trips,top kicker

robinlacey

no reads,he just sat down.

10/20 8 handed,effective stacks 2k.

i raise AQo utg,two callers in position and the BB calls too.

4 see a flop of Q 7 2,i bet out 210 into 290,first caller calls,the rest fold.

turn is another Q,i check,he bets 475 into 690,i call.

river is a J,i check,he thinks,pushes.

Tar.Aldarion

I would call, no flush chance?
q7,q2 is just unlucky, you beat a lot.

robinlacey

no flush possible no

bops

77 22:eek: QJ:eek: :eek: JJ:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

I'm gonna go with 77 - i think you're in trouble?


just wondering why did you opt to check the river?? - to catch a bluff?, or to get a cheap showdown?

you have ~ 800 in there with 1200 more to call? yuk yuk yuk

[EDIT maybe he's drunk/looney or maybe he has AA/KK and is just a clown - i don't think he has Q worse x here very often]

robinlacey

i think it was pretty close to being exactly a pot bet left on the river

Captain Tom

how likely is it he can be bluffing with 88/99 here?

robinlacey

no idea,i think he might be a solid enough regular but other than that i don't know anything about him

Tar.Aldarion

jj/77/22 was it? Without knowing much about him it's hard to say what to do unless you are the one playing. Ahead a lot and behind a lot.

robinlacey

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Without knowing much about him it's hard to say what to do unless you are the one playing..

usually that is the case,but i literally knew nothing about this guy...

fuzzbox

His flop call is really strong.

His river bet is really strong. You should prolly fold, as you only beat KQ (and who calls an utg raise with KQ in an 8 handed game as the 1st caller?).

He is unlikely to be playing AA/KK, he might have JJ, although he should not realistically call with JJ on the flop given his position.
He could have AQs/77/22. I dont see a whole lot else.

But ... you have under-repped your hand.
So hard to fold when you do that.

ocallagh

Preflop his range is any pair, AQ/AK, suited connectors, and possibly some broadway hands if he was loose.

Bluff:
Your turn check increases the likelihood he was floating on the flop and has decided to bluff now, however the fact that he had 2 others behind him on the flop decreases the chances of him floating considerably. In addition, it takes a lot of courage to follow through with 88-JJ after you make the call on the turn.

Qx:
He might have KQ or QJ as shown in his range above, however these 2 hands would be quite loose preflop and also 3 queens are already out. There is also a good chance he checks behind on the turn with KQ/QJ.

77/22:
Both these hands fit in perfectly.

I think I find a fold here.

RoundTower

any flush draw on the flop? If not I think you have to fold. I don't see how he can have a bluff, he must have had something on the flop. I expect he has AQ/77/22 a lot and smaller Qx checks behind. If there is a flush draw on the flop he has some more bluffing hands, this looks like a good spot to 2 barrel bluff you off a big pair. I don't know if an unknown bluffs enough here for you to call but I guess yes.

Ste05

Ugghh, for some reason I have a mental block on 22 and think people will fold it pre-flop, although I know alot of people think any pocket pair is worth calling with. But still my mental block continues. Therefore I think 77 is the most likely hand that beats us or a lucky QJ. KQ, Q10, a 2 barrel bluff after a float are all reasonable hands.

I like the turn and River check and I would probably pay him off, although this is 8 handed and I'm more used to 6-max, so I presume his range will be somewhat tighter in an 8 handed game, I think a fold is reasonable but because we've under-represented our hand on the turn and River I think I would call, I think our hand looks like a scared AA or KK now and a Q is very believable hand for him to have in this spot therefore he can represent it with ease, as well as actually holding a weaker one (KQ, Q10), it's a shame about the J falling on the River, a particularly disgusting card, only a K could be worse.

It's particularly difficult without any read at all, but I call him and not like it.

Hectorjelly

Im calling, our hand looks like nothing and he could be value betting worse.

RoundTower

really? I think TT or something checks behind, maybe KQ does as well. Also how does our hand look like nothing when we raise preflop, bet into 3 players, and then call that scary bet on the turn? I don't think we show up with, say, 67s here very much.

fuzzbox

Hectorjelly wrote:

Im calling, our hand looks like nothing and he could be value betting worse.

Our hand looks like something - we just chk/called a bet on the turn when the top card paired, after raising in ep and betting into a field on a Q72 board.

