sometimes you just gotta lay it down.

[spaminator 0]

Very simple:If you are going to lay down to a check-raise on the river, why did you bet?

Um, for value.

um you dont bet for value with the fourth nuts and fold to a raise in a limit game

[TheCinciKid 0]

There is nothing I can say that hasn't already been said, but I just want to weigh-in and agree with everyone else. This is a horrible laydown. By my count the pot is laying you something like 17-1 on big bet it costs you to find out that he probably has an under set or two pair. Who check-raises the turn on an open-ended straight draw?I also want to say that this guy could look strong with several hands that you have slaughtered here. AT or T9 for two pair, or TT, 99 or 22 for an underset. In summary, horrendous laydown.

[LaydownKing 0]

OK guys, you have all told me "this is a horrible laydown." Well how about this: I mucked my aces face up, and BB, looking very surprised showed me QJ. I smiled and said "yeah I knew you had it, nice play fish."

[Swift_Psycho 1]

OK guys, you have all told me "this is a horrible laydown." Well how about this: I mucked my aces face up, and BB, looking very surprised showed me QJ. I smiled and said "yeah I knew you had it, nice play fish."

I think everyone who read this post anticipated this ending, or else you wouldn't have posted this hand in the first place.I also think that no one is going to change their mind about your laydown being horrendous.

[allinbluff35 0]

turn pro, make millions

[Chiggleslap 0]

OK guys, you have all told me "this is a horrible laydown." Well how about this: I mucked my aces face up, and BB, looking very surprised showed me QJ. I smiled and said "yeah I knew you had it, nice play fish."

:roll: He should've said "Right back atcha, slick."

[WonderfulSplash 0]

So when are you going to tell us that villian had QJ and that you made an excellent laydown? Im sure you thought you were pretty cool folding the fourth nuts :roll:

So you posted the results anyway. Nice play fish.

[TheCinciKid 0]

OK guys, you have all told me "this is a horrible laydown."  Well how about this: I mucked my aces face up, and BB, looking very surprised showed me QJ.  I smiled and said "yeah I knew you had it, nice play fish."

The outcome of this particular hand has no bearing on whether you played it well or not. Would it still have been a great laydown if he had had a smaller set or two pair? Probably not, but those outcomes were probably more likely than the QJ based on the way the hand played out. Here's an example for you to illustrate it. In the early hand of last weeks' limit hold'em WSOP event where Dan Druff cracked that guys' Aces with QJ, the guy with Aces knew he was beat and still called. ESPN described him as a top European limit hold'em player and I have no reason to doubt them. It was obvious to him that Druff had him beaten and he still called. Why? Because that's what you do in limit hold'em. The odds dictate that you call one bet on the river in big pots even when you're certain that you're beat. As the saying goes, that's poker. I repeat, you had 17-1 odds on the river, you only have to win that once out of 18 to break even and once out 16 to be making money on the call. The way this hand played out, I'm confident that you win it more often than once out of 16 times.

[loxo 0]

OK guys, you have all told me "this is a horrible laydown."  Well how about this: I mucked my aces face up, and BB, looking very surprised showed me QJ.  I smiled and said "yeah I knew you had it, nice play fish."

The result means nothing. The decision was still an incorrect one IMHO.

[LaydownKing 0]

OK guys I really do appreciate all the discussion (from those of you who aren't just flaming). But I cite Sklansky's Fundamental theorem of poker: any time you make a decision that isn't what you would have made if your opponents cards were face up, you lose money and your opponent gains money. QED.

[allinbluff35 0]

OK guys I really do appreciate all the discussion (from those of you who aren't just flaming).  But I cite Sklansky's Fundamental theorem of poker: any time you make a decision that isn't what you would have made if your opponents cards were face up, you lose money and your opponent gains money.  QED.

tell me why it applies here

[dimseven 0]

OK guys I really do appreciate all the discussion (from those of you who aren't just flaming).  But I cite Sklansky's Fundamental theorem of poker: any time you make a decision that isn't what you would have made if your opponents cards were face up, you lose money and your opponent gains money.  QED.

Is that the onl thing You read in the book? Because if You had read the whole book and *applied* the concepts, You wouldn't have been folding on the river. Unless You read through and absorbed none of it.

[pokerplayer24 0]

I'd honestly 3 bet this hand just about every time. The only feasible hand that has you beat is QJ. You're fold was a horrid one getting such good odds to call. But I guess this was just another one of those. "I folded my quads, what do you think of my play?" stories.

