freddydr87
League Champion
Bronze Level
Celebrate 20 Years of CardsChat with us! Over $3000 in freerolls, bonuses, and merchandise giveaways; click here to get in on the action!
As everyone else have said, jam preflop. You dont want to lure the limper to come along and create this extremely awkward situation, where the stack to pot ratio is less than one, you are usually dealing with overcards on the flop, and someone is already all in. So just jam and let the limper make a decision for his entire stack.
As played fold on the flop is completely fine. He did in fact have AX, so you are only questioning this decision, because you would have hit your 2-outer on the turn. But we dont call in poker to hit 2-outers. And as someone said, he is almost never bluffing here, because even when you fold, he still need to beat the all-in player at showdown.
As far as the second part of your argument goes, it's a bit contradictive. You say he's being results oriented by basing the argument on the result (opponent having Ax). Neither of the two should really matter. Unless the result shows us something suprising that we can learn from, we should focus on the decision rather
The point is, seeing AX gives no reason to question our fold. If he had shown a bluff, then it would be more reasonable to at least ask, if folding was to nitty. Maybe the answer would be "no", but it would make sense to at least think about it and perhaps post the hand to a forum to get the opinion of others.
This hand however likely only ended in a forum, because of what happened, after Hero folded. A bit like when someone ask, if they should have called preflop with 82, because the runout was 87232, and they would have made a full house. Hope this makes sense now