We're not expecting FE. The play is 475 to win 600 against a range where we expect to be near 50%.

Villain folding is pretty massively +EV too. It's only slightly lower EV than him calling with 84o. (fold: +$225, call: +$241)

I struggle with this kind of thinking because at the time shoving didn't even occur to me. It was like ah I can't bluff this guy and a shove won't get called by worse, I don't think I should fold because I'm probably ahead, so I should call? Then I realized calling probably sucked and I lucked into the best case scenario. But shoving wider preflop over a very weak range doesn't really fit neatly into the categories of bluff, semibluff or value. It's kind of its own thing.

Looking at the numbers, it seems V is handing me money here Like it's not going to get much better than 40 bigs of EV in one hand. Also chances are very high he would have been gone before I picked up another hand (he didn't rebuy after this)

I think KQo should be a UTG open in any decent game. It's probably bad if there are good aggressive players behind you who will abuse you in position. I try to pick the table with the people that flat with Q9 and don't bluff-raise.

I hadn't been paying too close attention to V, it didn't really click that he was so lag until he left to get more chips and I was like hey he was in every hand.

Though I think even being aware of V being like that it's a raise? Why wouldn't it be?

You're not doing it right. You only added + behind 22.

Depends on your definition and perception of "LAG."

That's my definition of maniac/stupid, but what's really stupid is people calling with 42s to try to "catch him."

It's hard to outplay stupid, DUCY?

Stupid is unpredictable, because they could simply have ONE big fat range of everything.

And the best way to play against that range is...yep, you guessed it, find the cutoff line for which the hand is 50.1% against everything.

It does if you realize what your actual advantage is.

LOL...if I get a $1 every time I hear a bad player says "let's play poker"...

But hey, if you can reference a polarized example to validate your off-center logic, then your logic must be correct.

You are looking good vs the range they flat call your raise with. Worrying about a re-squeeze is crazy. That will just never happen.

Was assuming villain had a super wide range based on the original description. Also assumed he would pay us off if he hit anything on the flop.

Given how little info we have in reality, this is a pretty easy fold. A maniac post flop foes not equal 3 betting super wide pre.

Calling is horrible because of the fit or fold nature that it creates.

Fit or fold isn't always bad though. You are getting 2.25:1 immediately and if you hit your pair, you expect to get more value vs this villain than you have any right to. This seems better than shipping KQ.

It depends how wide we think the guy is. We can never really expect someone to show up 84o here unless we have seen it before.

Umm what? Calling a PF raise for 25% of effective stacks to play fit or fold is disastrous.

Playing fit-or-fold against fuzzy range...

Our hand doesn't have a high enough R to be calling in this spot unless you're willing to call off 100% of flops (calling off 100% IMO is fine because we're letting the maniac bluff 100% of his range which is ******edly wide, we're beating him at his own game). However flatting lets some players behind us in or lets them squeeze which is very bad for the (R)ealizable equity of our hand.

You should consider whether a raise is for value or a bluff based on the fundamental theorem of poker. Which pretty much states that ideally you would always play hands based on their equities if you had perfect information. (Full text in spoiler)
Due to the fact that preflop hands have a lot of equity, many raises are actually (semi)bluffs even if you currently have the best hand. A good example of this from Easy Game is if the BB raised to 125 with 88 and then you shoved for 500 with AQo. If you knew his hand, you would want him to fold making it a bluff. However, if you reversed the situation and the BB raised to 125 with AQo and you shoved with 88 you would still want a fold even if you are currently ahead. It is still a bluff because the highest EV outcome is if the opponent incorrectly folds his equity from you representing QQ+ or whatever.

This method of viewing a bluff and a raise is more complete so that all hands can be classified. As for this hand, I think a call is out of the question with these stack sizes. The most important factor to the EV of this hand is how often he 3b/f to 125. If he 3bets a depolarized range with lots of Ax and never folds them then the spot is much more thin. If he is really on tilt though, you probably just have to close your eyes and get the money in with him when you have a decent hand.

I can get on board with shipping being the play if we don't have any clue how this guy is going to act. However, calling isn't as insane as you all are making it sound. There are certain assumptions that can make calling better. Just depends on what you are assuming.

Example (leaving sb and rake out of calcs for ease): Let's assume that villain is never folding pre and shipping every flop.

