If that's your image, bet bigger on every street.

Shove river yourself.

What are your reads on V2? Is he an actual TAG? TAGs usually don't call 2/3 PSB with naked overs. Is he turning TT/JJ into a bluff catcher here?

Wow really tough spot. I am shocked that so many think the river is an easy call...I do not and am leaning towards a fold.

I know that you have been looked up light OTR a few times, but that is entirely different than V shoving over your river bet after having raised pre, then called both flop and turn. Given the pot is laying you more than 3-1 on a call ($1037 to call $305), that screams value to me more than bluff. And about the only value hand you beat is KQ. I don't think we can eliminate any of the higher sets or even 54s from V's range.

And to your earlier question, I think folding pre to the raise is fine. He raised 8x and has ~26x his raise for you to win...OOP, that is right on the line between 0EV call and -EV call.

Hard as it is to say, I think your hand is a bluff catcher at this point and I think V has way more value hands in his range than bluffs, so I would probably fold after a long time in the tank. If I had to guess (if you call), he shows QQ or KK in that order.

Gross spot, you bet $145 into $442,, perhaps if you sized up would be more of an easier committed sigh call, by betting small you have left yourself some folding reasoning but very slim, as played hes basically repping KK / QQ , or KQ hearts ?

tough spot and very read dependent, I think its quite tough to fold here , very player dependent,

I agree QQ and KK in that order are the most plausible specific hands, though busted draws actually make a lot of sense the way this was played. But forget busted draws for now.

Let's assume villain has all 54s, 77, 66, KK, and QQ. That's 16 combos. We beat 9 combos KQ and 3 combos 76s. If we restrict villain to these hands (no bluffs, no AA, no AK) that's 28 combos. We win 1037 when we call and win and lose 305 when we call and lose.

EV(call) = P(win)*WinAmt - P(lose)*LossAmt

EV(call) = (12/28)*1037 - (16/28)*305 = $270.14

Even under the unrealistic condition villain has ALL set combos and 54s the call appears to be massively profitable.

Solve((x/28)*1037 - ((28-x)/28)*305=0,x)

In fact the break even point is if we can beat 6.36 combos ignoring rake. Call it 7. Between the 6 combos AA 3 combos 76s 9 combos KQ 12 combos AK and all the busted straight draws and heart draws that might bluff, we can easily find 7 combos.

Note this model is pretty much a worst case scenario where we give villain every hand that beats us and ignore many possible hands we beat (AA, AK, 76s, bluffs). In reality he does not have every hand that beats us. He's a TAG. If he's competent at all he should be raising this flop with every hand that beats us except 54s. And we can't even assume he has any 54s. A lot of TAGs will just overlimp this hand rather than put in a 8.67BB raise. Most at this level actually.

Regardless, the flop is both wet and dynamic, and if villain is even marginally competent he should realize the dangers of a x/c (once) with KK 77 66 and (twice) with QQ in a three-way pot vs two limp-callers who could both have many flush draws and straight draws. We can discount these combos somewhat. He does not have all 12 set combos.

Villain is described as a TAG and Hero apparently has a maniac image. Moreover hero's river bet is small. It looks like a blocking bet. Villain may recognize this and go for a bluff or thin value bet with any number of hands. On this board he can have at least 50 busted draws. Even if this guy bluffs in this spot 4% of the time that's 2 more combos and we only need to get to 7.

Unless I have a really, really good read on villain that he is nutted I am not folding here ever. It's not even close.

Give me some plausible combination of hands we beat and hands we lose to accounting for the possibility (however slim) of bluffs where our expectation is negative. I sure can't think of any and I've thought about it a lot.

Good analysis. Only thing to nitpick is I don’t know if full combos of KQ call flop. Maybe KQdd, KQ with one or more hearts. Obviously though, as you stated, we can take a lot of the combos of stronger hands out of his range like 77 and 66.

Thanks, and you are right, villain may not necessarily x/c with overcards, though I would expect him to do so reasonably often as a TAG vs a perceived maniac.

