H is playing tight pre, and betting aggressive post flop. V hasn't gotten out of line during the 1h we have sat in the same table. I have no recollection of playing with him before. V seems to be looking his phone a lot + headphones on. Table is loose passive in general. OTTH:

Hand: Aa (no clubs)
Position: Utg+1
Stack: 390
Blinds: 2.5/2.5

Pre: h 7.5. 2 calls IP, V calls from sb or bb.
flop (32.5): K52cc: V check. H 30. two callers, incl. V.
Turn (122.5): 6x: V check. H 80. only V calls.
River (282.5): Tx: V shoves rest of his stack, around 250. H????

Pot odds are 2.1 to 1 so you need to win a little under 1/3rd the time you call to break even. AA wins over a third of the time (36%) against a range of 43s KT 22 AXcc. I discounted sets because KK re-raises preflop, TT doesn't get to river all the time and 66, 55, 22 X/raise before river some of the time.

So it's a close decision.

The question is what kind of strategy is V using?

1) too much bluffing = you call whatever beats his bluffs (any pair beats busted FD)

2) not bluffing enough = you only call if you beat his value range (KT+)

3) adaptively exploitative or balanced = you call enough of your range to remain unexploitable (use Must Defend Frequency)

I guess that a young player with headphones in is more likely than usual to be playing a balanced strategy (or attempting to). So if he's good then this river shove is balanced and you're going to have to defend with AA because if you don't you'll be folding too much to his river leads and he'll autoprofit.

If he's bad how's he most likely to be bad here? It's only a guess but I think this type of guy at low stakes is too loose so he's going to overcall too often in the blinds and draw too often postflop. This'll tend to leave V with a lot of busted flush draws on this river. So if he's not careful about choosing his bluff hands he can easily bluff too often. Therefore we should call.

The scenario we don't want to call is when villain is a nit and doesn't bluff enough. If he were an old guy I'd assume he's running a more old-school strategy and I'd fold until I saw evidence he wasn't a nit. Against a young guy with headphones in I'd call until I see evidence he is a nit. For me "not seeing him get out of line in one hour" isn't sufficient evidence to decide he is a nit.

It seems really bluffy. I can see him having KT, TT, T6cc, I don't see the hands that beat you just calling to the river. Really he doesn't check raise your turn bet with a set or straight when there is a flush draw on the board? I get that he might flat the flop, hoping for a blank and another bet from you. Well here it is and he just called again.

I call and this is not the worst hand I call. Curious about results. Also for the love of god raise more preflop. Check this out:

You raise to $12 instead. 2 guys call, villain calls. Pot is now. $48. You bet almost pot again, say $45. V Calls, Pot is almost $140 before they take the rake. Now on the turn you have his range smashed and you can force him to basically play for his stack. Bet $120. Doubt he flats - call his shove. Also, this strategy will net less callers preflop. You do not want 3 callers with AA. Really you don't want 3 callers with ANY hand out of position. So making it 4-5x preflop makes the hand easier to play from a stack to pot ratio as well as defending from getting several callers.

Ez fold. Guy looking in phone not getting out of hand decides to call 2 big bets with 3 people then thinks it’s a good idea to jam bluff river? What’s his line of thinking? Would you expect someone who you never played before to fold to you if you were villain?

If he is on the phone playing tight do you think he has a read on you? Have you shown monster folds? Have you bet flop and turn and folded river? Let’s do the “balancing” vs people we actually have to balance for. That or put it in the tally of percent you fold “top of folding range.”

I folded because of this exact thinking. The player, who folded OTT said he had KJ after the hand.

Beware of assuming that low stakes villains won't bluff BECAUSE you wouldn't bluff in that spot Low stakes players like action and so some of them (quite a lot of them in my experience) will be both sticky and bluffy at the same time.

Also in my experience a lot of young guys with headphones in looking at their phones a lot have experience playing online. They don't understand the value of live reads or they're too used to the high pace of online play so they get very bored very quickly when they play live. For those reasons I see a lot of online kids taking balanced lines against players I wouldn't bother with balance. They're on autopilot.

Obviously I don't know if this villain is one of those guys - I'm guessing based on appearance because it's a close decision given analysis of his likely range.

I think a fold is good. If there weren't a K on the flop, it'd be closer, but you could so easily have AK (let alone AA) and he's still taking this line -- I just don't think it's worth finding out. I'd wait for a better spot.

Have you been caught bluffing? How aggressive are you? I guess that matters a little. However, you are considered tight, so I still probably fold.

Really interesting hand. I sat here last night thinking about the hand for a good 20 mins trying to decide on appropriate line. I think you made the right decision though based on your description of villain. Good fold.

I think if the K on the flop is a , then it is closer to a call here. If not, then it is likely a fold as it is much more likely V ran into two pair with a Kx type hand.