These hands occurred on the same table against the same villain. In fact, Hand 2 occurred 3 hands after Hand 1.
The villain in these pots is 83/47/2.41, with a river AF of 6.0. However, the sample is only over 38 hands, and that means, while these numbers were close for the whole session, these hands probably took place around the 20th-25th hand or so in his session. Villain was very aggro pf, but I hadn't seen him do anything crazy postflop.
My thinking in hand 1 was that the ace was a good turn card to continue to bet on. One he calls, my only chance to win the pot is to bet. Sure, he could have less than a jack, but he'd certainly fold any draw ending in king high or queen high.
Hand 2 was a direct result of hand 1. Obviously, he folded the first one, so I felt I could try it again on the 2nd one. It's a bit different because we're OOP. If I was in pos, I'd take the free showdown. Do we ever fold better hands here? Or should we be check/calling, or check/folding?
Hand 1:
Absolute Poker
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $2/$4
6 players
Converter
Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is Button with J
3 folds, Hero raises, SB folds, BB calls.
Flop: 7
BB checks, Hero bets, BB calls.
Turn: A
BB checks, Hero bets, BB calls.
River: 6
BB checks, Hero bets, BB ....
Hand 2:
Absolute Poker
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $2/$4
5 players
Converter
Pre-flop: (5 players) Hero is BB with Q
UTG folds, CO calls, Button folds, SB calls, Hero raises, CO calls, SB folds.
Flop: T
Hero bets, CO calls.
Turn: 4
Hero bets, CO calls.
River: 3
Hero bets, CO ....