Check/fold, bet/fold, or check/call on the river?

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
If he is a tag then you should bet/fold since he wont raise here alot without a hand, very opponent dependent.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is interesting. I tend to check/call with TAGs. I figure they do the same thing LAGs do but just in better spots.

[Entity]

Given the description you gave check-call is money here.

[Raskolnikov47]

The reason you may have trouble with this situation is that your knowledge of the player contradicts the default strategy for the situation. You were bettor with a weak hand that, given the action, figures to be best much of the time. The board was draw heavy and your opponent merely called. The river didn't complete his plausible draws. Therefore, Sklanksy would say your hand was a "bluff catcher" (as he actually does say more or less exactly in his cannonical work under the short-handed chapter). By this logic, you should check and hope that he would bluff with many busted draws or perhaps even bet a worse pair for value based on your weakness.

The problem here is that you have said he is loose but passive. So you are making people who value reads above situations think that you should bet. Loose means call. Passive means wont bet.

I think your decision is relatively simple. Does your read supercede the situation? If you have merely observed him being a little loose/passive in a few hands, I'd trust the situation. If you have a solid read on this guy as someone who calls with anything because he is curious but will never bluff; then duh, bet.