Quote Originally Posted by Lithium
For what it is worth, I don't think the hand was played badly, although I agree with the comments that postflop you should have lead out with a substantial bet (at least .8xpot) to see if anyone was on the flush. If you get raised, then you have a good hunch you should lay it down (unless the villian has just been crazy gambling the whole time).

I also wouldn't have put the villian on a made flush postflop, since his bet was not pot-sized and signalled a little weakness. You actually may have been able to get him to lay down his overset with a larger leadin bet/more aggression, as that might have indicated a made flush.

The turn didn't improve the board any and the villian did not make a pot sized bet there either (.66xpot). At this point, I would put him on the nut flush draw or top two and shove.

Anyway, just my 2 cents.
sorry to continue this... but... NO NO NO!!

as said too much..."at THESE STAKES" the set of T's is NOT going anywhere unless he is an absolute nitty rock. you will NOT make him fold.

and because "his bet was not pot-sized" is the classic value-bet. just because someone doesnt bet pot...does NOT mean they are weak. all too often, it means they are quite CONFIDENT they are best, and will stay that way. if thats what some of you guys think, then i am still way underusing the 1/2 or 2/3 pot bet on all streets.

and what the hell are you saying about the .66X turn bet? it was $10 into an $11 pot, by my math. you had 5 see the flop for a buck ($5), and 2 call the $3 flop bet...$5 + 2($3) = $11. and with that math, you would shove over thinking the value-betting MADE flush is still on a draw? wow.

the more scared a player is...or the more vulnerable he is...or the more he is trying to "protect" what he think is best (for the moment), the MORE he will bet. not less.

this guy was advertising/representing STRENGTH, not weakness.

if a guy can bluff like this with top 2 or just a draw...then, more power to him...i'll have a lot of his money in the future.

not trying to be rude. but, to me, that was the opposite of what i was thinking.