I think we have more than nothing here often.

his hand looks really strong given his flop call on a totally dry board with two players to act behind him.

N'est pas?

Hectorjelly

Ok, well when I say nothing I mean it looks like the most we can have is AA KK! We check the turn and river which doesnt show a huge amount of strength. I dont think KQ is going to check behind on the river, Im pretty sure its pushing. However, it is hard for KQ to get there. I think that an unknown is going to be bluffing, or value betting a worse queen enough to make calling profitable.

He could well have KQ, JQ, QT etc, intending to call only one bet on the flop, then he improves and we check to him twice; it really doesnt look like we have a queen.

ianmc38

I'd call. You've underrepresented your hand. Looks more like KK/AA now with your turn line.

fuzzbox

Hectorjelly wrote:

Ok, well when I say nothing I mean it looks like the most we can have is AA KK! We check the turn and river which doesnt show a huge amount of strength. I dont think KQ is going to check behind on the river, Im pretty sure its pushing. However, it is hard for KQ to get there. I think that an unknown is going to be bluffing, or value betting a worse queen enough to make calling profitable.

He could well have KQ, JQ, QT etc, intending to call only one bet on the flop, then he improves and we check to him twice; it really doesnt look like we have a queen.

QJ just got there, so a lot depends on

A. how likely is he to call an utg raise with KQ or QT.
B. how likely is he to call the flop bet with less than Qx (JJ/TT/99/88 kinda stuff) with 2 players still to act behind him, and an utg raiser, betting into a big field.
C. how likely is he to understand that he needs to bluff with TT/99/88 now (given that JJ just got there).

Its hard to envisage a lot of players calling a pfr with QT a large % of the time so KQ might just be the only hand we beat, as most players would tend to fold the TT/99/88 hands of this world, facing that flop action from an UTG raiser and two players to act behind.

robinlacey

i really really wanted to fold,but i just couldn't bring myself to do it.

i knew i should have really,but i had just lost an all in preflop with KK v 88 on another table and was maybe a little tilty,so i called.he had 77.

the more i think about it,if i played the hand again i would fold.

robinlacey

i think the key to the hand is the flop.the call on the flop is so so strong,and he didn't slow down afterwards at all.

Ste05

fuzzbox wrote:

Its hard to envisage a lot of players calling a pfr with QT a large % of the time so KQ might just be the only hand we beat, as most players would tend to fold the TT/99/88 hands of this world, facing that flop action from an UTG raiser and two players to act behind.

Why? He has the best relative position on the table, he can safely call there with those hands, only 1 over card has fallen and he is ahead of our range, and he has position on us. We just made a continuation bet as far as he's concerned, anyone that acts after him will completely define their hand and make the original raiser act again before any more money is required from us, both hands will basically be face up, it also shows a huge amount of strength. IMO he has by far the best position on the table.

ocallagh

robinlacey wrote:

i think the key to the hand is the flop.the call on the flop is so so strong,and he didn't slow down afterwards at all.

fully agree, the flop call rules out so many hands. from then on it's clear he wants his tank in the middle. 77 makes much more sense than KQ. Also, if we think he has KQ enough of the time to call he must also have QJ a lot of the time too then which turns it back into a fold!:)

ocallagh

Ste05 wrote:

Why? He has the best relative position on the table, he can safely call there with those hands, only 1 over card has fallen and he is ahead of our range, and he has position on us. We just made a continuation bet as far as he's concerned, anyone that acts after him will completely define their hand and make the original raiser act again before any more money is required from us, both hands will basically be face up, it also shows a huge amount of strength. IMO he has by far the best position on the table.

he is not ahead of 3 players ranges in a raised pot preflop with an overcard. calling 88 - JJ on that flop with 2 players left to act is a bit loose.

edit: it does look strong alright, but only because you really shouldn't be doing it in the first place!

Ste05

The only range he cares about is the Original raisers at that point, not many if anyone is calling or raising behind us with a lone Q. So the call will usually fold out any Q's behind him. Then when the turn falls and our hero checks, he looks even more likely to be ahead as the Q doesn't really change anything, if he was ahead he still is, if he was behind an over pair he can now attempt to bluff.