Against a range of 24.5% (inc. all PPs) we are 50% pre so we make +$37.5 from the dead money. If we call and only call the flop ship if we hit a K or Q then roughly 33% of the time, we will call and be about 75% vs his range. This will give you +$42.31. This doesn't even include the times, you flop an open ender or a gutter with two overs or just K high on a ragged board (sorry no flopzilla on my phone.) and can make a profitable call.

It's not that bad because the way you're processing the comparison:

Calling $100 more vs shipping it $475 more.

Most people are risk averse and believe strongly in the idea that "you cannot lose what you don't put in the middle."

Some of the posters (myself included) may have added some sensationalism to why we think calling is less profitable, and most of us will agree that against this particular player, it's profitable as long as we're not folding.

However, you have to recognize that the argument is not whether calling is profitable, but whether if calling is the most profitable way of playing the hand.

Your example is heavily favored toward your argument that calling is best, because you have effectively removed FE from shoving.

Naturally if FE is 0, only factors are hand equity and pot odds.

If we assign certain range to V and are last to act, ability to see more cards and V's action would be more profitable.

Your example is very biased and doesn't help your argument at all.

I agree with all of that. As I said, I am on board with shipping. The original post was so vague, I was just saying we shouldn't rule out a call. I was surprised when people flipped out about it.

Originally, I was thinking that he would have a ton of Ax that we don't do well against all-in pre, but that he is probably going to jam most flops. Off the top of my head that scenario lent itself to a call.

Totally agree that my example is biased towards a call. The point was to show that there are situations where a call would be best here. I don't think the assumptions I gave are all that unrealistic. Certainly you have played with villains where those assumptions apply.

Don't think we are disagreeing much here. I was arguing that calling is a viable option, not that calling is best in this very vague spot.

We already have $25 invested so we need to count that and $25 of bb money in your simplified dead money shove Calc, so it's $62.5, not $37.5.

RP and others already covered that you are ignoring FE pre and how the 3 other people might react to a call.

Your rough Calc suggests call is +EV if the rest fold, but that's a big if. (not as +EV as shove)

:facepalm

Yea effed up leaving our dead $25 out.

Don't think someone calling behind hurts us that much. I think we are at least just as likely to be dominating them as the reverse. It does limit our ability to call flop with K high occasionally though so that sucks.

Keep in mind, my rough calc is leaving out a lot of times we should call without a K or Q. I mean it's pretty easy to see that seeing a flop before making your decision is more profitable than not seeing a flop assuming villain is calling off pre or jamming flop.

The optimal play comes down to ranges and frequencies. Point is that we can construct some realistic assumptions that make a call the best play. A call is worth some consideration in a scenario like this. Maybe not in this exact spot. Maybe we need a wilder villain or slightly deeper stacks to make it a call, but it's not as easy as "don't call off 25% of your stack pre."

They could squeeze.

I think we can agree calculating call EV redic complicated.

I can't imagine calling though. It may be closer than I originally spitballed, but I can't stop thinking about somebody behind with AQ. Small part of their range, but 3 shots at it. I want them out.

In situations in which hero could potentially make incorrect folds because of lack of information, it's better to jam knowing hero has the edge.

If we have determined that KQ is ahead, and we get cold feet and fold to shove on A22 board, we are making a mistake, and that's really the gist of why fit-or-fold is bad in this scenario.

What a dream!! With all due respect, how is anyone defending a call here on any level?
I'm 4b (eff shoving) my entire UTG open range vs described maniac 3B to comfortably ISO, expect folds from Vs behind, and take my huge raw equity edge to SD vs maniac for 100BB. I'm not ranging him down to 84o obv, but it's somewhat irrelevant assuming I'm not opening 42s UTG (as RP noted).

A Nightmare would be CALLING a maniac 3b range with my open UTG range, inducing calls from wide Vs behind, taking a four way flop with same maniac open shoving and annihilating my edge on every level, and now having to play fit/fold, not vs maniac so much as with relative position from hell against 1 or 2 Vs to my left.

Fit/fold wise against maniac, if I do just flat the 125 and we somehow get HU, I'm comfortably snapping off his auto flop bets/turn shoves on A22 as quickly as 884. But AP, you left in a player and had to hit.