Hero sitting at the table for 20 minutes. Aggressive image as I x/r a couple of times already and 3b villain once. Also x/r 3 way on K75r with K7s after defending bb and doubled up a shortstack that had 77.

Villain seems like a solid reg. Played with him once but no reads. Just saw him overbet in a few spots and he seems TAG.

775 effective

Villain raises in mp 20, hero 3b AA (last orbit we 3b him in the exact same spot), villain calls.

Flop (130) Q32
check, cbet 45, call
Turn (220) Q329
check, bet 160, jam 670, hero?

Is V dense enough to be orgasming, er, checkraising with something as weak as AQ or KQ? That's the only consideration. If not, then he either has a total airball (very unlikely IMHO) or a flopped/turned set. (Q9 is another distant possibility.)

Your description of V makes me strongly inclined to think that you're boned. Fold, with an eye roll and a sigh.

Flick

Eh it's close but I don't think we can fold. We don't block AQhh or KQhh he probably doesn't have 33 or 22 or at least shouldn't if he's actually a tag. Too high up in our range to be hero folding without a very solid read

I can find a nitty fold here. What semi bluffs does he even have here? JTh, and maybe a few naked heart draws? Even Q9 might take this route with a relatively dry board up until the turn.

I can't see him taking this line with anything valuewise we beat, except MAYBE kings (and unlikely). Set of Qs/9s make more sense to me here, especially when we are showing incredible strength in a 3 bet pot.

Meh, I think its a fold. Call Flop Check Raise Turn, just tends to be a nutted line. I think AQ, KQ, or QJ just call turn.

160/f is unacceptable. If it had been Qh, then sure fold, in the meantime there are too many hands that are going to ckc turn ckc river because you bet 160 so they just shove now. No info folds are a good strat but that's taken too far here. 54/A4/A5hh, Qxhh, KK... sometimes it's just naked AQ for reasons above - can get there against 32s Q9. Flick.

Calling off 670 because you just put 160 in the pot is a great example of sunk cost fallacy.

If the board was wetter, I could get behind a call here just because we can be ahead a lot, while having outs when we aren't. I just don't see too many people go crazy on a dryish board.

You might be right from a solver/percent defend point though. My fold is more of a gut feeling than a math one.

The ridiculous concept of "blocking" doesn't apply here (or anywhere else). Our holding of AA doesn't prevent (as in, "block") him from holding AQ. It just makes it less likely.

However, his actions make that hand very, very unlikely, as OP tells us he's not an idiot.

Call

AQhh is slang for ace-queen suited of hearts; if we held ace-ace with the ace of hearts, it would prevent him from holding ace-queen suited of hearts. Hence the comment “we don’t block AQhh”. Hth

It's a far bigger deal that what's being accounted for here, 160 was creating a 3 street stack-off leaving less than pot behind. It's not great and folding is reasonable, it's just one of those spots - and I'm leaning call bc 750 depth, no Ah or Qh in play, and the slightly less frequent sets available - hell just have to show me QQ/99.

Hmm reread what I said. I said we don't block AQ or KQ of hearts which is good since we're ahead of those hands and v could possibly play them this way.

Blockers are important in close spots. It's not something that's up for debate

With OPs described image I think this is a call. 20 minutes at a table and OPs 3! And raised bets post will get under people’s skin and cause a higher than normal spew.

As is, we’re only calling ~500 into ~1500. Not a ton of bluffs needed. I’d guess QQ gets 4! Often pre here because of above. I think you see AQ, KQ here a lot and he tells you he put you on AK

Oops forgot to post the result.

Hero called, villain won with 99

I can't fold here, and 2 things make it clear. 1 is we don't see the Qh, so he could have that card with another heart, either the A or K. 2 is that we 'have an aggressive image'. Do you really think a TAG would not take the opportunity to x/r here with a range that includes AQhh or KQhh? If those are in his range, I have to call.

Sent from my SM-N976U using Tapatalk

Whatever. The foolishness of using the "blocker" concept in this situation still applies. What matters is V's actions.

Perhaps (and IMHO the concept is grossly overrated and often used to justify actions), but as I said, V would have to have been an idiot to play that way, and you told us he wasn't. I don't think a good player would play that way with AQ or KQ of hearts at all.

Sometimes it comes down to: how good or bad is that player, and would he do this if/unless he had such and such a hand? That consideration trumps all the pseudo-sophisticated gobbledygook that is often used by people who are weak at the basic skill of poker: reading the other player.

If he does indeed have top pair with a flush draw, why would he jam here? His hand isn't all-or-nothing. He could still win even if he missed his draw. That's why I think that the hypothesis that the turn card gave him an orgasm because it added a flush draw to his top pair is wrong. If he had AKh or AQh, that turn card would be nice but wouldn't really affect his winning chances all that much. Sure, outs are added, but now he has only one card to come. A check-and-call situation. On the other hand, if he just hit a set, his actions make perfect sense.

Again, this is only because you said he's a good player.

Honestly im not 100% sure. In theory it is a call. But playing live im not sure if people really jam worse hands like Qxhh here. People tend to play with more caution and call instead of jamming

So many levels behind.

I know that ya gotta prove you're one of the boys by tossing around all these "sophisticated poker concepts," especially the required jargon and acronyms, so I get why you make silly comments like that. Chime in so no one will think you're a donk/fish/ploppie/newbie/rookie/LAG/MAG/***/GAG.

The OP's question is sooooo simple to figure out, since he gives us enough info to do so. The line chosen by V is that of a poor player with something like AQhh or a good player with a flopped or turned set. Therefore...

Let's not forget, boys and girls, that V checked and called the flop, which would be a silly action with top pair, good kicker, and a dry board.

They don't. Unless they're drunk or they suck in general.

I forget who first said it, but AA is one pair. You don't need to ride it to your doom. I've seen SO much money pissed away by people who won't lay it down, no matter what.

Just standard stuff. You're just behind. I don't think it's a great idea for OP to take your comments too much to heart for this reason.

Grunch: Flop is probably best a mixed bet 65/check, leaning towards checking AA a good amount. Range betting 45 is also probably fine, especially vs people who don't check/raise enough.
OTT, we just call it off I'm pretty sure, note that our sizing really incentivizes villain to jam, instead of calling and playing with a PSB behind on the river after several draws came on the turn. I would guess that, for this reason, we want to go more like 110 OTT (which still does the same thing, but makes check/jamming slightly worse since there is less in the pot) but I haven't run it at all