When he's called on the Turn, the Hero probably has AA or KK, maybe KQ or AQ. Then when checked to again on the River, he can attempt to get AA or KK to fold if he so desires, as they are unlikely to call a push. Obviously he can check behind there but a bet looks super strong and will more than likely win the pot and will certainly fold out alot of over pairs.

fuzzbox

Ste05 wrote:

Why? He has the best relative position on the table, he can safely call there with those hands, only 1 over card has fallen and he is ahead of our range, and he has position on us. We just made a continuation bet as far as he's concerned, anyone that acts after him will completely define their hand and make the original raiser act again before any more money is required from us, both hands will basically be face up, it also shows a huge amount of strength. IMO he has by far the best position on the table.

No way.

The action goes thus:

UTG open raises (or was it utg+1 ?), he now calls, then two others call with relative position to him, and one of them has absolute position on him.

Now, with 4 players to the totally dry flop (Q72), the utg open raiser now bets into the field. This shows tremendous strength by the UTG player. Villain now calls this bet, next to act, with two players still to act behind him.

this shows even more strength, because UTG range is so strong - AA/KK/QQ/*maybe*JJ/AQ kinda stuff, AND because there are two players still to act.
This makes it less likely that he calls with 88, hoping that its good Vs an AK type hand. There are three reasons for this - 1. UTGs range doesnt contain too many AK/AJ hands that are CBetting (CB into 4 players is not that great), and 2. there are still two players to act behind him. and 3. the board is so dry.

He has the worst relative position on the board, not the best, and he is calling a very big show of strength from an EP open raiser.

Therefore - he shows lots of strength by calling the flop bet.

fuzzbox

Ste05 wrote:

When he's called on the Turn, the Hero probably has AA or KK, maybe KQ or AQ. Then when checked to again on the River, he can attempt to get AA or KK to fold if he so desires, as they are unlikely to call a push. Obviously he can check behind there but a bet looks super strong and will more than likely win the pot and will certainly fold out alot of over pairs.

Everybody knows that you should not attempt to bluff ppl off AA or KK.

Its more likely that he has a hand, than is trying to bluff. If he has a hand, then its likely to be better than AQ.

Ste05

fuzzbox wrote:

Therefore - he shows lots of strength by calling the flop bet.

I agree, and it's relatively cheap to call, and by calling he has complete control of the hand from here on in, if anyone does anything behind him he can play his hand perfectly, and will see the original raiser act again. Usually he'll be in a great spot to take the pot away from the original raiser on the turn or River and will have control of the pot, if the original raiser bets again on the turn, he can play perfectly again.

As turned, apart from AQ, QQ and 77 there is basically nothing that can call bets on the turn and River.

and because the board is so dry and it looks so strong I would continuation bet that flop a huge % of the time even into 3 players. Exactly what calls except for a set, a scared Q or a float?

fuzzbox wrote:

Everybody knows that you should not attempt to bluff ppl off AA or KK.

Its more likely that he has a hand, than is trying to bluff. If he has a hand, then its likely to be better than AQ.

It doesn't mean it can't be and isn't done. I agree that a large % of the time he'll have AQ beaten, but IMO the only hand that beats us is exactly 77 or QJ and I think that is too tight a range to assign the Villain, he'll be value betting KQ, Q10 (although somewhat unlikely pre-flop) and a certain % of the time he'll be bluffing.

I know the results of this hand show he did in fact have 77, but I still think against a random player they will have a wider range. If my maths is right, the pot will now be about 2,840 and about 1,200 to call. (1,640 on turn + his push of ~1,200). He then needs to be bluffing/value betting worse about 1 time every 3 to make the call profitable, it's tight but I think OK.

robinlacey

ste i think you are underestimating what a show of strenght my c-bet is.

i am probably the most agressive regular in these games and i'm still hardly ever c-betting when i get three callers,in fact in this spot i would often check the flop here because i think c-betting is almost over representing my hand,and i have TPTK!

robinlacey

i mean when i bet the flop i kind of regretted it straight away because although its technically a value bet its hard for me to get called by a worse hand...

fuzzbox

Ste05 wrote:

I agree, and it's relatively cheap to call, and by calling he has complete control of the hand from here on in, if anyone does anything behind him he can play his hand perfectly, and will see the original raiser act again. Usually he'll be in a great spot to take the pot away from the original raiser on the turn or River and will have control of the pot, if the original raiser bets again on the turn, he can play perfectly again.

