Hero winning TAG image, 2,1k. I think villain respects heros game and doesnt want to play too many hands against hero.
Villain young LAG and covers. Definitely winning player but not a crusher. Have played with him a few times and has sizing leaks and cbets too much. Capable of big bluffs, but never saw him overbet bluff.
He has been running pretty hot in the 2 hours sitting at the table. Was already up like 2k, but lost like 600-700 bluffing. The bluff happened a few minutes before hero played the hand against him.
He called an utg raise otb and tripple barreled on AAT86r after utg checked. He bet pot otr, got called by JJ and announced Q high.

OTTH:

2,1k eff.
7 handed, 2 limpers, hero raises otb 30 with KJ, sb folds, villain in bb 3b to 105, only hero calls.
Flop (225) KK7
cbet 110, hero calls
Turn (445) KK74
villain checks, hero checks back
River (445) KK74A
villain quickly slams 600 on the table, hero?

Prbably a pretty standard sigh call.
Unlike he checks AK ott, so we're only worried about AA and theres only 3 combos of that. We only need him to be betting anything else 2 combos to make it a profitable call.

And when we check the turn it takes a bunch of Kx from our range, so he might bet Ax here for value.

Snap call vs this player type and probably sigh calling vs some tighter players. Not much money to be made from hero folding the tip top of our range.

Call, if he has AA, bad luck. I'd bet turn at some frequency, small, 1/3 PSB.

I checked turn for deception and to get villain to valuebet worse or to induce a bluff. Or if villain checks to still get him to call a big bet otr. I think im never getting value on turn and river. If villain would have bet 300-400 otr i wouldnt have made this post.

The point of my post is the overbet. Where i play i never see people overbetting as a bluff. And when people overbet its always the nuts.

So my question is if we can make exploitative folds against overbets because of player tendencies with the top of our range in a spot like this?

If the bolded were true, you've answered your own question and there's no reason to post the hand. So presumably it's not literally true. And so it comes down to an assessment of combos and live read. Can V have anything but AA and AK? In my experience, overbets are often either bluffs or designed to take the pot down on a draw-heavy flop, e.g., when someone has overpair or TPTK type of hands. If V had AA (which was my initial hunch), why not bet 300-400 for value targeting a K or weaker A? I'm just not convinced an overbet here = nuts or near nuts.

I agree overbets are relatively nutted (of course they are), but they're not *only* the nuts. Given V description, seems like he's capable of putting in some bluffs here.

For value, I think AA makes a lot more sense than AK. When overbetting, he wants to unblock calling hands and AA is perfect because you're left with all the Kx. AK also seems likely to have bet turn at some frequency.

What bluffs really make sense though? His 3-bet range doesn't flop many/any draws and running a bluff with air seems ambitious.

Maybe overplayed AQ or KT? Seems unlikely.

Overall I'd lean towards folding but looking for reads to call. I will say the snap overbet OTR feels more likely to be a bluff than value.

I'm calling and it isn't close. Trips, 3bet pot, villain just got caught bluffing, quick river action, he checked the turn... if he put together a value hand better than what we have with this line, gahbless him he gets my $600

I don’t love it but probably have to call. KQs, AQ, QQ.... not a lot of hands for V to have here. Of course AA & AK but I’m putting V squarely on AQ.

One of the most reliable betting tells I've seen is the quick river bet on a bluff. I'm pretty sure I've seen a CLP video discussing the same thing. The way you describe the immediate bet means to me that it's either exactly AK or a marginal hand at best. If it were AA, he'd have to think for a second about sizing any value bet unless he's certain you've got trips (very hard to deduce given your line in this hand).

I'm calling as I think you're at least 75% good here.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

First thought was snap call, second thought was to make a nitty fold because of the overbet. Then i thought i cant fold a king here and called. Villain had AA

Not sure but maybe my question about making exploitative folds in such a spot is results oriented

This is actually an overbet spot although Villain probably doesn't know that. He has more AK than you and always has more AA than you. So betting huge makes sense for Villain.

Population hasn't studied overbet spots enough so they usually only overbet when they have it. Against an unknown you can fold and exploit them very hard here. So you know the answer better than us.

Theory = call
Exploit = fold

If he actually is bluffing here (very unlikely he is that good) than I'd consider him to be pretty knowledgeable.

Just saw this - yeah AA makes the most sense. Can't fault a call but people aren't good enough to bluff here.

The 600 slam is a pretty big tell imo. But we checked turn to induce and obliged so I guess call since we are so high in range.

I like turn bet better than x. After he got caught bluffing a moment ago he's not likely to put us in a tough spot 400bb deep. He prob thinks his image is trash after losing 600 on a bluff not long ago. We've established he can run big bluffs by barreling but it's another animal to xr turn and fire river as a bluff deep.

Lol really? You think he fires an overbet for more than 100 blinds effective bet for value with Ax on this board in a 3 bet pot? Like, thin value here with a 600 bet into a pot of 445? I mean, come on.

I mean if you put up wishful thinking in the dictionary, there you have it.

Sometimes you mods seem so out of tune with todays games its just mindblowing to me. Thats why i often ask myself how many of you actually log significant volume at all these days, and if you are beating the games for a significant winrate longterm.

I am calling the river, but i actually think its pretty close even against a lag because of population tendencies of vastly underbluffing the river. And especially overbet bluffing the river.

If we have a good enough profile and extended accurate reads, i am making a big exploitative fold here.

But if we dont have that though, and we checked back the turn we probably have to sigh call against a player capable of doing crazy things.

If there's any chance he's spazzing with JTs, QJs, 89s, whatever then folding is obv very bad. As played he has all this crap in his range OTR.

Sure. How often is a random 2/5 villain overbet bluffing the river though, even if he arrives at the river with some of those hands?

95 percent of the playerpool just have us beat here every single time. Its up to OP to figure out if this villain realistically have overbet bluffs in his range here in a 3 bet pot.

In the OP he potted river on AAT86 so he isn't scared of blasting off these double paired boards into weakness. An overbet works on this runout and action since it's unlikely we slowplay Kx on the turn and I don't mind an overbet from him OTR with air.

Your fallback is 95% of the player pool doesn't overbet bluff, how often does some random villain overbet bluff, etc. Exploiting the population as a default is kind of lazy when you have such a revealing hand history in the OP. You're making strong arguments in favor of overbet bluffing regs if they fold everything but a full house.

These lags end up eating regs for breakfast since a reg or anyone almost never has a full house here. We should never have AK, K7, K4 so our only call here is 77?

Yes, because it is simply true. Rivers is always being underbluffed in LLSNL and especially overbet bluffs.

If a fold here is exploitable is twisting the whole point. It doesent change the fact that very few villains ever bluff here with 600 into a 445 pot. If we make an exploitative (correct) fold here, it is we exploiting them- not the other way around.

I don't know how else to word the fact that V potted OTR a double paired AA board into the UTG pfr only a few minutes ago. What the rest of the room does in that spot is irrelevant.

If you make the exploitative fold here, he's exploiting you when he bombs you off any non-fh. You should never have a fh here and any thinking player would see that.

I said in an earlier post that i would indeed sigh call against described villain. I am just trying to explain why i think its alot closer than most people think, and against many villains this is a fold to the riverbet.

Like, in my regular playerpool of like 35-40 players- its 1 maybe 2 players who will overbet bluff the river at any meaningful frequenzy.