I asked V if he would show if I folded and he said yes.

155 was fine. Im the biggest nit about folding ever, but im calling this one.

And that is why you make it 225...SPR of 2, nothing to think about. As played I call and expect to lose to a set most of the time. If I have KK as V I expect your range to be QQ/AA/AK only and QQ is folding anyway so might as well donk the set and then shove turn just like he did.

+1 mirrion

I don't think we properly understand the ramifications of having a loose image. If we have a loose image and have been showing up with random nut 74ss hands etc and then we FINALLY get AA how is it that all of a sudden we start seeing monsters under the bed here.

preflop, super standard 3-bet to 155 - 170. In 2/4nl players aren't 3-betting us with 22 - TT so we don't need the super paranoia about set mining. 3-bets are going to be exclusively JJ, QQ, KK, AA, AK and maybe AQs and a tiny fraction of the time KQs. So we can 3-bet and when villain calls he should be calling exculsively with JJ, QQ, AK majority of the time and KK should be 5-bet shoving us most of the time since we are "loose".

When flop comes King high and V donk bets into us, 85% of the time that donk bet is going to be AK and maybe 5% of the time V has KQs. It is rare, very very rare at this level for villains to donk bet top set into the preflop raiser on a rainbow dry board.

So I really just don't understand the soul wrenching angst in this spot.

The only situation we should be super worried is if our image was that of SUPER NIT and V is a thinking player and our hand is face up as AA. Then and only then should we be worried. Otherwise, given our image our hand is NOT face up as AA and V can overvalue AK/KQ and even a ******ed QQ/JJ that is turning their hand into a bluff...

given the way this situation progressed, I'm so happy to get it in with AA here, and if V turns up with KK, meh...

Majority of the time, our AA should be prison raping AK in this spot like a fresh fish new to Shawshank

This is what we know about the Villain. He has:

• No record of donking flops
• No record of bluffing
• No record of 3betting
• A record of overvaluing TPMK
• A record of check-calling with draws and TPMK

Also, he's on a heater, and given the description, wouldn't be competent playing a stack of 300bb+. Significantly, with this type of player, when he donks into someone who has previously shown strength and they just call, Villain might assume Hero is weak (i.e. has QQs or maybe AK). So my read is that he is likely not bluffing, but donking for value (it's tough to put him on a draw as well, especially as the K is a and Hero holds the A of ).

The question thus becomes: how often is he overvaluing KQ or AK (or, in the rare case, AA)? If we include KQ in his range (and I play in this room and to me this "bling" type of villain would 3bet and call a 4bet with this hand), then we have 18 combos of these overvalued "donk" hands versus 9 combos of sets. Remember, he check calls with TPMK, but there's no evidence of him doing so with TPTK. And, once again, he's not likely accustomed to playing this deep, and is on a heater, so his mindset is: "when you get a hand (like AK and you hit), then you just get it in on the turn, because you're never folding."

I'd be thus saying if we can include KQ in his donking-value range, then it's an easy call, given that you're receiving 2:1. If you can't include KQ within his 4bet calling and donking-value range, then you can still call, but it's a far more marginal spot, and a fold might be more justifiable.

To really assess the non-KQ range scenario, we have to ask whether Villain donks with a monster hand (i.e. a set). In my mind, loose-passive players in this room usually don't, unless the board is draw heavy. Thus the only reason I can see in Villain's mind for shoving this turn is that he believes Hero is merely going to check behind turn (because Hero just called flop) and it's better to shove turn rather than river because it looks more bluffy. This means you are identifying Villain as a Level 2 thinker (i.e. is aware of his own perceived range). Are we satisfied with such a designation? Does the fact that he says "I'll show if you fold" accord with him wanting to be perceived as bluffing? Or does it mean he literally wants you to fold? I can't see why he would want you to fold. But, remember, he might be inducing for the wrong reason, that is, overvaluing his hand.

225 is too much, and even the most basic ABC player will read that raise as AA trying to protect against getting cracked because that is how they would play it.

Going from 55 to 225 folds out too many TT, JJ, QQ and AK hands and the ONLY hand in V's range that typically calls this 100% is KK. If we 3-bet to 225 I feel TT and AQ fold 95% of the time, JJ folds 75% of the time, QQ folds 60% of the time, AK folds 40% of the time and we get called by KK 100% of the time.

So it just losing way too much value by crossing that $200 threshold. I mean, that is a HUGE bet and even the fishiest fish will read that as AA and we lose so much action...

ANd folding out TT-QQ, AK, AQ would just be criminal and lose too much value...

I don't think the call is marginal without KQ in his range. Even with just a range of KK and AK this is a clear call. Granted, not a super fist pump call, but a call nonetheless.

