Wow, there is a lot of serious thought going into this hand. I must be missing something, but I'm not sure what. The amount of chips should have little to do with the play? It seems to me, you are either bankrolled to play at this level or you are not? For this reason I discount the amount of the shove.

Nothing says Villain is an elite player. What we know is Villain appears to be competent. Maybe Villain is out for a cheap night on the town, is leaving soon, and wants to bully or spew off his chips before he leaves. There is no real information on Villain other than what we were told.

Unless Villain has some magic power, I see him only raising pre with AK, AA and he fell into the nut or second nut flush. I do not know many players who are coming over the top pre with anything less than these holdings. Maybe Villain is an exception here, we have so little direct info on him.

As for Hero, his play is quite passive, and gives Villain no reason to think Hero has anything that can beat a flush, or maybe even top two pair.

Aren't we giving Villain too much credit or a crystal ball to look into the future and know if he plays these exact two cards he scoops the hand?

Exactly.

Look on the flip side of things.

Do you think betting range of $100 is the same as $300? What about $500? What about $1860?

Can you recall the last time you made a bet over $1500 playing 2/5 or lower? Have you ever made a $1500 bet?

If you did, I am sure you didn't do it as a super merge to get somebody to fold winning hands and call with weaker.

Right, so hero is calling down with non-nutted flush and will now call a $1860 shove on a paired board.

Villain must have been thinking:

Flop: I have the nuts. I am going to bet for value.

Turn: I have the nuts. I am going to bet for value.

River: I no longer have the nuts, but I am going to shove because Hero can't possibly have FH in this spot.

When was this, 2006?

Questions are for both players, not just hero, because villain is also risking a large amount of money if he's somehow bluffing.

Is villain rolled to bluff $1860 on river? How many people are actually rolled in LLSNL to make $1860 bluff?

With all due respect, the majority of people advocating a call are 1/2 players that may not even have a bankroll the size of this river bet. As Sneaky is correctly alluding to, 2/5 is a significantly different game and when bets of this size go into the pot they are more often than not the nuts.

To posit that this V, who by our limited read appears competent, is some sicko willing to bluff off nearly 400 BB's on the river for absolutely no reason is asinine. River overbets are almost always for value and as the size of the bet increases, the likelihood of it being a bluff decreases significantly.

Thanks for this.

+1.

The overbet shove makes perfect sense for KK/99, but not for the nut flush or a bluff. With this simple logic I think we should be able to find a fold. Though honestly, in game I don´t know if I could do it. I guess that is why I am mostly stuck at $1/2.

Can we talk about the rest of the hand? I´m basically always donking this flop for value/to insure I can get money in on each street without scaring away one pair hands. Should I be checking here sometimes?

So that... anecdote... assumes villain flopped the nut flush. OK.

But I think it's possible villain has weaker/airier hands in his range.

What about a nut flush draw + pair, like the 3 combos of AsKx.

Or how about the 3 combos of AsAx?

I'm not going to assume V is a complete soul reading wizard. But this can be a dream spot for villain to outplay us deep... with AsKx, he blocks the nut flush as well as the top rivered boat, he gets to play in position (so he sees us act first), and the river is an amazing spot for him to turn weaker made hands that have major blockers into a bluff to get us to fold every time.

By the way, when you say "Right, so hero is calling down with non-nutted flush and will now call a $1860 shove on a paired board" I assume you'r being sarcastic, right? If so, you're making a good case to consider calling. Hero won't call the river with his baby flush. Baby flushes are a good % of hero's range. Hero won't even call the river overshove with 44. So yes, sometimes calling ranges are inelastic... but sometimes they aren't. Villain is losing a huge amount of value with KK and 99 by shoving river if we are never calling.

No reason?

Hero folding 100% of his range is actually the *best reason* to bluff.

Flop: alright, I have overpair (TPTK) with nut flush draw. Let me make a 1/2 PSB bet to semi-block bet and for value.

Turn: nothing changed, let me make the same 1/2 PSB bet.

River: I missed and my hand didn't improve, so now I will shove a ridiculous amount of money into the pot because...

In other words, you believe V thought that he was behind on flop and turn and bet 1/2 PSB bets to setup initiatives, so that he can make a huge overbet bluff in case he misses the one-card flush draw?

Doesn't it sound pretty ridiculous when I put it literally?

Of course I was being sarcastic...

Hero was behind bigger flush and now he is adding to that list 3 combos of 44, 1 combo of 99, and 3 combos of KK.

So your argument is turning into V won't shove $1860 because he's losing value?

lol. I was actually thinking about what an awesome bluff this would be if V had AsQx. Basically the only hands in our range we can consider calling with are 99,44.

Edit: Saw Willy beat me to it.
Edit2: I also realize the contradiction between my last two posts.

Regardless of what is actually happening in the exact hand ITT, the hand discussion should make everyone think about the possibility for extremely creative very +EV plays in position turning hands like AsKx in very deep spots on boards like this one into a bluff on the river with the right dynamic / villain. And FWIW, the "right villain" is probably ABC TAG.

You are totally missing the point.

*V holds KK and flops top set.

In his mind, what could be in hero's range after hero calls the flop bet?

