You're obviously never going to get it exactly right, you just take your best estimation and then make your decision on that.

Poker is not about getting every decision right results-wise, it's about making the best decision you can with the info you have. Your info will always be incomplete.

+1

You also have a limit in certainty based on this:
wbatas gives a great nuanced description of the villain, but is forced to conclude he don't have any specific reads due to his small sample.

In the end, we're making assumptions based on experience. There are error bands on how well we can define a villain the OP has probably played with in fewer than 100 hands of poker. Our experienced based estimator is however good it is, so we are forced to make a best guess and go with it. We might reign in any big read-based strategy shifts, due to the small sample size. However, we have to click a button so pick the best one based on how you read the spot.

This is like old-school wa/wb. If you were playing 20 or 40 game, you could be sure that many opponents would recognize that you capped your range and that you weren't bluffing. Maybe you are bluffing here due to b/f. I don't think you really fold out anything you want folded, and I'm unsure of how much more value you get than c/c. Could be you nailed the play, but it isn't really my favorite.

Makes you wonder, if you somehow got here with A3o. Would donking be expert?

the more I read this hand the more I'm convinced you're just bone ****ed and there is no good answer. like...he's never folding, he's never bluffing the river....he'll bet like pocket 4s you'll call and he'll shake his head like he lost and then take the money. I actually think against a ****** you're supposed to check and fold this river but obviously you're not doing that so I dunno. Maybe bet/3 is actually the answer? lol no....

if he's never bluffing, it's an easy fold (preferably on turn). not that complicated.
if he has enough combos of FD or SD, we happily call down on blank river.

I don't think its a boned spot at all.

What are we getting, 8:1? We need like 6.7:1 to call to draw to our toppest pair. Thus, we fold because we somehow hate money? There must be something in "not that complicated" that I don't get, because we're getting a sweet overlay to make up for the times when a guy who should never has a 3 gets to have one.

We are getting 7:1 without accounting for the rake. So we are basically getting the exact price to call turn.

And our RIO are so bad we snap fold, when again, the villain may have one combo that contains a 3, that being a PP of 3's? Given that he probably doesn't fastplay quads, we may be close to zero combos of 3. To go along with that, our villain probably doesn't fastplay 2's full or have A2s or A3s in his tight TAG range.

Basically, I'm saying "it's an easy fold (preferably on turn)" is just silly and ignores pot odds. That's including 0% bluffs, as well.

Im not disagreeing with you. That said, our implied odds arent great since we have to lead all rivers we hit. Also, hes pretty much never bliffing here when he raises into two other players behind.

hand is fine except river donk is terrible. turn fold would also be terrible.

pretty much but i'm quoting this so the thread will get another bump.

The thread title seems wrong, but I lol every time I see it.

thank you, jeese, for your contribution to the poker lexicon

DougL: Nice catch. Ignore my turn comment. I got lazy, didn't count pod odds. Assuming we donk K/A and always get called by worse, we'd be making 8 BBs when the pot odds are 6.7-1. Discounting for 22, 33, 3x, 77, AA, KK, we still have odds to call a pure value range.

This is a good time to say something I've been meaning to say. I've noticed that every once in awhile I get sloppy while I am playing and don't bother to calculate the pot odds, figuring I've basically seen this situation before. But sometimes, it comes out when I review sessions and think about hands that I made an incorrect fold (usually) because I figured I knew the situation and I didn't.

I don't know if others do this, but it's important to remain engaged in the game and think about situations even if you think you know them and have seen them 100 times before. Because if you make that assumption too often, you are going to make mistakes. It's one thing to make those mistakes when playing 15 tables online, but in live poker you have time to think about every decision so you might as well get them right.

Reading back, I failed to vote. FWIW, I love how wbatas played the hand up until the river. You can make a good argument for c/f on the river, we were playing pot odds, now we missed, and we're facing snug villain. You could also go for c/c as a bluff catcher, because I'm not sure I trust flop action that much, the board ran out without hitting anything, and small sample + kittens. Argue either one of those and it seems like good poker. Vs an unknown at your local casino, probably have to go with your default read vs. the general population of locals who seem like this guy.

FWIW, when I call down due to pot odds with ace king or ace queen unimproved and get to the river, I basically always call absent a read. At this point it's one more bet, we have a showdownable hand, the pot is by definition pretty big (otherwise I wouldn't have had the pot odds to call the turn!) and you'd be surprised the number of times my hand turned out to be good even on really awful boards just because a lot of players, once they x/r a draw or a bluff, never stop barreling no matter how badly they miss.

I also think players at least theoretically notice these river folds and there's some possibility that folding the river could result in future exploitation.

If I have a strong read that the person never bluffs or never 3-barrel bluffs, I've sometimes departed from this and folded the river. But the vast majority of the time, I call.