And if we include just a small fraction of the time spazzed out QQ/JJ and KQ then its even more of a clear call.

I know it just sucks in these spots and we feel that somehow our awesome poker skills should have soul read our way out of this, but given our image and perception of how the table sees us, it is 100% impossible to read V for exclusively KK ESPECIALLY since the way V played it is 100% counter to how the vast majority of LLSNL players would play top set on a rainbow bone dry board...

I mean, think about it. That is a lot of soul reading we have to do.

We have to see passed our super loose image, see passed the way we are perceived, then see passed a player who overvalues TPMK, then see passed an atypical line of donk betting top set on a rainbow board, then see passed the turned flush draw (players tend to spazz out even more when a flush draw is out there)....

The grim reaper couldn't soul read his way out of getting stacked with AA vs KK given the above.

Or put another way, if we fold in this spot, I guarantee we are overfolding way too much in other +EV spots.

Preach on dgi
155 is fine
This is a snap
Is this a cooler / bbv thread?

Keep in mind, I was ranging him on low-medium p/ps as well as JJ+. Sometimes these types of Villains think that such hands are ideal for 3bet raising from blinds, especially when they've been winning. However, I should probably discount these p/p combos, as he's not likely to make this move too often (maybe 1 in 4 times when in this position with 2s-10s). So, I see your point, on it being "clear" rather than "marginal", given a basic combo count and the pot odds.

I guess what you're saying too, by implication, here, is that "tanking" is perhaps wasted mental energy, which, can also have the negative effect of Hero out-levelling himself when under the pressure of calling a 200bb shove. Or can we say that in these situations it's still worthwhile to think through the possible "motivations" behind Villain's unusual line in a bloated pot? In the end, the fact that Villain doesn't really have any suggestion of being competent at deep-stack play, along with a basic equity calculation, should ensure that Hero doesn't have to soul-read. I'm curious to know whether it's bad practice for him to do so. Also wondering whether this unusual line by Villain would be easier to deal with if the board had no broadways (e.g. 1026r). I assume it would, because Villain could easily overvalue JJ-KK just as he overvalues AK or KQ.

+ 1 mirrion

OP, is Villain thinking about our hand at all here or is he just playing his cards?

I've played in this room a lot too (this week) and my pov is that gold chain big watch guys like to trap/check raise more than they like to barrell/bully with the nuts

even without the number of combos, this feels like AK way more than KK

I have an erection hitting the table here as I call

you've given a wall of text about history but f all about 3bet pots vs villain and generally how aggro you have been with 3/4 betting etc. Is he trying to get into pots with you?

PF/flop looks fine. turn is yuck but I am calling here. You lose to 66/88 and the rest is Kx hands he thinks he is betting for value (given flop call) or possibly spazzing with big pockets.

[QUOTE=dgiharris;40663191]+1 mirrion


When flop comes King high and V donk bets into us, 85% of the time that donk bet is going to be AK and maybe 5% of the time V has KQs. It is rare, very very rare at this level for villains to donk bet top set into the preflop raiser on a rainbow dry board.

So I really just don't understand the soul wrenching angst in this spot.

The only situation we should be super worried is if our image was that of SUPER NIT and V is a thinking player and our hand is face up as AA. Then and only then should we be worried. Otherwise, given our image our hand is NOT face up as AA and V can overvalue AK/KQ and even a ******ed QQ/JJ that is turning their hand into a bluff...

given the way this situation progressed, I'm so happy to get it in with AA here, and if V turns up with KK, meh...

Majority of the time, our AA should be prison raping AK in this spot like a fresh fish new to Shawshank




This +1000

Sounds right on

I don't have anything against tanking for big decisions. In fact, almost all of my big decisions are made after 15 - 20 seconds even when I 100% know what I'm going to do. I do this so I don't inadvertently give off timing tells in other tough decisions.

When facing big money decisions, its okay to take a moment and just think through a line. The problem occurs when FEAR of losing makes us see MUBs and then we start looking for a soul read and out leveling ourselves.

The temptation to fall into the hollywood / TV reads bullshtt can be overpowering. We start disregarding all the solid logic and deductions in favor of finding some Oreo Cookies read like "He rubbed his nose!!!! One orbit ago when he had the nuts he rubbed his nose and he just did it again!!!!"

Never mind that he has a little bit of a cold...

There is a saying "Think long think wrong" and whenever fear is involved, that saying is almost always correct.

Given all the information we have on this hand, image, etc, this is a clear call.

If we fold here and V shows KK, this will inadvertently lead to us making more bad incorrect folds. 90% of the time, we are good here. Trying to soul read your way to figure out that 10% that you are not good does not result in you correctly folding that 10%. No.