On the other hand he will raise KK QQ 77 and 66 quite often. I don't know how many combos of each hand he has, but calculating the exact EV is not so important as showing that it's +EV to call.

But let's say villain has 3 combos 76s and just the KQ combos with a flopped BDFD or FD: KdQd, KhQh, KdQh, KhQd, KhQc, KcQh

This alone gets us to 9 combos which is plenty. Now let's suppose he raises his sets 2/3 times OTF and raises OPs 1/3 times. That leaves 2 combos KK, 2 combos QQ, 1 combo 77, and 1 combo 66. Let's be generous and suppose he raises 54s 2/3 the time for 2 combos. We'll ignore bluffs and thinnish shoves like AK and AA for now.

EV(call) = (9/17)*1037 - (8/17)*305 = $405.47

Now let's suppose more conservatively he has all 3 combos 54s as well as the 6 sets, and only calls with the 3 combos 76s, KdQd, KhQh, KhQd, KhQc. In other words the K high BDFD + overcard hands, and he dumps the Queen high BDFD + overcard hands. That makes 7 combos we beat.

EV(call) = (7/16)*1037 - (9/16)*305 = $281.13

So it's pretty close to the previous estimate with all combos. Even if we drop all KQ but KhQh, we get

EV(call) = (4/13)*1037 - (9/13)*305 = $107.92

And all these calculations assume both that villain is never bluffing even though this line looks pretty bluffy, and that villain's never taking a x/c line with say AA or AK and when the draws brick decides to shove the river vs a perceived maniac who could easily be triple barreling a busted draw.

It's impossible to know the exact EV of calling without knowing the player's exact range, but my best guess is this call is worth several hundred dollars. And I can't come up with any reasonable scenario where it's not a call, though I can come up with some stretched instances where it's only say +100ish rather than +300ish

This hand is a great example of why little pairs go down in value when stacks get deeper, because 5th set is not really that great a hand when you get 200 bb+ in

This is much closer to a fold pre than most people have thought

On the river...sheesh, if this V is seminitty, ergh. He really shouldn't have AK or KQ unless they are hearts. He doesn't sound like the type to bluff shove 450 in with a busted draw very often. He raised pre - what sort of range do you give him? Is something like 76 suited in range preflop? Most tighter guys are overlimping with that sort of hand. If he tends towards a tight raising range...eh, I'd be pretty nervous when he shipped into me that he had a better hand than mine.

After talking with my buddy from LA who plays professionally he advocated that with this river specifically is a check call

This is really good mathematical analysis and I can't find fault in any of it other than the ranging and that has more to do with V's actions. I think a Raise 8x/call donk/call turn/shove over our bet river heavily weights his range to all the set combos and 54. I eliminate KQ and 76 as no reasonable TAG will shove over us on the river (they just call). And I don't think there are anywhere near as many busted draw combos as you suggest, especially given that there is a K and Q on board (and V's actions WHEN those cards hit). For busted flushes, I can see AJ, A4, A5 and that is about it as those are the only hands that have NO SDV OTR that would feel the need to shove to win. All others (containing a K or Q) just call the river.

I admit, your math makes me think it is closer to a call than when I originally posted about it, but I still think it is a very close fold as I would much more heavily weight value hands (77, 66, KK, QQ, 54) than bluffs.

But thanks for your analysis. It is a good reminder of why the math is so important in these spots.

Shorn

Regarding Shai's ranging, it's really important to know what type of 1/3 NL game you are sitting in. Are you sitting in a game where ~$700 stacks are flying around all the time? Or are you sitting in a game where ~$700 stacks almost never go in?

I sit in a game where, even though it is *very* loose preflop (like, stoopid loose), $700 stacks go in approximately never. Which means that KQ snap calls this river bet, even the "smallish" bet, almost always and never thinks of raising; 76 tanks before making a call vs fold decision, as does AA/AK, etc., and a bluff for this size against this strength just typically ain't done apart from the most aggro / maniac / difficult of players. A raise to these sizes stacks is *extremely* nutted in my game.

But, maybe OP's game differs, in which case more consideration has to be given for making a call here.

