Barnet....

[lol]

yep i like money  i just view some mtt situations differently to you i guess,i find that there are certain situations which often arise that are best handled with pot control.. because i'm not in the play nut draws fast brigade no matter what the stack sizes/lines of betting etc etc - does this mean i'm wrong because i don't conform to your opinion?

I see this as a medium strength hand after the flop which imo you need more questions in your head and more techniques in your arsenal, pot control being one of those techniques.When i flop a medium-strength hand, and I determine that it's usually way ahead of or behind my opponent's range,i will sometimes check the flop..
If you want to play draws fast all the time then fine that is your opinion but u wont see me posting lol just because i dont agree with you,you'll get a reply/explanation as to why i dont agree..

i'm different again it seems  i'd prefer to check the flop given stack/blind sizes etc etc and see a turn card..

If this was the case, and the villain was beating us, would this be the best way for him to extract value from the hand?

I guess u mean the check call line on the river?
i'm just quoting the theory of poker here on river decisions- ''You should bet when your hand is a favorite to win when called. Not when it is the favorite to be the best hand, but when it is the favorite to be the best hand against a hand with which your opponent will call.''

I'm stuck here free_rollin as joemacs bet on the turn tbh has me scratching my head to what hand range he could possibly have given how the action has gone up to now in a limped pot but as played to river yes i do prefer the check call to the lead.

might work if you want to get creative but if called it may well mean following it through with an all in on the river no matter what card comes..be interesting how others will view this line though 

out of interest what was your line of thought with the jacks in the $500,000 gtd? no worries if u wish not to reply,i'm just being nosy

i cheated and checked his stats - abi $108 with roi of 41% out of 1100 odd mtts but slightly miscued by the fact he recently took 3rd for $44000 in a $109 rebuy,your hand is pretty face up after the check call turn lead river line imo so i guess a reluctant fold though joemac's line of play does seem bluffy lol lol.
As played i agree with you , it is interesting hand..The river could be played differently i guess with a check call because i can't think of too many hands that call you on this board that you have beat the way the action has gone[maybe against a sat qualifier i might lead though ]

But op made no comment that villain was over betting pots just betting big etc but he did say villain was the ultimate calling station ..
so if we go by Cf's read that villain is a calling station/bad player that imo makes him passive enough so that all the hands that he could have imo which we are beating like Ax or a flush draw KhQx etc etc would make it more likely for him to check call with here surely?.So why the huge over bet is what i'm asking myself.If he is bad as described then 2 pair or a set maybe make more sense and a slim chance of a spewy bluff,but even the bluff does not make much sense which keeps bringing me back to sets,2 pairs or a small made flush being the more likely hands here and maybe a flush draw with a inside straight..
So given the hand combos that villain may have and Cf's stack size then a reluctant fold could be the best option.

If the original question had been ''what range would we put a bad player on here after his over bet'' then most answers would be get your chips in,but Cf has him as a ultimate calling station which totally changes how i view this scenario.

i would discuss my thinking with you mantis as you take time out to post more than 1 sentence on your thoughts,but mr greekstein has pissed me off 1 to many times with his childish little quips and snide comments [something that is a recurring theme in most replies i post that he has a habit of doing]
so i dont particularly feel like replying to you - mantis - right now ..
 i will add this though -

You simply can't say betting out 50k is the best strat to exploit Cf's post-flop strength because you have no idea if Cf is strong post-flop. Villain has no idea Hero has TPTK and that's where your thinking breaks down. Hero could have 2 black 4's and insta-muck, gg slow-play. This guy is crazy and he's doing crazy things. Those crazy things involve some hands that beat us but also include many more hands that don't.

you dismiss my thinking based on image yes? but allude to guy doing crazy things based on what? a oesd 3way?Cf describes further in OP as villain being a calling station so why the sudden change of pattern?