As turned, apart from AQ, QQ and 77 there is basically nothing that can call bets on the turn and River.

and because the board is so dry and it looks so strong I would continuation bet that flop a huge % of the time even into 3 players. Exactly what calls except for a set, a scared Q or a float?


It doesn't mean it can't be and isn't done. I agree that a large % of the time he'll have AQ beaten, but IMO the only hand that beats us is exactly 77 or QJ and I think that is too tight a range to assign the Villain, he'll be value betting KQ, Q10 (although somewhat unlikely pre-flop) and a certain % of the time he'll be bluffing.

I know the results of this hand show he did in fact have 77, but I still think against a random player they will have a wider range. If my maths is right, the pot will now be about 2,840 and about 1,200 to call. (1,640 on turn + his push of ~1,200). He then needs to be bluffing/value betting worse about 1 time every 3 to make the call profitable, it's tight but I think OK.

I think you are believing that the villain can play a very elaborate game on the flop, by "pretending" to have lots of strength, he will later be able to do lots of good stuff.

People tend to play much more straightforward in a multi-way flop, and even moreso in a multi-way dry flop, with players still to act.

If villain thinks on such an elaborate level, and if villain can do both A. bet the turn with TT-88, and B. realise that he needs to bluff shove the river with those hands, or if villain can call a pfr with KQ AND QT in that position, THEN we can call.

I think there are a very large number of ifs in that statement. Too many for me to believe that it happens 33% of the time.

robinlacey

isn't there some thing in science where if there's two possible solutions,both of which make an equal amount sense,you choose the one which is the most straighforward?i think its called ocram's razor or something.

basically if the villain is either thinking on a really complicated level or his actions mean exactly what they look like,its best to presume the latter is true most of the time...

Captain Tom

is there any merit to check/calling the flop here since?

how about bet/folding the turn?

Ste05

I agree it's over representing your hand, I think it looks like exactly AA, KK, QQ with AQ at the absolute minimum of your range, but I still think nothing except for a set, scared Q or a risky float is ever calling here, simply because of the strength it shows, and because of the dryness of the board this is almost the perfect flop to cont. bet on with almost 100% of the hands you raised pre-flop with. It's so difficult for anyone to play back at you. The only real option (obviously apart from folding) is to call you and see what happens on the turn. It's hard to explain this properly, but because it's such a perfect flop for a cont. bet it's also an almost perfect flop for a float/ call and re-evaluate with a decent pair above a 7 and below a Q.

Obviously the problem is that there's no read at all for both players, but there's nothing wrong with. Look at it this way, yourself and most others here are advocating folding AQ here, exactly what do you do with AA or KK? basically you are folding your whole range except for QQ. It's a marvelous spot for a 2 barrel bluff and comes along so infrequently.

Tar.Aldarion

Occam's razor basically says "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one." It's pretty safe to assume the simplest one is the correct one.

ocallagh

Ste05 wrote:

I agree, and it's relatively cheap to call, and by calling he has complete control of the hand from here on in, if anyone does anything behind him he can play his hand perfectly, and will see the original raiser act again. Usually he'll be in a great spot to take the pot away from the original raiser on the turn or River and will have control of the pot, if the original raiser bets again on the turn, he can play perfectly again. As turned, apart from AQ, QQ and 77 there is basically nothing that can call bets on the turn and River.

I have to disagree with this.
Robin can't really be c-betting air in a 4 way pot first to act. Robins range is AA/KK/AQ/QQ/77 90% of the time on such a dry board, oop and with 3 opponents. The villains flop call is strong, but not enough to get Robin off AA/KK. (The villain does not anticipate the perfect bluffing card for when robin does have AA/KK). Add in the chances of the 2 players left to act and it is mad to float here.

I do agree that once the villain calls the flop he can play his hand perfectly though, but that is like raising for information. It might allow you to play the rest of the hand perfectly but it is not profitable. Robin or the other two have a hand far too often, and without the turn pairing the hand will be hard to bluff.

and because the board is so dry and it looks so strong I would continuation bet that flop a huge % of the time even into 3 players.

I don't think this is correct.

Exactly what calls except for a set, a scared Q or a float?

a set, KQ, AQ, AA, KK. They have position on you. Are you saying every time we raise preflop in early position we should bet the flop because only a set will call us?