Ggamedependent,imoG

it was a good game splashy game but against this villain in particular I also felt that he would just call with AhKh AA KhQh he wasn't the type to overvalue a hand

How do we know this is a reasonable TAG? I would argue no reasonable TAG would flat a set on a board with this many draws. Which is evidently what he did. There's no reason to assume he's reasonable. As an aside I contest your assertion no reasonable TAG would shove 2p on the river. I would. Not in general, but against a maniac donk betting flop turn and betting only 1/3 PSB OTR? Yes, absolutely, because a real maniac has all kinds of nonsense here like random KX and QX possibly even 7x.

As for draws if he's raising 54s he is raising a ton of hands here and has many draws. He could be as wide as these 88 combos of busted draws (i'm including some pair + draw hands): 55-44,A5s-A4s,K5s-K4s,T8s+,98s,75s,64s+,54s,AhKh,AhQh,KhQh,AhJh,KhJh ,QhJh,AhTh,KhTh,QhTh,JhTh,Ah9h,Kh9h,Qh9h,Jh9h,Ah8h ,Kh8h,Qh8h,Jh8h,Ah7h,Jh7h,Th7h,9h7h,8h7h,Ah6h,Kh6h ,9h6h,8h6h,Ah3h,Kh3h,Ah2h,Kh2h,T9o,98o

Granted he probably dumps most or all of the gutshots before the river, but he can end up with three to four dozen draws by the river easily. And yeah he may not turn the KX and QX flush draws into bluffs but even so that leaves quite a few combos, depending how wide he's raising pre-flop. Even if he only has 20 and bluffs 5% of the time that's 1 combo which is pretty significant mathematically.

And I didn't even account for bluffs or thin value bets. I don't know why you would assume villain is not raising sets, overpairs, and the straight OTF or OTT though. You figure out what a typical TAG has here as a call call shove line vs. a perceived maniac and I can work out the EV. The relevant variables are

a) how often does a random TAG raise 54s to 8.5BB?

b) how often does a random TAG raise 76s to 8.5BB?

c) how often does a random TAG raise 77 and 66 to 8.5BB? A lot of TAGs at this level fork their ranges in predictable ways and an 8.5BB raise contains only big pairs and AK, maybe a few more hands, but rarely 54s and often not even 66 or 77 after two limpers.

d) how often does a random TAG flat a set on a super wet dynamic flop?

e) how often does a random TAG flat 66 and 77 on this turn?

f) how often does a random TAG flat KK on this turn?

g) how often does a random TAG flat 54s on both the flop and turn?

h) how many flush draw, straight draw, combo draw, and pair + SD/FD are in random TAG's range OTR before the shove?

i) how often does a random TAG turn the combos in h) into a bluff after what looks like a weak bet from a player with an overly aggressive image?

j) how often does a random TAG take this line with the thinner value hands K7s Q7s 76s KQ AA and AK vs. a player with an overly aggressive image who could easily be barreling a draw? I think against actual maniacs we can definitely shove 2p for value, probably AA, and maybe AK. Regardless I've seen plenty of bad TAGs play 2p and TPTK+ this way. Whether he has certain 2p like K7s Q7s 76s depends on how aggro he is, but if he opens 54s he definitely has 76s, probably K7s, and maybe Q7s in range.

I think that's it though I'm possibly forgetting something. I don't think you can come up with any set of variables for which we get it's -EV to call in this specific situation of a generic TAG playing against a perceived maniac. The pot odds are just too good. I'm sure there are specific players against whom we can fold, but that requires a more detailed read. Like if the guy is a passive nit who would never raise without at least a set, it's totally different, but we have no reason to believe that based on the OP description.

@GG: OP described villain as a TAG who's OTB and his own image as "semi maniac" "very agro" and he's getting called down light. It sounds like a splashy situation, but I wasn't there. OP is the only one who can really accurately range villain, I'm just working with the assumptions given.

Then it's a fold. If villain flats or folds 2p and worse hands, doesn't bluff, and all you beat is 2p and worse hands, then...I mean what is even the question? Your EV is -$305 because you always lose.