What happens is that you fold, and 90% of the time you fold, you made a bad fold meaning you miss out on that money, and 10% of the time you fold when he has KK and you save that money.

Add all that up and you end up losing even more money long term...

Well guys, I wish I could tell you that Andy fought the good fight, and the Sisters let him be. I wish I could tell you that - but prison is no fairy-tale world. He never said who did it, but we all knew. Things went on like that for awhile - prison life consists of routine, and then more routine. Every so often, Andy would show up with fresh bruises. The Sisters kept at him - sometimes he was able to fight 'em off, sometimes not. And that's how it went for Andy.

I call, flip my aces face up and villain turns over 88 for middle set and I'm dragged into the laundry for another round of tossing the salad.*

Middle set had not even crossed my mind. I did not think for a second that this villain would 3 bet from the SB with 88 given the passive way he played throughout the session.

Thanks to all of you for your thoughts.

I spoke to a couple of players the next day, one a non thinking losing player, the other an old nit who knew the player, who who were both at the table who said it was obvious he had me beat and what I had. Meh.

I ran the entire hand by two friends who I regard as two of the best pros in the room who both said that I played it totally fine.

I think it was the right decision to call. I think a 4 bet to 175 may have been preferable but I had seen him call a very big 3 bet earlier and fold ott and I still think we would have called and the hand plays out the same.

A 4bet to 200+ I thought just folds out so much of his range that I beat and get value from 99-QQ AQ, AJ, KQo.

Put a 10 J or Q on the flop and as played I think I fold to the turn shove.





Sent from my GT-I9100 using 2+2 Forums

Lol gotta love the results oriented analysis from the fish. If he would have turned over AK, it would have been "Yeah it was obvious he had AK, I'm surprised you took so long to call."

good call, well played.

After reading DGI's responses, I have a few more thoughts here. (And since I'm about to disagree with DGI, I advise all readers to take my post with a helpful dose of salt, as it should be with great caution that one disagrees with DGI.).

Let me pose a few questions:

First: Is Villain Level-1 or Level-2(+)? If he's L1, then this is a snap call, end of story. But if our Villain is L2, then we have to think a little longer, though maybe wronger.

Part A, a musing related to this: Do Level-1 players 3b/flat preflop? This is a serious question that I've been thinking about quite a lot lately. Maybe it doesn't actually relate to this HH, but I think it is an interesting concept, which might prove helpful in properly ranging our opponents. I think the answer is "almost always, no".

Second: If this Villain is Level-2, what part of his value range do we beat?

Third: If this Villain is Level-2, is he capable of bluff-shoving almost 200bb?

Fourth: Notwithstanding the answers to the above questions, does this Villain think he's betting for value, or does he think he's bluffing? This is a tricky question, because the answer can mislead us as villain can simultaneously think he's betting for value, but in reality is turning his hand into a bluff without realizing it.

These are some of the questions I try to answer during each hand. I find this list a helpful tool when trying to divine the Villain's action.

In this HH, the answers to my questions are as follows:

1) Unclear, but could reasonably be either.
1a) 3b/flat action by Villain leads me to believe he is actually L2.

2) [AK], and we chop with [AA]

3) Unknown. Most villains are not capable of putting in a 200bb bluff.

4) This action screams value. Villain does not think he's bluffing. So we have to entertain the thought that Villain is value betting with a hand like AK or QQ and doesn't realize that Hero's range should have these hands completely crushed.

Adding up the answers to the questions, we should conclude that we are beat and protect our stack.

225 is an absolutely ridiculous 4-bet size here.

In regards to the turn bet, I think it's important to be thinking heavily about what your opponent is perceiving your range to be. If you are in a situation where it's very plausible for you to have top set, and in fact this is one of a few hands you are likely to have, you often aren't going to get shoved on like this. I think the flop call is good but without a specific read you need to fold the turn. (Your hand range is only reinforced through your flop call.)

I like your post, it is well thought out and logical however there are just three points of order that invalidate a lot of it.

#1) OP's image is that of a LAG, so his hand is NOT face up as AA
#2) Too many villains at this level (to include so called L2 and L3 villains) would have zero problems going to war here with AK and playing for 200bb stacks and treating it like the stone cold nuts.
#3) Most villains at this level do not donk bet sets in this spot.

that is why I'm never folding here and why I believe a fold is incorrect. I've seen way too many so-called "solid" players shove into me in spots like this when I think my hand is face up as AA and then I make the call and I'm surprised by the range of hands that make the shove. Spazzed out QQ/JJ who have been waiting ALL DAY for a real hand, finally get it, and then an overcard hits and they monkey tilt. AK hands that think AK is the stone cold nuts preflop let alone when an A or K hits flop, and the occasional ******ed KQs...

