Villain has to never shove an overpair here for us to fold. There is absolutely no way that op has this read, and even if he did, he would need to be close to 100% certain of his read.

Agree that this is generally a call but if your read is well defined (meaning that you have watched multiple sessions or a really long session). I don't mind a fold.

Once the fish leads, and he raises, I'm sure hes got QQ+, but my move looks so strong, that I think even an amateur lays down AA/KK to me in that spot. I can see him having AQ, but like I said, I think he plays it more passively preflop. Just like he did with AJs

If this is true why in the world are we raising the flop. We don't want villain to fold KK+. As played this is always a call IMO, maybe a crying call but it's a call.

This is the most obvious and most useless comment so far.

grunch: call

i can see why you might fold... this is a ton of money on a rapidly inflated (exploding) pot. this is the one player where his aggression means something very powerful. however, despite the variance (and the fact that this one hand could ruin our session) i cannot lay down a set here. only one hand beats you. there is a big draw there for which i'm not putting the villain on the draw, but i would put the villain on protecting against the draw. i'd call and hope for the best.

Obviously but it's an extreme, simply to point out that playing by a rule where "If you commit 1/3 of your stack and have second nuts you should always call an all in" is ridiculous.

There are exceptions to rules. You shouldn't autopilot here and call. If you could logically narrow V's holding down to exactly the nuts then it's an easy fold.

(Sorry if you thought my comment was just trolling, but it's just to show you that generally there's no rule that always holds).

Alright, alright...an update from the op is overdue here.

This is a call.

I think above is one of the most important pieces of information in this hand.

The fact that he made the choice to rack up and leave then has staid for 15+ more hands is interesting. This is pretty close

If he has the scared money vibe like you seem to indicate, maybe ask him if you want to run it for just 500$ each and see what he says lol

+1 (nitty, passive, shoves without a lot of hesitation)

Results?

For those of you saying that V can have a set of 6's here, I disagree 100%. If V limps AJs from LP, what makes you think he opens with 6's pre?

Another question to ask, if you're in this spot with Aces or Kings, do you call?

Someone who was playing the way he was I think is smart enough to realize Aces or Kings are no good there.

Seeing that he limped with AJs, from LP, it gives me more reason to believe he would've limped with AQs from EP. Also, I don't think V ever goes this crazy with AKs. Maybe once he hits his flush, but I'm almost 100% certain he takes a passive line, until he hits.

Bottom line we have an extremy small sample size vs a relative unknown. I'm not a huge math guy but we have the second nuts and we are getting 2/1. We have the best hand in this spot at least 1 out of 3 times( IMO it's more). We should be calling this off more often than not. We need more concrete reads than what we have.

I definitely don't call with KK because we still don't beat him spazzing with AA and we block all but one combo of his spazzing with KK. And I probably don't call with AA but then I don't flat in the small blind with AA or KK pre flop and I almost certainly don't raise to 310 with AA on the flop

we feel happy calling it off with 88 here because we are calling $770 to win an additional $1495 vs a likely range against which we have

90% equity vs 6 combos of AA,
90% equity vs however many combos of KK we can give him and have
5% equity against only 3 possible combos of QQ

and if you want to include his mega draws, however unlikely you think,

we also have 70% vs AQss and 75% vs AKss


this sir, is a call

i would call unenthusiastically. with the table talk making me like the calling a lot less. but only needing 1.5 total combos of non-QQ hands is hard to overcome.

basically what doomed said.

and to the people that were like obviously why would you 3b/fold middle set if you don't think he can have AA... i'm fairly sure op thought the most likely thing for villain to do with AA vs 3b was flat. i would agree.

No, OP says he thinks villain would fold AA to the 3bet, not call.

Meanwhile, after his last post I'm really starting to think hero folded.

The way you are describing V, he's not opening QQ 100% of the time. So you now have to discount his QQ combos.

V has all AA combos.

Looks like H folded.

Bottom line, I would need a lot more time than 1.5 hrs to formulate a read strong enough for me to fold middle set otf in a spazzy 2/5 game.

I have played with guys where I snap fold here but it's after having many sessions with them where this is 99% the nuts.

I have had many many more sessions where unknown players did things uncharacteristic from their previous couple hours w me at the table.

This is a shrug call pretty quick for me.

Amateur players randomly make huge, almost shocking mistakes out of nowhere.

You have a 15 hand sample of his opening tendencies with a rack on the table. That range might include 66 in LP, probably not, but it might.

The main reason we call is sufficient likelihood of Villain holding AA. I sure hope we don't play this way with AA,KK, but we can fold KK for sure AP, probably AA as well.

If you're gonna fold the 2nd nuts in this spot against this V, fold pre, as 88 doesn't make the absolute nuts often enough to continue.

theres only 1 or 2 villians at my casino that id even think about folding this hand to and even then im still prob giving it a **** it call. lol at thinking about folding this vs anyone but a supernit. pay the man his money if he has it.

Lol @ anyone who thinks this V (who we saw x/c three streets with AJ on A high board) is going to spaz out here with AA, at the END of a huge session for 1.1k

Lol x 2 if after the table talk it isn't obvious he has exactly {QQ}.

V: "Do you have a set?"
H: "No I have Kings"
V: "Oh wow" aka "Oh wow I sucked out bad, hope you call"
...
V: "Do you have a set of queens?" aka "Better try to pretend like I don't have QQ"

Why does everyone think V would say "oh wow" if he had QQ because he sucked out on KK?

There is a far more likely hand he would have and be surprised we had KK...

V has KK.

So call and hope for low red cards

Right and then asking "Do you have a set of Queens?" because he's afraid of a set of Queens (which hasn't called by yet since H is pulling off an epic slowroll)..

I'll give in a bit I guess, it's close, probably can call if the reads aren't super strong (expecting a ton of QQ still), but IMO with the table talk this is a pretty simple puke fold..

Calling here all day with the descriptions you gave of V and action. You are going to see AA fairly often.

I'm guessing by no results that hero folded?

From the fact thread exists and the title, i'm guessing the opposite.