Part 1:

Live game
The game is 7 handed,
Hero in SB has $550,
villain 1 in MP has ~130,
villain 2 on button has ~700
Villain 1 is unknown, but previously called all in with 99 on a flop of 456 vs. AA, more or less knowing he was behind.
Vlillain 2 plays a very loose aggressive style, is willing to call preflop with a wide range of cards.
Hero is known to play fairly tight.

Pre-flop:
UTG straddles to 10, 3 callers, hero with KK makes it $50, villain 1 & 2 call.

flop ($165) J 4 5

Hero?

(Part 2 later)

Bet $150, try and get it in. Bet near pot on just about any turn.

Actually I bet $100.
Short stack calls for 80
Big stack raises all-in (~400 to me).

Easy call?

$100 seems a little weak to me, I'd go more with $125/150 but ok. I can see folding here if this guy is a really good LAG player; good LAG players will know that you have a big pair here and I have serious doubts one would raise that much on a draw or top pair. Only hand I can really see him doing this with that you're ahead of is the superdraw -67 of hearts.

That, of course, is if he's a good LAG player. If he's not, then he might be under the impression that AJ is good or the nut flush draw is a great allin hand here. Both seem viable.

My end result would be: Good player = fold. Mediocre player = call.

Edit: I say this because I fancy myself a decent (though many would dispute that adjective) LAG player at these stakes and I would never ever do this to a big raiser out of the SB without a hand I'm sure is ahead; the way you played this hand SCREAMS "I have a big pair" and a good player will try to hit on you and take all your money when you can't fold to this kind of flop.

I can't imagine betting out 100 and then folding to a shove. If someone setmined for $40 that's just awful. I'm pretty much not 3betting this so heavy if I'm going to fold to this sort of action.

"Vlillain 2 plays a very loose aggressive style, is willing to call preflop with a wide range of cards"

Call me a station but I'm not folding this unless I absolutely know that villain has a set here 75% of the time. Lots of combo draws are out there. What are we losing to? 44, 55, 45? Those are the only three hands that I can really be afraid of. And even if he has 45 we aren't looking that bleak. If he's an effective LAG then he MUST make this same play with draws in order to make money. If he was a TAG/NIT I could see an argue for a fold. But investing $150 of my ~$550 stack and folding with such a powerhouse seems a little awful.

Huh? You'd have to invest $400. And your stack size is irrelevant to the entire situation, not sure why you put that in.

Hero should be raising more pre, in these type of situations in live games people dont like to give credit to squeezes from OOP. They ussual put hero on AK/AQ.

So make it 75 next time, this will get action most of the time plus it will make for much better stack to pot ratio on the flop. Not that the SPR isnt already good enough for us to stack villian 2 becuase he is a lag and will have a ton of draws here.

Why does everyone think the LAG has a draw here? He already has proper odds to call pretty much any solid draw out there (flush/straight) since it's 1:3.5 to call. He knows he has to show down to win since there's a guy already allin. I'm not saying he never turns over a draw, I'm just saying all evidence points to the LAG knowing SB has a big PP and wants to get it allin on the flop while he's ahead.

I'd guess 45 if I have to put LAG on a hand. I think if the player is any type of good (aka not a donk, not drunk) you're behind more often than you're ahead here. If he's donkish, I'm calling. Who knows what allin guy has -- could have a monster or could have top pair; he's irrelevant to the call at this point.

Part 2 already

and results

imo

550-150=400
Stack size is irrelevant to the entire situation???? ummm

I think you understood that I knew stack size was relevant to determining how much was necessary to call. To pretend otherwise is just that - pretending. (Don't mean to come off a dbag, just find it weird to be misunderstood in such a strange way).

That comment was meant for this:

That sentence should be cut off at "$150" or it should read something like "But investing $150 into a $400 pot" or whatever. My point is, the size of your stack is irrelevant to the decision being made. The size of the pot, on the other hand, is not.

I disagree.

The stack behind you absolutely matters now since it is an all in situation. We would be calling 400 to win x amount, whereas if we had more money we'd be calling y amount to win x amount. When we have more money at stake that means we have to be right about our decision more often than not (in this situation). I dont know if I explained that well or not. In other words, if we have more money behind us in an all in situation, we must be making the right decision moreoften than if we had a smaller amount behind us. Therefore, I disagree, and think that we make this call given the range of hands we are against.

I absolutely agree that hte size of the pot matters. However, in an all-in situation, so does your stack size. If we had 200 dollars behind us we would absolutely make this call, right?

I bet 80-100 (f the short stack no set mine odds here) and hope and pray the lag has top pair or a draw so he can reraise you or shove. What lag smooth calls with a draw there with those stacks and a half pot bet. Zero

this post is so dumb jesus christ