V's sometimes play QQ/KK more cautiously fearing an overcard on the river or that someone has the nut flush draw which has pretty good equity against them whereas with AA they only have to worry about the flush hitting. Yes we know they are essentially the same hand, but V's often play them differently. I was surprised he called too, was pretty sure he had KK and would fold, but I guess not. Might have worked if he had another $100 or so...

Right... not a x/r, I missed that. That does change things a bit, and he can still have more of JJ+ there too (then I had previously allowed for). But I still think shoving the turn may be better then the river.

You say he's not likely to fold OTT, but the river is good because it hits his scare card index. But if this is true, then shouldn't your value line with sets and monster SD+FD draws OTT be to get the $$$ in there so he cannot fold OTR?

I guess, then my question is: Can you have it both ways?
-- Shove for value OTT when you have it.
-- Wait to shove for a bluff OTR when you don't.

Here's my thoughts:

How much does their combined calling probability have to be for your EV to be 0 or positive?

Your EV for the shove is: (1 - callingPercentage)*potSize - callingPercentage*(potSize + shoveSize). Solving callingPercentage for 0, we get:
callingPercentage = potSize/( 2*potSize + shoveSize ).

So for example, if your shoveSize is the potSize, they can call as low as 33% of the time for you to have break even expectation. If they call more than 33%, you lose money, less than 33%, you win money.

If your shoveSize is greater than the pot size, then it's bad because they only have to call a small percentage of the time to break even or make money from you.
By playing with the shove size, we can see our ideal scenario is shoving less than the pot.

From what I can tell by looking at effective stack sizes, your shove size for v2 is going to be about $300 into a $500 pot. This means he needs to call at least 40%ish of the time for you to break even. If he calls less, you're making money.

To keep it simple, we need the combined probability of both players calling to be less than 40%. The problem as I see it that your shoving into two different players, one whom you have labeled as a station, and showed strength on the flop and turn. I'd estimate he'll be calling around 40% of the time. You then have one more player, and this probably tips the combined calling percentage to be greater than 40%.

I would not have shoved this river.

*edit*

All that side, I still love this play and aggression, I just think it's the wrong time for it. Do it against a weaker iso'd player, or two nitty players whose range doesn't include many flushes on the river after all the flop and turn action.

I've always had a similar question (i.e. the inconsistent thought of I expect calls when I have it but folds when I don't) but bip! set me straight on this. Something along the lines that our bluffs, if done in the correct circumstances, are probably going to be slightly +EV (long term, cuz obviously high variance short term), which makes our value bets when we have it obviously ++++EV (and we're pretty much free-rolling with these).

Gparaphrasingbip!,perhapsbutcheringitG

Well I think it's pretty clear that I don't have a set since I would always shove turn with one, and shoving turn with a draw when I have little to no FE against an overpair and only ~30% equity seems wrong. V2 should never have AK/random cards here when he attempts to raise flop and calls turn unless it's AKhh. The river shove really reps a flush only, but from the outside looking in it seems like there's no other hand I can really have? I'm folding all one-pair hands on the turn and the only combo draws I can have that missed are like 68cc and 64cc compared to all the obvious front-door heart flush draw combos. A couple of the solid regs that were at the table commented that it was a pretty sick bluff and thought V2 was dead, so I guess it looked believable to a thinking player, maybe not so much to random rec player since they might not be thinking that way, just "well I have KK how can I fold?"

Setting aside the fact that V2 didn't shove the turn like he should have, is anyone calling with KK here in V2's spot without reading results?

I'm definitely not; as the cards lay, this bluff really should have worked.

I'm lazy, what's the math on how often you need folds on this river shove to breakeven? And then have to factor in how often V2 has AA (which he's never folding) vs KK vs, um, is there another hand he can have deepish for a tight player 3betting preflop? I mean, you can *almost* argue that V2 shows up with AA ~50% of the time here (seriously, isn't AK/QQ/JJ in the flatting range a lot?). And then on top of that we have V1 still to deal with, who's calling a decent x% of the time simply cuz, well, he's V1.

Don't know the math, haven't bothered trying to figure it out. When V2 flats on the turn I think he has QQ/KK way more often than AA though. Does he fold JJ/QQ in this spot but call with KK? Does he even call with AK if he somehow has that? I dunno. He can't beat anything that I would ever reasonably have in this spot 95% of the time. Weird hand, kind of.

I did that math a few posts above.

Ha, yes you did (sorry, I must have missed that).

A $10 pf raise at the Wynn seems small. When I raise $15 there it often feels like a small raise. I'm a nit pf so I just fold to the reraise.

I don't think the bluff is spew at all. The river card is terrifying to a lot of players and the bet is much more expensive than anything the players put into the pot earlier in the hand. It's probably borderline at worst, which is still much better than spewing.