Is this common?

[urnodaisy]

with two diamonds on board likely pair semi-bluff. Harrington Vol. 2 page 27 says, "When the board shows two of a suit and the opponent makes a big bet or moves all-in, most top players would think that a semi-bluff flush draw is now the most likely hand they're facing". Problem with overbet for villain is only hands that would call are hands that have villain beat.

[degenrat]

"How big does your stack have to be inorder to call this PF? "

I believe you are missing a key component here, your opponents stack.

I think i call the flop against a very weak opponent and expect AK, AQ, AJ a REAL LOT of the time.

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I take the overbet as weakness

[/ QUOTE ]

This was my initial reaction. I had to choose between the donkish overbet and the donkish bluff.

My wife settled it when she looked over and said he has overs, you have to call. (Level 1 thinking)

It turned out to be the donkish bluff (KQo) which did not improve.

Which brings me back to my initial question: Is this common?

[/ QUOTE ]
In my experience, no (the pure bluff w overs). I'd say it's evg's + nate's range way more often, 90%+ so.