It doesn't mean it can't be and isn't done. I agree that a large % of the time he'll have AQ beaten, but IMO the only hand that beats us is exactly 77 or QJ and I think that is too tight a range to assign the Villain, he'll be value betting KQ, Q10 (although somewhat unlikely pre-flop) and a certain % of the time he'll be bluffing.

I know the results of this hand show he did in fact have 77, but I still think against a random player they will have a wider range. If my maths is right, the pot will now be about 2,840 and about 1,200 to call. (1,640 on turn + his push of ~1,200). He then needs to be bluffing/value betting worse about 1 time every 3 to make the call profitable, it's tight but I think OK.

Ste05

fuzzbox wrote:

I think you are believing that the villain can play a very elaborate game on the flop, by "pretending" to have lots of strength, he will later be able to do lots of good stuff.

TBH, I don't think he was setting anything up at all, I think he was probably just calling to re-evaluate on the turn, then when the Q fell and Robin checked, he took a stab at the pot, I don't really think it was all that elaborate, although I may have over cooked the books slightly in my explanations. I just think he happened to stumble on the situation, and realised that he needed to fire 2 bullets because of our turn call (which IMO looks like a rather scared one).

bops

good discussion above, but i would like to add i really like the way the villain played the hand - straight forward simple aggression - especially the river push - i guess he pinned you on your exact holding

also i think the majority of people who advocate a fold here will actually call in this spot - interesting??

Ste05

ocallagh wrote:

a set, KQ, AQ, AA, KK. They have position on you. Are you saying every time we raise preflop in early position we should bet the flop because only a set will call us?

Not at all, but when everyone is scared of the other and it's quite likely for no one to have hit the flop, usually first to bet will win the hand, we can represent a hand so I'd usually bet it out and expect to take the pot down. Flops like 8c7c3, 10hJ6h, 3s5s8, 7s5h9d, etc. are bad for c-betting, flops that contain a rainbow of 1 big card, 1 medium card and a low one, is absolutely perfect and on those type of flops there's basically nothing else that can call us apart from the hands I outlined above. Honestly there is nothing that can call us except for a set, a scared Q or a middle pair/float type scenario.

If there's an over pair behind us more luck to that guy.

ocallagh

Ste05 wrote:

Not at all, but when everyone is scared of the other and it's quite likely for no one to have hit the flop, usually first to bet will win the hand, we can represent a hand so I'd usually bet it out and expect to take the pot down. Flops like 8c7c3, 10hJ6h, 3s5s8, 7s5h9d, etc. are bad for c-betting, flops that contain a rainbow of 1 big card, 1 medium card and a low one, is absolutely perfect and on those type of flops there's basically nothing else that can call us apart from the hands I outlined above. Honestly there is nothing that can call us except for a set, a scared Q or a middle pair/float type scenario.

If there's an over pair behind us more luck to that guy.

I agree it is better than most flops to cbet, but that doesn't make it right. If we have nothing, it is highly likely there is a set, Q, float or overpair out there! With 3 to act, and out of position you need something. The only reason people are scared is because of the fact we need something to bet, it's a catch 22 situation! If we get called we have to give it up on the turn and the scared queen/float takes it away.

Ste05

I don't mind someone floating me there and taking it away from me on the turn or River TBH, it takes balls to make a play at that pot. TBH, I'd be more likely to C-Bet that flop with nothing or QQ, 77, 22 than with AQ, AA or KK. But because I'd be trying to get to showdown with maybe 1 or 2 bets on later streets with those hands, instead of getting AI now or betting 3 times with them.

fuzzbox

bops wrote:

good discussion above, but i would like to add i really like the way the villain played the hand - straight forward simple aggression - especially the river push - i guess he pinned you on your exact holding

He didnt pin us on anything, he had a full house on the river, with a pot sized bet left - what else would he do other than shove?

fuzzbox

Ste05 wrote:

TBH, I don't think he was setting anything up at all, I think he was probably just calling to re-evaluate on the turn, then when the Q fell and Robin checked, he took a stab at the pot, I don't really think it was all that elaborate, although I may have over cooked the books slightly in my explanations. I just think he happened to stumble on the situation, and realised that he needed to fire 2 bullets because of our turn call (which IMO looks like a rather scared one).

Floats work a lot better when its likely that our opponent is weak.

When somebody raises utg in an 8 handed game, and gets 3 callers, and then on a Q72r board fires close to pot into a field, then its not likely that our opponent is weak.

Thus, our opponent is more likely to be strong.

