Visiting Hard Rock Hollywood for WPT series specifically to play cash this past weekend. Hand takes place Saturday during the day.

Villain is mid 20s, has been at the table for about 1-2 orbits. Very first hand he sits down I open UTG +1 to $15, 1 caller and he 3 bets from BB to $85. I folded. A few hands later another player opened to $20 and he 3 bet that person to $75 who then folded.

For this hand we are roughly $800 effective and I cover villain.

Hero AJo (with As) UTG: Raise to $15
Folds to CO who calls
Folds to Villain in SB: 3 bet to $65
Folds to Hero: 4-bet to $165. My thinking here is that villain most likely has been 3 betting very light and 2 of his 3 bets already got folds from the PFR. Theoretically, AJo is very marginal, if not wrong, to 4-bet but I almost fully expected a fold. Plan was to fold to 5 bet shove, but reevaluate flop in position if called. Thoughts??
Villain: Tanks for 20-30 seconds and calls.

Flop is KsJs7d

Villain: checks
Hero: checks
At this point I'm thinking about villain's range and I'm guessing, based on his aggressiveness, he would 5-bet AA or KK and likely AK as well so mentally I am figuring he has very few combos of those hands at this point. I would also expect villain to lead TPTK on the flop. JJ is possible but only one combo of that. 77 would be a very bad 4-bet flatting hand so I eliminate that entirely since I don't have any history with villain to indicate he is fishy.

Turn is 8d

Villain: checks
Hero: Bets $100
Villain: Tanks for 20-30 seconds and calls $100

River 7s (pairs board and brings in front door flush draw)

Villain: open shoves for about $550
Hero: ???

Ez fold pre, as played it kinda matters what suit your ace is if considering calling

Good point, I thought I added it to the original post. I hold the Ace of spades.

Ouch. I like the thought pre, but I don't like this particular hand. Now that you've checked the flop (I would have bet it because I'm betting most of my 4-bet hands here), I like checking turn and evaluating river.

River absolutely sucks. We beat little and have very little info on Villain, but V has 3-bet three times in one or two orbits and didn't 5-bet. Also, we checked flop and bet small on turn (I hate turn bet sizing)? Soul-read is all you can do. He could be bluffing a scare card or he could have you crushed. From here, just fold, but from table, I might choose something different.

In future, please put pot size on all streets. Thanks.

There is a natural tendency to want to punish an overly aggressive player (bully), however in this case, I see two problems:
1. a sample size of seeing him 3B 2x is not worth a lot if you haven't played with him quite a bit before.
2. You have AJo as well as position. If you are not going to fold, I would just call.
It's the old story of playing a maniac; the tendency is to want to play a lot of hands against them, however, waiting for a premium hand is usually preferred. In this case he called a 4B in position and you have only AJo.

Could you elaborate on the turn bet sizing? Pot at the time was 350 and I was hoping that the ~1/3 sizing would look like a delayed c-bet with a really strong hand (KK, JJ, AK) that wasn't afraid of the flop and just letting opponent catch up. I started this hand as a 4-bet bluff and intended on following through with a river bet if he checked to me.

I think the biggest error in the hand was not betting flop, I understand theory says to c-bet almost 100% of flops when you're the 4-bettor. There is not much in the theory regarding turn bet sizing when checking back the flop in a 4 bet pot with middle pair LOL.

1/3 sizing (less than) looks weak and it enables him to float w/anything, including with the intention of betting you off a scary river. Are you really betting that small on a delayed c-bet (which I don't really like) on a two-toned incredibly draw-heavy board? Heck, T9, although unlikely, already got there.

This obsession w/ 1/3 sizing is just so odd to me. I guess it's a "thing," but I don't like it at all usually. It just seems to make decisions so much more difficult.

I'd be uber cautious of calling someone a mainiac on the basis of 2 orbits (and 3 3-bets). We've all had heaters over short periods. There's a fantastic piece by Ed Miller on Baysian Inference in one of his books. Essentially the pool of mainiacs is much smaller than the pool of regs, and therefore immediately categorizing into the mainiac on a small sample is not a good thing to do.

Back to the play. I fold Pre the first time (AJo UTG is marginal at best). I think if I 4-bet I go bigger here $200 plus. Now it's a sould read. I'm itching to call, but I think it's a fold.

I think that everybody has posted valuable input. Specifically, the idea of labeling someone a maniac within 2 orbits. I definitely felt he was 3-betting light, but did not categorize him as a maniac and the river shove definitely took some thought - I did not snap call as I would with a true maniac.

I think the biggest mistake was checking the flop since villain, correctly, read this as weakness. Knowing his hand, betting ~$125 on the flop would've gotten a fold and no tough river decision.

As played, my thought process on the river went as such: (thoughts?)

Preflop villain flatted my 4-bet so I discounted the possibility of AA or KK. I think that he would 5-bet those hands. I have zero history with the villain, but his typical archetype would probably 50% flat AKs, 50% 5-bet AKs, and 100% flat AKo. Of course, I hold an ace so all those combos are reduced. Specifically 9 combos of AKo and 3 combos of AKs, of which I think 50% 5-bet.

I also do not believe that villain is flatting 4-bet with 77 preflop and the 7 pairing significantly reduces the probability of him holding 77 as well.

With the K and J being a spade and me holding the As, it was very difficult to find any flush draws that he flats preflop. Possibly QTs that flopped open ended straight flush draw? That's also a very loose 4-bet calling hand OOP. I can apply that same logic to T9s. They're both possible 3-bet light candidates, but tough to flat a 4-bet with OOP.

JJ is also possible but only one combo left with J in my hand.