[nrs02004 0]

You deserve to be shot, raped, and then shot again... and then raped again, and then forced to sit at a table with 9 decent poker plays and watch them take your set of aces and shove it up your @sshole.Just my 2 cents...But seriously you're worse than that dousche on WSOP who folded a set of 10's. At least that was on a semiscare board and in NL, not on a BS board, for one more bet with odds up the wazoo to call...

[Actuary 3]

I'm declaring BS.Swift_Psycho makes a good pt about any card makes AA no longer the nuts. The hand was designed too perfectly.The OP is posting "fold" everywhere..I think its a jopke. A set up for something...Like Aseem pretending. And then he'll lcome back and say "you see how ridiculous you weak tighties" sound, telling me not to 3-bet 10-9 suited pf! 8)

[LaydownKing 0]

You deserve to be shot, raped, and then shot again... and then raped again, and then forced to sit at a table with 9 decent poker plays and watch them take your set of aces and shove it up your @sshole.Just my 2 cents...But seriously you're worse than that dousche on WSOP who folded a set of 10's.  At least that was on a semiscare board and in NL, not on a BS board, for one more bet with odds up the wazoo to call...

You might be the best poster ever.

[allinbluff35 0]

OK guys I really do appreciate all the discussion (from those of you who aren't just flaming).  But I cite Sklansky's Fundamental theorem of poker: any time you make a decision that isn't what you would have made if your opponents cards were face up, you lose money and your opponent gains money.  QED.

tell me why it applies here

[Canada 0]

OK guys I really do appreciate all the discussion (from those of you who aren't just flaming).  But I cite Sklansky's Fundamental theorem of poker: any time you make a decision that isn't what you would have made if your opponents cards were face up, you lose money and your opponent gains money.  QED.

If you think for 1 second that Sklansky, or any other pro, or any decent player for that matter, would say that was a good laydown...Well you're sadder than a person who posts made up hands played on the internet and talks about physical tells.Tool

[Sushiman 0]

OK guys I really do appreciate all the discussion (from those of you who aren't just flaming). But I cite Sklansky's Fundamental theorem of poker: any time you make a decision that isn't what you would have made if your opponents cards were face up, you lose money and your opponent gains money. QED.

This has got to be a joke.

[jack24bauer24 0]

OK guys, you have all told me "this is a horrible laydown."  Well how about this: I mucked my aces face up, and BB, looking very surprised showed me QJ.  I smiled and said "yeah I knew you had it, nice play fish."

Folding your aces face up on the river shows the entire table, along with everyone who viewed this thread that you are a horrible fish.

[Nutcracker 0]

OK guys, you have all told me "this is a horrible laydown."  Well how about this: I mucked my aces face up, and BB, looking very surprised showed me QJ.  I smiled and said "yeah I knew you had it, nice play fish."

I think everyone who read this post anticipated this ending, or else you wouldn't have posted this hand in the first place.I also think that no one is going to change their mind about your laydown being horrendous.

I must disagree. Seek out the one known as Loismustdie.

[LaydownKing 0]

OK guys I really do appreciate all the discussion (from those of you who aren't just flaming).  But I cite Sklansky's Fundamental theorem of poker: any time you make a decision that isn't what you would have made if your opponents cards were face up, you lose money and your opponent gains money.  QED.

tell me why it applies here

Why? Because if he showed me that he had QJ, I should fold - if I call, I am making a mistake according to the FTOP. I made the right play. Also you guys aren't factoring in my read on him.

[dms26 3]

OK guys I really do appreciate all the discussion (from those of you who aren't just flaming).  But I cite Sklansky's Fundamental theorem of poker: any time you make a decision that isn't what you would have made if your opponents cards were face up, you lose money and your opponent gains money.  QED.

tell me why it applies here

Why? Because if he showed me that he had QJ, I should fold - if I call, I am making a mistake according to the FTOP. I made the right play. Also you guys aren't factoring in my read on him.

If you had a good feeling that he had QJ, then why did you go ahead and bet when he checked to you. If you had a good read, why bet in the first place, didn't that lose you money too?

[No_Neck 0]

Weaseling out of things is very important to learn, it's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel.that is one of the funniest lines ever.

[ACJ349 0]

I think that even if this was a real hand, and OP folded face up, the BB didn't show him QJ. Notice he posted that right after someone said, why don't you post that he had QJ then so we all say it was a good fold.He's not thinking about long term winnings. He just wanted to try to make a "great laydown" and save 20$.