Given all the uncertainty, like I said above, even the Grim Reaper couldn't soul read his way out of this hand. I mean, as evident by villain making a decent sized raise and then calling a decent sized 3-bet... I just don't see how we can ever think if V can call a 3-bet with AK V is also all of a sudden going to read us for AA and not think his AK in this spot it the stone cold nuts...

It boils down to a few logical premises. Would/Could this villain play AK this way? If the answer is yes, we can never fold. And I submit a player who would raise then cold call a big 3-bet with 88 is doing the same with AK and if he sees this flop with AK he is off to the races betting this like its the stone cold nuts. Thus, we can never fold here and have to take it up the cornhole...

The question of whether Villain is Level 1 or 2 is definitely relevant to this HH. In this case, I believe that Villain is 3-betting for value, but with a semi-bluff afterthought. His initial response is "Yippee I've got 88s" so he just raises and then realises after he is called---or in this case re-reraised---that it might be possible for him to represent a big pair. The reality is, though, there's not much strategic thinking involved, and he's really hoping for a non-broadway board. For him to be genuinely Level 2, he would be seeking to represent a top 3% hand with the knowledge that his middle p/p still has some equity against his opponents. This is significant because it means that he never has air in his range; if he leads into a Q72 board with 8s, for instance, he's doing so not as a bluff but with the mindset of: "I reckon I've probably got the best hand/hope you don't have a Q/I don't want to see a A or K on the turn".

I agree this was a +EV call but I don't agree we are correct 90% of the time.

In the worst case scenario we lose to 9 combos (3 KK and 6 combos of 8s and 6s) and beat 6 combos of AK, which gives us 40% equity. If we discount the combos of 6s and 8s (since Villain is 3betting these only a 1/3 of the time), then we lose to 5 combos, which leaves us with 55% equity.

If we add KQ to his range and still discount 6s and 8s then our equity improves to nearly 80%, because we now beat 18 combos. I don't agree that Villain ever has JJ or QQ, but if we add these 12 combos then we do have over 85%. Of course, if we remove 6s and 8s entirely from his range, then we in fact reach 90%.

We can, of course, discount the KQ combos and QQ/JJ combos to 1/3 much in the way we discounted 6s and 8s. In this case there are 4 KQ and 4 QQ/JJ, along with the 6 AK, for total of 14 combos that we beat and 5 that we lose to, giving us 75% equity.

In the end, we only need around 33% equity to B/E, so even with the worst-case scenario of 40%, we can still make the call, but it's rather marginal. I think it's reasonable to conclude we have around 60% equity, which makes it a clear call, without the need for a fist-pump or soul-read.

Don't forget the additional 4% of spiking our A on the river. After 4 weeks of run bad, it was due! Lol

Sent from my GT-I9100 using 2+2 Forums

Yeah. Nobody except a true maniac or someone with massive balls bluff shoves 300bb into a K high flop in a 4bet pot. AK is usually c/c flop and often folding pre facing a 4b.

If I am V in this hand I play it the same way except for the 3b pre from the SB.

I agree completely with the bolded part here. (And even said so in my 2nd post ITT.) IMO, this is probably the salient deciding factor for this hand as played.

I also agree with the points you're making. Tough for me to step up to the plate here, make the call, and play poker like a big boy given the stacks, but I'm studying.

Then wj94 has to go and say this:

And I want to crawl under my chair and x/f for the next hour...

Uhg... what a ****y spot 300bb deep.

And FWIW, I agree with wj94, I like how V played the hand. However, I like the 3b from the SB though, given we are deep.

Think about it this way: If you are V, what is your own flatting range pre facing this 3b 300bb deep? Probably mostly PPs and suited connectors looking to flop gin, not AK hoping to flop one pair. AKo is lighting money on fire flatting OOP and there is only one combo left of AKs on the flop. Whether V has AK here is dependent upon what level he's thinking at. If everyone at the table is pretty deep then the 3b with a PP is not a bad play even from SB.

It doesn't make sense to suggest that posters on this forum would be thinking like the Villain in this HH, given the OP description of him. Anyhow, 3-betting PPs and S/Cs and then calling a 4-bet from OOP with around 10:1 implied odds is generally not advisable. And to suggest there's only one combo of AK because Villain would only call AKs and not AKo isn't convincing. If you follow this kind of ranging to its logical conclusion, then you would be saying that we only beat 1 combo and lose to 9, giving us a mere 10% equity. This is without including 4 combos of 57s, which would mean our equity is even worse, since Villain hits the straight on the turn. With 10% equity, we should be snap folding to his shove on the turn. Can you honestly say you would be doing so?