Can you eliminate flush from hero's perceived range?

Villain's 1/2 PSB bet is very much consistent of someone flopping top set on a monotone board. Can you disagree?

Turn changes nothing. Villain follows up with another 1/2 PSB bet. Still consistent with someone holding top set. Can you disagree?

River pairs board and now villain holds top FH. Villain shoves everything. Consistent with someone holding top FH. Can you disagree?

This hand has really made me enjoy PLAYING SHORT!!!

Brutal decision on the river. I am calling it off.

You make a great post about all the reasons to call but then say we should fold...

I love this. I hope I can start doing it, because it obviously works. No way Hero has KK and very unlikely 99 or K9 -- and based on this thread, he's folding 44 and 22. (I'm probably folding them in game.)

Is that a possible thought process? Sure. But there are others.

If we want to play the game of standing in villain's shoes, how about this: Villain has AsXx... and he bets flop as a semi-bluff / to build a huge pot when he hits / for thin value from worse draws, etc. Only hero calls.

Villain blocks the nut flush - that's huge. Stacks are incredibly deep. Villain decides to take a line of betting all turns and jamming all rivers. Sometimes villain makes his hand and sometimes the river serves as a huge overshove bluff that makes 100% of hero's range, which can never include the nuts, into a bluff catcher in a 1000BB pot.

To be fair this hand is more a question of hearts then ranges.

I agree if we look at the math this is a call against V's range but very few Villains have enough heart to pull this off as a bluff, even less a tag (no offense to tags).

Very few Vs in my player pool are capable of shoving 400bbs as a stone cold bluff here. I would call against a few and they all share the attribute = they usually play higher then 2/5.
Your standard TAG at a 2/5 game is NEVER bluffing here and you're 100% bluffcatching here.

absolutely disagree.

if you are V and you have ranged hero to a flush, and now the board pairs on the river, why would you make a bet that hero is never going to pay you off on and give up all that money?

Hero stated no specific reads on villain. I assume this means villain doesn't know hero's play very well. This means it would be absolutely horrendous for villain to bluff shove here (considering hero has plenty of flushes and full houses here). When facing a big bet, given no other information we should start out with the assumption that our villain isn't suicidal.

So villain is a TAG, but we don't have any specific reads, how do we know he's tag. Also, him raising a decent amount seems to contradict him playing TAG but w/e.

How do you know this if you don't have any specific reads?

So villain has no reads on us at all?

Again, re-iterating that we don't have any reads.

OP contradicts himself a lot. You literally said in the OP that he's a TAG, now you're saying you didn't say that?

This seems like a call with a very under repped hand.

Are we discounting that he may have misread the board and is pushing the nut flush for value?

I've seen it before
It happens all the time
Closing the door
You leave the world behind

You're digging for gold
Yet throwing away
A fortune in feelings
But someday you'll pay

I was just about to post this as well (minus the song quote ).

So you agreed with everything except river shove?

In other words, you disagree with the old saying "big hand = big pots."

Or that you're simply projecting 100bb mindset into a 450bb scenario?

I think it's a really good question and close, but I probably don't donk 500BB deep in a 10 SPR pot because oop we can't really control the size of the eventual pot. Said another way, I do not want to play against a raise oop. Facing a raise, we can't fold and definitely can't raise, so we call and commit to play a very large pot oop, and it's a bit of an equity nightmare. V can have a range including semi-bluffs and made flushes. His semi-bluffs have good equity, and while we have equity against his made flushes, we have to play the entire hand oop, which is a massive benefit for villain. For example, re: RIO, if the board pairs on the river and we make a 1 PSB shove, are we getting called? Probably not, and gives villain a strong post-flop advantage. And if we check a paired board, will villain bet with worse? Probably not, and likely not the sizing we'd like anyway. And when he does have a whiffed draw, to what extent is our bottom set equal to a one-pair hand anyway?

In a 100BB pot, I think betting the flop and never folding is much better.

Everybody's very far off about hero's range and him being underrepped. Hero limp-called $55 pre. If I'm villain, my general assumption here is that hero has any PP from 22-TT, SCs, Broadways, occasionally off suit connectors. Flop comes K94sss. Hero checks, villain bets $110 *in a 4way pot 2nd to act*. This could be a cbet with air, it could be AK, and it could be a big flush or set. If I'm villain, I think hero's calling range is KJ,KQ,AK (usually the queen or jack will be a spade), maybe KT. Small flushes, 99, and 44.... We are deep. If villain is good, he understands that hero isn't going to necessarily open up his stack with TJss or 78ss. Raises for value without at least second nuts just don't generally happen on monotone flops when players are deep, especially when flop was seen multiway. Occasionally there are bluffs and semibluffs though.... Now on the 2 turn card, hero check calls $275. The turn to flop bet ratio is fairly big. Hero's going to be folding his KQ and KJ hands a lot knowing that it's likely to be $500-700 on the river.... Again, hero doesn't want to open his stack up with 44,99 and small flushes. We understand this as villain... When hero makes that turn call, his range *is* going to be perceived as having lots of flushes and sets.

It never appears weak to check call twice on a monotone flop that went 4ways to the flop, especially at this sizing.