You have an aggro opponent and that means you ain't folding pairs in 3b pots, period. As far as sizing goes post, you can bet up to half pot as an adjustment but there is really nothing wrong with keeping things wide and thinking about your own range in spots (i.e. you might not have much Jx here). I don't know what 1/3 pot sizing was wrong in another thread, just milk the guy, but also realize that it's not like anything but Qx or JJ really wants to get ckr on this flop by any player, even a nutjob.

With all this being said, I prefer a passive check-back the flop, call turn, call river line. That way we take a stand and also pot control simultaneously. Of course the outcome may still be a shove on the river, but we're really calling down any turn and any river. By doing that you're forcing him to pull two triggers on the turn and the river as opposed to one x/r trigger on the flop (which has the maximum fold equity). Not many LAGs have the stones to pull two triggers with lower fold equity on each trigger.

This, as played it's a sigh call.

Isn't it a good idea to induce and have villain bet or raise lighter, at least in this situation where you actually have a hand?

What would be the purpose of betting large and folding out all of his complete air and keeping in only his strong hands?

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk

I am with Amana and Ava in this spot (similar to the other spot from last week where they advocated betting less to keep V's range wide). When we are never folding, betting less may induce V to spazz wider too which we want. And even if he doesn't spazz, he may call a smaller sizing with some hands that he would fold to $225.

AP, I don't think you can fold given the price the pot is laying you. V shoves for $800 into $525, so you need to call $575 to win a pot of $1900 (~3.3 to 1, or 23% equity). Combinatorically since two Jacks and two Queens are gone, a slag V is ~ 50/50 to have either, so this is probably a quick call for me given we hold the best Qx. Not saying you don't get shown Jx a good amount of time, but never 77% given how you described V.

Edit: And BTW, you aren't scared $$ at all. You just sized yourself into a spot that was uncomfortable, something that I do plenty but am working on (among MANY other things).

All of these have good points. Thanks. I have a better feel for what's driving the sizing errors now.

Thanks, yea I keep trying to press the easy button in big pots instead of the +EV button. I also keep thinking players are adjusting when most times they are not. At any rate, I did make the call for the record.

Ooh? Well, since this is posted here, I bet you got shown Jx. Tough luck.

Sure did. I guess there was no way around getting the money in given the feedback though.

You probably have to pay off given V description, but the fact that he still check raised you after you've shown so much strength does significantly increase his likelihood of having Jx.

To be honest, I think I like the line of check back flop and call down or bet turn then river if checked to. Playing like this helps balance the times when you have a weaker holding and want to see a free card plus you've got his range crushed pretty badly with your actual hand so you don't mind giving a free card either.

This line also allows him to get to the river with the most amount of air which will be easier to call

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk

Well it sucks, but that's how poker goes. Described villains usually are gamblers who love the rush of scooping huge pots as opposed to "getting the best of it". They love to ride the variance train and these are the kind of villains who run it up big if they hit. When such players sit at the table, typically you either get smashed or you win big. The variance is higher than ever, so buckle up your seatbelts and go along for the ride.

Was it a nice Jack at least though, like AJ or KJ, or was it a tilt-inducing J3?

Heh, I'd argue the dominated AJ should be more tilt inducing than two live cards against my AQ... But yea it was AJo.

Final thoughts:

He clearly jammed for value in this instance. He was able to do so confidently because he was able to successfully narrow your range down to a big hand that is difficult to fold such as AQ, KK, or AA. He was able to successfully narrow your range down because you 3-bet pre, and then bet the flop when checked to, indicating strength. Had you left your range wider, it's possible he may not have gotten the maximum. It's still LAG dependent. Some just blast away.