pot control then why is betting flop such a big deal?

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't get whats with that comment? This is just a discusion, you can keep your condescending comments to yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]It didn't look like you were discussing, it looked like you were saying any other line was stupid or "sooooo nitty". Your mind seemed made up and I didn't feel like arguing the pros of checking behind.

Sorry you took offense.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
I get that you'd check flop to get value from pp, but what yould you do if you held AQ on K high flop. I would bet it and thats why I have to bet AK or AA hand (basicly hand that hits). How can i cbet flops that miss me and check flops that I hit?

[/ QUOTE ]


If I had AQ I would CB and if I am played back at I can confidently fold. You are assuming to much when you think villian will think "hmmm last time we were heads up on a big card/two small rag flop he checked behind with AA for pot control. But this time he is betting! That must mean he whiffed and is just trying to take it down right now because if he has something he would have checked. Time to check/raise him out of his seat with my fours!!"


And this assumes you are in a pot vs a regular. This is just a random unknown. People do not get fancy at full ring. You CAN take obvious bet when I miss on ragged flops/ check behind when I hit lines because THEY DO NOT PAY THAT CLOSE ATTENTION NOR DO THEY UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF POT CONTROL. At least most don't. And I wasn't yelling that was merely emphasis.

Of course on the 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] or other coordinated flops I am checking behind AQ as well so even if they do pay attention they will notice I am not always betting when I whiff. Almost all opponents at 50 NL do not understand flop texture. And the ones that do are too busy 8 tabling to get out of line vs you.

And of course, I'm betting flops that I hit hard, sets, two pair, flush draw with over/overs, pair with flush draw, str8 with overs, and naked str8 and flush draws for balance. So it should not be apparent to them that you simply betting when you miss and checking when you hit.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
"alternatively, on the flop villain checks, we bet villain calls. villain checks turn, we check behind. then on the river we either bet when checked to or we call villain's bet. this line is completely standard-- flop cbet, check turn for pot control, value bet river."

But in this scenario the pot is already bigger by the turn. And since the pot is bigger going into the turn it now makes a possible donk bet by villian all the more perplexing. So if both lines offer pot control then why is betting flop such a big deal?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good question.

I don't think checking behind on this flop is terrible, as many have claimed. I think it is a player dependent thing, but I would tend to bet it against an unknown.

To answer your question, generally speaking, I think betting this flop will generally give us better options down the road.

For example, you might get an opponent to call with some hands here that he will not call with on the turn. He may have some sort of hand that is willing to call the flop MPWK+BDFD, but not call on the turn. Yes, they may now choose to bluff the turn instead, but opponents are generally more likely to call incorrectly than to bluff incorrectly.

Scare cards can sometimes come on the turn, although on this specific board there are only a couple scare cards. Also, it allows us the option to still build a big pot if we are to spike a set later in the hand.

These are very general things, but I think this is generally why this flop should be bet.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

let me just clarify something: are you saying you want to check the flop b/c the hand is easier to play on the turn since the pot is small?

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
let me just clarify something: are you saying you want to check the flop b/c the hand is easier to play on the turn since the pot is small?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, pretty much. Take the way this hand played out. Villian could have unwittingly outplayed us with top pair here. He may think he has the best hand and so he plays it strongly. But to us it would be spewing with KQ/KJ.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

I want to mention that I agree with what threads12 has said, he can verbalize things better than me. Especially about villians being more likely to call incorrectly than to bluff incorrectly. By betting you give your opponents a chance to make a mistake, and it is much more likely that they will make a mistake by calling than to go very aggro and bluff us off the best hand. I check here sometimes too, but agaisn't regulars who's game I know, I don't think there is a good enough argument to do it to unknowns.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
let me just clarify something: are you saying you want to check the flop b/c the hand is easier to play on the turn since the pot is small?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, pretty much. Take the way this hand played out. Villian could have unwittingly outplayed us with top pair here. He may think he has the best hand and so he plays it strongly. But to us it would be spewing with KQ/KJ.

[/ QUOTE ]

if villain is getting out of line w/top pair here it will become readily apparent and he will be shipping us his money shortly. make a note and move on.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
I want to mention that I agree with what threads12 has said, he can verbalize things better than me. Especially about villians being more likely to call incorrectly than to bluff incorrectly. By betting you give your opponents a chance to make a mistake, and it is much more likely that they will make a mistake by calling than to go very aggro and bluff us off the best hand. I check here sometimes too, but agaisn't regulars who's game I know, I don't think there is a good enough argument to do it to unknowns.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am 13.... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
let me just clarify something: are you saying you want to check the flop b/c the hand is easier to play on the turn since the pot is small?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, pretty much. Take the way this hand played out. Villian could have unwittingly outplayed us with top pair here. He may think he has the best hand and so he plays it strongly. But to us it would be spewing with KQ/KJ.

[/ QUOTE ]

if villain is getting out of line w/top pair here it will become readily apparent and he will be shipping us his money shortly. make a note and move on.

[/ QUOTE ]


How can we make a note and move on when we folded the turn? We don't know he had top pair.

Re: NL50 - AA c/r\'d on flop
 

no we will never know what he has that one hand (you could just ask). just make a note that he c/r'ed you on a dry K high flop. this is a scenario we'll see fairly frequently-- overpair facing aggression on a dry board. if we pay attention to what else he does at the table, and to what he shows down, we should be able to discern the caliber of hand he needs to make a play. if he did it w/KQ here, he will probably do something similar later.