The most probable hand to me seemed to be 88. He could have possibly flatted my small 4-bet (another mistake) to set mine. Gave up the flop, then I checked it (mistake) and spiked his 8 on the turn. Just calls my $100 then jams river. No history with villain, so not sure if he'd go more value sizing on river with the full house or jam to make it look bluffy.

With all this in mind, it seemed like he only has 4 possible value combos (JJ (1) and 88 (3)) that for sure play this way. I think AK bets the flop for protection against the draws, so by time we reach the river I don't believe he has AK.

Bluff combos that we beat that I can reasonably see: TT, AQs (diamonds) that floated turn with gutter and FD, ATs (diamonds) as well, QJs (diamonds), JTs (diamonds).

With this all in mind (finding way more bluffs than value) I called.

Villain turned over 22 and we take down the pot (LOL) so maybe he was a maniac after all.

fold pre

Yeah, it’s hard to believe that he plays a flush draw this way, actually, so I’m not sure how relevant it is that we hold the A of spades (though it is certainly nice). Wouldn’t he lead turn with a flush draw? Also relevant is that we hold the J, blocking JJ. Again, though, is middle set playing it this passively on the turn when the board is so wet?
His line is not remotely credible.
Crazy that he turned over 22. Goes to show that AJ is a pretty good 4bet if he’s playing this wild.

Fold river or get shown KK or AQss. Poor hand selection. Suited A,wheel cards are much better 4b bluff candidates. I like the thinking and 4b sizing pre but AJo is a much better call. Agreed that just bc you see this villain's action in a few orbits doesn't mean he's a wildman.

I think V played it pretty well. He know you couldn't/shouldn't be too strong. Tough to call w/ AJ there. As I stated, he's either bluffing or has you crushed. Glad it was the first.

(BTW, the only reason I would have bet small on the turn was to induce a bluff, but I don't think you know V well enough to use that here, although I think that's what happened.)

Yes, my intention at the time certainly was not to induce a river bluff, but that thought process did come to mind when I was thinking whether to call or fold. I thought that if he's as aggressive as I assume he is, my turn bet would look weak and he may be attacking that.

I think the turn call with intention of bluff shoving the river was decent by him but disastrous to 3 bet with 22 and especially terrible to flat a 4 bet with it.

As he sat at the table longer it became clear that he was a maniac and his two buy ins only lasted him about 45min-1hr before he left empty handed.

I would argue that his river play, turning a small pair into a bluff, is absurd and very bad on the merits.
Your range (if Villain is even thinking about it, and it’s quite clear now in the aftermath of this hand that he’s likely just pushing buttons with his decision making process) after you bet the turn consists of QQ and Jx for value, TT for value/protection, and delayed cbets with flush draws and air.
If you’re following some balanced MDF approach to decide what hands to call down with, you have to call with all QQ/Jx on the river. Maybe TT is indifferent to call/fold.
By shoving river he’s folding out all air that he beats and is getting called down by worse.
He clearly had better hands to use as bluffs in this spot, like baby suited connectors in diamond or spades (hands with no showdown value).
Bluffing with a small pair here is quite bad and a sign that he’s definitely overbluffing.

Sorry, his better bluff candidates are baby suited connectors in diamonds (not spades).
Should also mention that we obviously don’t have a lot of flushes here, after we elect to not c-bet the flop. Which is why we get out into a tough spot with a weak range. This is exactly when MDF thinking actually works (against an opponent who is capable of bluffing). We just have to shut our eyes and call down with our 50% best hands. Clearly AsJx is in that top part of the range.

Agree his pre play was pretty bad. Still think his river shove was a fine bluff with how you played your hand. A lot of people fold AJ there. Then again, I never get to the river like that w/ AJ, so who knows?

The problem is, we have zero idea if this player is capable of bluffing. We know very little. Yes, 3-betting that much is rare, but people do go on heaters. He could be aggressive pre and passive / fit or fold post. Heck, I don't think we've seen the guy get past pre-flop.

This is a good point and I think where live stereotyping came into the process for me. I don't remember if he had been in any post-flop spots prior to this hand with me. If he was, it was nothing noteworthy.

What I mean by stereotyping is that he was mid 20s European looking guy who obviously has experience in that exact room since he was wearing a leather jacket and pants when it was 90 degrees outside while I was almost shivering cold inside. So I figure that young euro regs are often aggressive and capable of moves. Figure that in plus his multiple 3 bets within 1-2 orbits and that's how I categorized him.

Fold pre. As played bet/fold the flop and check back the turn. Call river small sizes 1/4-1/2 pot on this runout and villain read

This is why we give descriptions. I'm sure I'd stereotype him the same way However, I usually wait a little while before calling a big portion of my stack, but it worked out great!

Yes, you’re right, we can’t know anything for sure. But we can piece together our prior information with specific analysis in this hand, and try to reach a conclusion.

My first question is what is he actually representing in this hand? Would we expect a player of his general category (young kid, aggro preflop) to lead turn with a flush draw? I would say, yes, except for one specific hand type that may want to check/call: 8sXs. We may ask, why about sets and two pair hands that river a boat? Will such hands ever just check/call our tiny blocking-size bet on the turn? I would argue rarely if ever.

I think we can make such logical deductions with good precision and narrow him to an incredibly thin value range on the river: 8s9s, 8sTs, 8sQs, 8sAs (which we block). Some of these hands are questionable calls preflop, but for the sake of argument let’s give them all to him.

Now we ask, can Villain have 2 combos of bluffs to back up that value? If so, we’re getting pot odds to call with AJ, else we aren’t. He needs to bluff once in a rare moon to justify the call. I would assume by default a young kid who’s shown aggro preflop tendencies will bluff at least one in a while.

Looking at it another way, you’d need to be very certain that Villain never bluffs to justify a fold. Where are we getting that information from? Is this just an arbitrary assumption?