Originally Posted by BelgoSuisse
He has 87 and got there on the river.
Where does this read come from? It doesn't fit anything he did for the entire hand. Even if you're right, I'm not sure I understand what's leading you to believe this.
First, he called a preflop raise out of position. While it's plausible that he could have done this with 87, it's far more likely that he did it with a hand like AJ.
Then he bet out on the flop, which I really don't think he'd do with a weak middle pair on that board. From his perspective, he has to consider what hands you would have raised with. Pretty much no hand (other than maybe KQ) is losing to his hand (if he indeed has 87 like you are claiming). Also, he likely isn't bluffing, since he's giving such good odds
to call, that any hand better than a pair of 7s is going to call.
On the turn, he makes another minuscule bet. After encountering resistance on the flop in the form of a call, the villain knows that the hero has a pair of 7s with a weak kicker beat. There was no draw on the board, so hero obviously has something, and anything that calls that bet is beating his 7s. However, the bet was so small that he has to know the hero won't fold to it with any kind of a hand.
On the river, you are claiming that the villain made 2 pair. However, he shoves instead of just betting a normal amount. With 2 pair, he probably would (correctly) believe that he has the best hand, so he'd want to price the hero in. Therefore, rather than shoving all in, which likely doesn't get called, he would generally value bet his 2 pair, so that he can get paid off.
I know that it may seem cool to put them on a hand like 87, because when you're right, you look like a genius, but be careful. Almost every time, the simple read (AJ or thereabouts) is the right one, so don't get caught up in figuring out what they have on those extremely rare occasions when their hand doesn't fit the action at all.