($114) Getting tough on position abusers

[ryanghall]

I guess I should mention that I don't have a zillion hands on the guy; I probably have 70 or 80 IIRC. To say he's 21/7 flat out is probably misleading cause the sample size isn't enough. I don't see what other hands he's supposed to have against a tight raiser than PPs and very big cards. I guess he could have 87s or some crap, I don't really know. I could totally see him dumping that hand anyway. What would *you* think I had if I made this play?

Ryan

[ryanghall]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just confused why you call him a position abuser yet you seem to think his range is entirely PPs.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's a position abuser because he has the nerve to call my bet and I don't like that [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Ryan

[Scotty_12]

Is that flop bet standard? It looks like a weakish cbet, and if I was BTN i might not giving you credit for having 88 beat, I would certainly peel. His turn bet is weakish which makes it reasonable to put him on a baby pair (the board is baby cards, he could be milking) - in the end I think we need a better sample size/bet sizing read on villian to make this play - we have 1210 when we fold @ bb30

If I was villian in this hand vs you my range would be 77+, and I would look you up and make a note - the flop bet looks weakish, and could your turn plan have been to CRAI? - how could you count on my agression when I flatted on the two previous streets? Are you just CR me due to my weakish turn bet (I dont think i make this bet if i am villian ,so its hard to say)