I wish you'd included this in your OP before I wasted hours analyzing a trivial situation. Sorry you got set/set but if villain is as described not raising 2p and one pair hands then this is a super easy fold.

And x/c on this river is a bad idea unless you expect villain to bluff and bet really thin (but he sounds like a nit after your recent post, so I wouldn't expect this). If you're going to call a shove I just don't see the point of not shoving yourself. If you shove you look more polarized and villain may call you down lighter. It's particularly doubtful he folds AK and AA. If you check he's probably just checking back the hands you beat like AK and AA and betting with the hands that beat you.

it was a difficult situation given my image and the size of my bet on the river

i kind of leveled myself into a call

i was trying to give him a good price to call with more of his range then just the top of it

since i was getting called down lighter

but then when he jammed i thought he might be seeing my bet as weakness "blocker" or maybe even spazzing with missed hearts

the line i took looks so donkish

Do people go all in as a bluff in this spot with a missed draw? I have never come across anyone bluff shove busted draw over a bet bet bet line like this before. V's range is better sets like 99% of the time and it's a pretty trivial albeit painful fold.

I'd also like to compliment OP on donking this flop, I like that a lot.

What to do on the river is pretty interesting and I am ok with all options since they all have merit. Smallish bet can get a hero call with one pair, shove can induce hero call if you have right image, check can get him to value cut or bluff missed draw. I probably lean toward half pot or so on river.

Yeah that makes sense and he may even have some bluffs but the thing is if you beat zero value hands, which sounds like what you believe the case to be if he's flat calling a hand as strong as KQ, then he needs to have a LOT of bluffs, and for that to be possible two things need to happen:

a) he needs to have a LOT of draw combos in his range, which is doubtful given the 8.5BB raise and your further description of this guy which leads me to think he is not raising J9s T8s 98o and the like

b) he needs to have a high bluffing frequency

For instance, if he can arrive at the river with 20 busted draws (possible, but unlikely as he sounds more like a nit than a TAG), he would need to be bluffing about a third of the time he misses to break even, perhaps as much as half the time, depending exactly how many sets are in his range.

And if he can arrive at the river with only a handful of busted draws (say 10) he needs to be bluffing more like 70% of these hands, and players cautious enough to flat KQ here are just not bluffing anywhere close to that amount.

Depending on his 8.5BB raising range he may not even be able to get to the river with enough combos of busted draws for a call to be profitable even if he bluffs 100% of them. For instance, if he's only raising suited broadways he just doesn't have enough busted draws in his range OTR to consider calling.

My earlier calculations supporting this was a highly +EV call assumed he sometimes bets his 2p hands, which would be logical for a TAG against an agro, semi-maniac. But if he's not doing that, you just don't beat anything.

Next time you're in a spot like this, ask yourself if you beat any value combos. If the answer is "no" it's almost certainly a fold even with ridiculously good pot odds.

I don't think anyone sees the line as weak even though river could have been larger. Looks like a "call me" sized value bet to me.

The line you took looks very strong. If you had checked river it would be a different story.

So you need to be good here about 22% of the time to call. His value range is KK and QQ although some KK might raise turn and some QQ might fold turn. For a call to be profitable, all he needs is two total combos of bluffs/KQ in his range to go along with the sets. So if he has KQhh and literally one bluff calling will be profitable.

Think you have to call without a good read.

Never? That’s a soft game. If I play an 8 hr session I probably see a river bluff shove 3 or 4 times on average. Some nights it’s every other orbit. Some nights it’s once every 8 hrs. To say you’ve never seen one it a crazy ABC smash ale game. If the bus to valuetown only runs in 1 direction, how could you ever lose?

You often see it for 225bb stacks against someone who's bet all 3 postflop streets?

Gyouplayinadifferentgamethanmeifso,imoG

Villain is offering $1050 for $300.

Do you think his shove is for value or bluff, i.e. what hands do you think your opponent puts you on. If you suspect of QQ or KK, then why do you think he hasn't raised either street - the flop is a little wet especially considering your position and the PF dynamics. Is Villain type of opponent to raise turn to discourage continuing with a draw? Obviously, you'd fold river with a missed draw, so river shove isn't for value in that case.

