This is a discussion on $2 NLHE Full Ring: Opponent crushed the deck within the online poker forums, in the Cash Game Hand Analysis section; https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/124TV0fUP
I personally like how my opponent played this hand against me. For one thing I got to the river with minimal investment but really his
I personally like how my opponent played this hand against me. For one thing I got to the river with minimal investment but really his only hope of extracting value on a hand like this is to induce a bluff. He knows he crushed the deck and was waiting for me to double or triple barrel. Glad I held off.
I agree that villain makes more money in the long run in this spot by checking his range on turn/river. Quite audacious defending 3x BvB being effective with 35 bb. Did he fold a lot in postflop? In fact is the most likely reason he would find to defend me with such little depth.
Villain hit the lottery no doubt and as teh cards lay she did the best sheT8o could given Hero's T8o, but Villain should be setting up the next play. Would she check a nothing bugger on the flop? Sure, why not?
As played would she naturally check to the raiser on the turn? Absolutely, I would.
But I would beat the river, because I would also bet the river in this sequence with a bluff or a middle pair. Checking looks like Villain is conceding or setting a trap.. If she is conceding it is unlikely she will call with anything that Hero can beat. beating put hero to the binary test. Did Villain check twice to set up a trap in a penny game, or does she suspect hero is weak because of Hero's turn check. In the example hero folds easily, but what if hero held a pair of eights? Would she fold or call. Hero would call an ace if raised, and bet it if checked to. What about a 7?
In a penny game its best to look like you may br bluffing.
Think about just how stupid the average American is. Half the people are dumber than that, George Carlin RIP