If the board had come out turn 3o, and we had check/called, and the river was J and we checked and he shoved ... what would you suggest that we do?

pok3rplaya

If I folded this I'd buy myself a present afterwards as congratulations for making a sick fold.

Seriously though I'd like to think I'd fold the river. Mainly because his flop call is super strong and because of his preflop range.

fuzzbox

pok3rplaya wrote:

If I folded this I'd second guess myself for weeks about it.

fixed that up for ya

Ste05

fuzzbox wrote:

Floats work a lot better when its likely that our opponent is weak.

When somebody raises utg in an 8 handed game, and gets 3 callers, and then on a Q72r board fires close to pot into a field, then its not likely that our opponent is weak.

Thus, our opponent is more likely to be strong.

If the board had come out turn 3o, and we had check/called, and the river was J and we checked and he shoved ... what would you suggest that we do?

I'm a little confused here, am I talking about this from the Villains POV or the Hero's??

If the turn came a 3o and the Hero bet again I'd fold. If he checked I'd probably check behind. I'm not saying he floated here, I'm saying he called a c-bet in position with the aim of re-evaluating on the turn [he could have a pure float (unlikely), but more than likely he might have a mid pair that he thinks *might* be good]. If Robin checked a 3o turn and the Villain bet, once Robin calls, I'm done with the hand.

It's just playing a hand in position, it's not all that elaborate, I was just talking about how the hand actually developed, plans change all the time as a hand progresses and opportunities can present themselves.

Ste05

pok3rplaya wrote:

Seriously though I'd like to think I'd fold the river. Mainly because his flop call is super strong and because of his preflop range.

What's his pre-flop range??

Tar.Aldarion

It could be anything since you know nothing about him, so he could have hands that beat you, and he played as such.

fuzzbox

Ste05 wrote:

I'm a little confused here, am I talking about this from the Villains POV or the Hero's??

Fair point - both

If the turn came a 3o and the Hero bet again I'd fold. If he checked I'd probably check behind. I'm not saying he floated here, I'm saying he called a c-bet in position with the aim of re-evaluating on the turn [he could have a pure float (unlikely), but more than likely he might have a mid pair that he thinks *might* be good]. If Robin checked a 3o turn and the Villain bet, once Robin calls, I'm done with the hand.

If you had AQ, the turn came 3o, and you checked, he bet, you called, river came Jo, and you checked and he shoved - what would you do?

It's just playing a hand in position, it's not all that elaborate, I was just talking about how the hand actually developed, plans change all the time as a hand progresses and opportunities can present themselves.

I think that robins bet into a field on a Q hi board, would tend to significantly reduce the number of times a guy would call with 88/99/TT (which are effectively the only *bluffing* hands left that can call the flop.

He could have AA/KK, but they should check now.

So villain tends to have one of :

A. Qx (where x is very much likely to be AQ, but can be KQ or QJ sometimes (rarely)
B. a full house
C. 88/99/TT that realises he needs to bluff, and figures to take robin off precisely AA/KK with such a bluff. AND he needs to have called the flop in a very marginal and difficult spot with those hands.

Alls Im saying is that it requires a lot of things to line up for villain to be bluffing, so its far more likely that villain is not bluffing. When villain is not bluffing, then he has us beat.

bops

fuzzbox wrote:

He didnt pin us on anything, he had a full house on the river, with a pot sized bet left - what else would he do other than shove?

very wrong i'm happy to say!!

if he believed you were weaker maybe he would value bet????

Ste05

fuzzbox wrote:

If you had AQ, the turn came 3o, and you checked, he bet, you called, river came Jo, and you checked and he shoved - what would you do?

I'd fold probably, but I think that situation is different than to here because the turn in each changes the complexion of hands that the Villain can represent, he's never betting or representing a Q on the turn, he is/can be in this example. EDIT: It also reduces the chances of us having a Q when one falls on the turn, so he can be happier that his mid pair is ahead of our c-betting range.

fuzzbox wrote:

Alls Im saying is that it requires a lot of things to line up for villain to be bluffing, so its far more likely that villain is not bluffing. When villain is not bluffing, then he has us beat.

I understand your point of view, I just think that as the hand developed and due to our (correct) passive line, it will induce a bet from enough hands that are not exactly 77 and QJ to make the call profitable. We have no reads and without a read I'll never put someone on a tiny range.