KJ turning trips and facing a shove

[Rulle00]

Villain is 40/2 over only 40 hands and AF 0,25

1/2 with effectiv stacks ~90bb

Pf: Hero raises $8 utg with KJ [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] and Villain calls from sb.

Flop: (pot $17): KQ5r (one [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]) Hero bets $13, Villian min raises and Hero calls (probably folding to a big turn bet unless a good card hits).

Turn: (pot $67): K (completes rainbow) Villain open shoves for 2x the pot.

What do I do here?
Do people play their strong hands like this?
Given his very passiv stats (although is a small sample), is it an obvious fold?

[djshawk]

Damn I just typed out a reply thinking villian raised utg and you called [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

This is pretty sick but I think you have to fold. He looks like a classic loose passive fish and he's telling you he has you beat.

This guy could easily have AK/KQ/QQ/55 and I'm pretty sure he has one of them way more often than anything you beat.

I often see players who will all of a sudden just bet all in, not very often but often enough for it to tie in with how often you'd expect them to hit a big hand. It looks like this guy is one of these and you just need to fold.

In the last two days I've had two similar hands and was behind both times to full houses.

[Alobar]

maybe its really bad, but I prolly call.

Stupid loose passive fish in my limited experience never bet huge with big hands, its always stupid ass little bets. And when they do bluff its some retardedly large bet (like this). Which is whats great about NL, cuz they never get value for their good hands, and lose the max on bluffs.

I guess a fold without a better read isnt bad, as im sure youll have opportunities down the road to get his money, but if I called and lost I wouldnt feel bad about it.

[mike l.]

wtf i thought nl was supposed to be easier than lhe ive read about 4 threads in here and you guys are making it all seem really complicated and tough. how can you not call here? you have trips and 40 hands is virtually nothing as far as data goes. im finding this forum to be really demoralising.

[justin]

[ QUOTE ]
Stupid loose passive fish in my limited experience never bet huge with big hands, its always stupid ass little bets. And when they do bluff its some retardedly large bet (like this). Which is whats great about NL, cuz they never get value for their good hands, and lose the max on bluffs.


[/ QUOTE ]

[bozzer]

i would call because he can be value-betting worse and i struggle to fold trips at any point, but its non-obvious because the board is superdry.

[Nick C]

The only real reasons I see to be optimistic are that our sample on Villain is small and the turn overbet does fell a bit like a "go away" bet from a frustrated AA or Q5 (but our sketchy read is that Villain isn't loose enough to have Q5, although I guess maybe he could if he loves suited cards in particular).

Anyway, I understand what Alobar is saying, but it's a lot easier to see the slowplayed monsters than the overbet bluffs since the slowplayed monsters get to showdown more often. The big bluffs that get called are generally up against big hands or are coming from a player who's already clearly indicated that he's a maniac and/or is on tilt.

So I would be pessimistic while I was calling, I guess I'm saying, and would already (in anticipation of showdown) be cursing my luck for having caught one of the few cards that would get me to pay off.

And the thing is, that turn overbet does seem suspicious, but then at the same time the flop min-checkraise is a fish-standard slowplay all over.