Hero ($500): Late 20s, glasses, playing TAG showing winners.

V (~$200): 20s, fishy I think, only thing I've seen him do so far (new to the table) is 3bet my UTG open from $13 to $45 and showed me TT.

Hand: I open with AQ to $13. Guy calls in the CO and V calls on the BTN.

Flop ($41): Q82

I bet $22. Guy in the middle folds, V rather quickly goes all in for $187.

Hero?

Snap?

I mean he has no concept of position and relative hand value(since he 3bet an UTG open with TT lol wtf, what a waste of a good hand), he sees a hand he likes and pushes his chips in the middle.

Gambooolll, if he has you crushed just hit runner runner flush.

Edit: Actuallly wouldn't hate folding either but myself am not folding.

It seems like this guy has some aggro plays in his game (3 betting your UTG open with TT). I would prefer even more reads,especially regarding his flop aggression tendencies.

However,my first instinct is to call here. I believe we are facing a worse Q,flushdraw or other types of drawing hands enough of the times to make this a call.

The amounts of valuecombos he can have here on this board is pretty limited from my point of view.

Sent from my LG-D855 using 2+2 Forums

Fold. The reason he showed you that he 3-bet TT is so that you'd think he was loose and crazy. Maybe he is. Maybe he's not. I'd give it a few more orbits to find out for sure before sticking $187 into a $63 pot.

I've done that before. When I first sat down at a table I've done something intentionally ******ed, showed the hand, and then got lots of extra action. 3-betting tens pre isn't even all that crazy. It's kind of unusual for most 1/2 players. I 3-bet tens pre all the time, but I'd never go all-in for a 3x pot bet without the current near nuts.

Hmm 88, 22, QsXs, other FD, and Qx hands. Call. We beat more combos than are losing to.

^ There's more to the question than whether we beat over half of the possible combos of villain's range. We need to consider our equity against his range and compare that to the price we're getting on a call.

Hard to draw much of a conclusion from the TT hand; he might think it's a bad play and be showing for meta, he might think it's a good play and be showing bc that's what he thinks you should do.

The flop decision seems close; having the A means there are fewer FDs he can have, but also gives us a slight bump in equity against FDs. He can still have pair + FD and FD + gutter hands.

We're calling 165 to win 250, so we need about 40% equity. Worst-case scenario, his range is sets + combo draws:

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

11,880 trials (Exhaustive)

board: Q 8 2

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
AsQc	32.02%	3,780	48
88,22,KsQs,QsJs,QsTs,Qs9s,JsTs,Ts9s	67.98%	8,052	48

More realistically I think we can expect sets to raise smaller often and add a few bare FDs to his range. If we give him 3 combos of sets instead of 6 and add in a few bare K high FDs:

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

11,880 trials (Exhaustive)

board: Q 8 2

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
AsQc	45.66%	5,400	48
8h8d,2c2h,2h2d,KsQs,QsJs,QsTs,Qs9s,JsTs,Ts9s,KsJs,KsTs,Ks9s	54.34%	6,432	48

Against that range it's a call.

^That is good to know, but I think we have to assign a relatively unknown Villain a much wider range, for better or worse. We have no reason to assume he can't have Q8s here, or spazz with Qx (because omg can't let another spade hit!).

Doing a little logic here, Villain must have been at the table for several hands if he's already 3b our UTG raise, and we're now in EP or MP. We should have at least some idea how likely he is to have, say, Q2.

It's better (try some equity calcs with those hands added in). Once we start adding Qx hands into villain's range our equity skyrockets and it's a super no-brainer call.

Ha, I meant "for better or worse" in terms of what having other hands in his range might suggest about his skill level (Probably worse, but I was trying not to judge.)

I agree w/ your conclusion, and I'd be calling here for exactly that reason.

I think we need to call but us having the As kinda makes me a bit weary here.

Wrong thread sorry

This is a fold.

Just run the math on how often he needs to be shipping naked FDs here to be profitable.

Maybe you should try running the math on that.

Do I even need to do math on 3x pot ship when vs range contains sets and possible Q8

Yes, seeing as how we just ranged it above and it came out a call.

The second set of trials looks like it excluded all sets.

Furthermore this assumed he's shipping practically all of his bare fds too.

Come on guys?

Grunch. My first instinct is to snap call because of the TT show but we are calling off a huge bet to win a small pot. Not sure if we have enough info to call off here getting such a bad price but it's sure tempting as hell

Results?

What? It has half the sets and only 3 bare fds. It doesn't even have J9s.

It looks like it only has 1 combo of 88 and 2 combos of 22.

As far as bare fds I stand corrected.

How many combos of 22 and 88 do you think are possible on Q82?

3 combos of each.

Grunch: From a 20s aggro, I expect this to be a FD almost always, with a tidge of TPGK, a couple of q8s combos and maybe half of the 88/22 combos. I call.

So 3 combos total would be half, no?

Yes, but I don't see why we think he's only shipping sets half the time and shipping all these combo/bare fds 100%

I mean, were suggesting that its okay to call of a 3x pot ship with TPTK versus a relative unknown and the only read we have is he 3b us with TT.

Because an overbet shove is more often a draw than a strong made hand from most players. Sets are still in his range, but they'll often raise a smaller amount.