He is the ultimate calling station,

[From the bets I've actually seen the cards for]

Longy i don't think you follow what i was trying to point out..In Cf's 1st post he described villain as bad but the 2 showdowns he gave did not imo should not lead him to think that..Cf has now posted again so i assume he saw more showdowns than originally written..
If it was just the 2 showdowns that CF had described/seen then my opinion would still be fold but as per info now then rrai is the best approach..

Surely the idea of PHA is to work on the reads OP has given.

as above the reads given [oesd 3way limped pot + a bluff] led me to question his read,is this bad?

you don't think he warrant donk status for the discussion of this hand

at no point did i say that this hand did not warrant discussion,where did you get that?

From the bets I've actually seen the cards for it's been an OESD and nothing. I have recently tripled up against him, with AA against his K7 (which he limped with in mid pos after i limped utg) on a 568 flop (some other guy had JJ too).

this is not a ''they only post bad beats on forums'' as i explained my decision based on Mr spewys act pre-flop.
Also the way villain has been described and previous hands played/described then his huge over bet to me is the trap as he would have Cf on a strong hand which will most likely call.. The recent triple up being another factor in how read it here..just because villain played a oesd fast in a limped pot 3way pot and tripled up Cf when he limped AA and has been caught once on a bluff does not warrant a instant donk status imo..

Do you not think from the OP you are giving donkey a bit too much credit?

We really have to believe this bet means a set or flush do we?

putting this actual situation aside greek if we play to a ''std'' get those chips in as per a lot of forum advice with TPTK on a 1 suit flop like this..then yes i overbet Mr std Tag with my made flush as it is the best way to exploit [hate that word maybe take advantage is better]

Also you keep labeling him a donkey? why because he played a oesd in a 3way pot against AA+JJ in a limped pot and still had 100k in chips after? as stated above i do not class this as a donk play he had the odds and stack to do so..hence he still had 100k left..i just question CF's assumption here based on the 2 showdowns he has seen,the other being a bluff..that villain is bad?

this is not a ''they only post bad beats on forums'' as i explained my decision based on Mr spewys act pre-flop.
Also the way villain has been described and previous hands played/described then his huge over bet to me is the trap as he would have Cf on a strong hand which will most likely call.. The recent triple up being another factor in how read it here..just because villain played a oesd fast in a limped pot 3way pot and tripled up Cf when he limped AA and has been caught once on a bluff does not warrant a instant donk status imo..

Easy shove.

Easy fold

All fold to villian, who picks his cards up and starts to look like he's folding, but he calls

is this a clue? is it the classic tell - act when they are weak when they are strong? if so QQ maybe 88 fits in with his style/choice of betting imo from how villain has been described..

You have plenty of play left in your stack plus Mr spewy is on your right,these 2 factors also would influence my decision to fold..

just going along with this limp 3betting thing , i agree with mantis that if you did add this move to your game then you have to balance your range out with other hands so that you can catch the blighters out when you do have it..also you may
be able to get away with limping a little bit more with speculative hands , observant players behind may be wary of raising your limps.

scenario 1
if you have a large stack i'd prefer to take/steal chips from the larger stacks -  keep short stacks around until you can take enough chips from the larger stacks so they will not be a threat to you.Especially if the short stack/stacks are to your left.

scenario 2
get those chips in.

So why do you advocate sometimes reraising here?

because the way NFH has played it up to now [the turn check] - allinstevie can call a variety on the flop,when NFH checks [shows weakness] this is gr8 opportunity to bluff or make a 2nd stab with a semi bluff or to think that T9 98 77 88 etc is still ahead..
The sizing of AIS turn bet does not make to much sense to me and it still favours imo bluffs/semi bluffs,check calling is ok sometimes as a defense against possible semi bluffs when we are oop..So if we feel that folding a marginal ish hand here is incorrect then to raise it up is an option as i'd want to charge him for his draw.

NFH had a feeling he was getting floated so going by that read a certain degree of positive expectation has got to be here isn't there?