Short of being absolutely confidant of Villain's play, I put his range on two pair or a bluff both of which you beat - I see enough people overplay their one-pair-top-kicker that I can include AK in his range - I'll discount Ah-Kh because I think more people raise the turn at that point. I'd say call, but be willing to accept a loss. Otherwise, I don't think you should be playing these stakes and/or stack sizes, not mention possible overall BR and BRM aspects as you'd be ceding $742 uncontested ($442 on turn + your bet of $150 + opponents $150) - you only get the additional $300 if you call.

Certainly 225bb's is on the larger side, but in the 100-150bb range it's not unusual. People don't just give away pots in a lot of the games I play.

I think ruling out KK is a big mistake. People like to slowplay top set more than you think even on wet boards. And it's easy to see why - top pair is double blocked.

I actually think the way the hand went down QQ and KK (in that order) seem like the most likely of villain's holdings. It's interesting he doesn't raise the turn though. Any A, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, or heart besides the K are either action killing cards or often give someone else a better hand. There's 26 cards that complete the FD or SD and 8 cards even make a 1-liner to a straight. That's 56% of the deck making bad rivers, and the hand started 3-ways with two limpers. It's fairly likely any of those cards will give hero a better hand (from villain's perspective), especially with the donk bet (donk bets are very often FDs / SDs). Any halfway competent TAG should always raise here. The way he played this hand alone leads me to believe he's probably not actually a TAG and more of a TP / nit type.

This hand is interesting mostly because of how important an accurate read of villain is here. If villain doesn't bluff much and would just flat 2p hands OTR (typical TP / nit play) then it's a pretty easy fold. If he's actually a halfway competent TAG who adjusts to his opponents, his range should include some thinnish value bets against a perceived semi maniac and he should have fewer sets (except maybe QQ) because a halfway competent TAG would have raised the other sets by the turn. So if villain's a nit we are losing quite possibly 100% of the time costing us $305. If he's a TAG capable of adjusting to hero's image, calling is +EV by a few hundred dollars.

I suspect OP read his opponent incorrectly. I sometimes think people are TAGs because they look a certain way, I see them raising, entering a decent number of pots, etc., but often they're just nits getting good cards. There are in fact some warning signs in this hand that villain is probably not a competent TAG, even not knowing his hand. First, villain's gigantic preflop sizing is suspicious. Good players usually don't raise all their hands to 8.5BB (particularly OTB) and they don't fork their ranges by raising huge with super premium hands and less with others. Second, he flats a donk bet as PFR on a wet dynamic flop. I almost always raise donk bets when I'm IP, regardless of my hand strength. It's just a weak hand being played poorly by a weak player like 90% of the time. So the large raise followed by flatting a donk bet twice IP then raising all-in does not look how a TAG would play anything here and makes me lean strongly toward reevaluating the guy as a nit and folding.

Also, at this level, very few players are competent TAGs. 9/10 players who at first seem like competent TAGs are actually bad players. You may assume they play something like 18/16 (typical TAG) when really they're 9/4 (nit) or 20/5 (TP) or 30/15 (this last one raises about the same hands a TAG would but limps in way too often). I'm of the opinion without strong evidence to the contrary, one should always assume villain is a bad player, regardless of what's been witnessed over the past few hours, because over a small sample size almost anything can happen.

As an aside, I really like hero's donk bet here precisely because competent TAGs will see it as weak and be tempted to raise it. In this hand this does two things--you encourage a raise which builds the pot with the likely best hand, and you get crucial information about villain by his response to the donk bet.

Bit of a derail but nice to see that you're also an Ed Miller guy

Yep I've read all of Miller's books, but also about fifty others plus watched numerous training videos and I've never seen anyone recommend raising to different sizes based on hand strength. Guess "forked ranges" is mostly a Miller term though?

A lot of nits and bad TAGs will raise like 2.5x to 3x with low PPs and SCs and 6x+ with big pairs and maybe AK. I try to spot these guys quickly so I know when I can get 3 bet them light and when to get out of the way.