You're confusing the equity that the caller needs with the equity that the bluffer needs.

The bluffer needs you to fold ~60% of the time for him to make a profit, but you only need to be right 37.4% of the time for you to make a profitable call.

AQ, QT, all sorts of Kx and random spew. I agree with the other poster that this probably isn’t a set and we have 27% against KJ anyway.

If he has 2 combos AK, 1 combo QT and all KJ then we have the right price to call.

I don’t love this spot but I think call is the best option.

The bolded part is the only thing I disagree with.

I love this spot. It's a fistpump snapcall and I expect to make a huge profit against villain's donk jamming range.

Results???

Once again proving that our australian brethren play in a different game.

Mind you, I'm still calling this off, but its not anywhere close to an insta fist pump call. Just cuz someone is wearing (insert whatever outfit you think is a tell) and drinking (whatever drink you think is a tell) doesn't mean they just massively overbet with garbage hands (lol @ giving V KQ/KT here with equal weight as his value hands)

No, he isnt at all. If you read what he is saying that is, and put away your own glasses.

The point that he makes is that its meaningless to try and soulread a villain that is not any good at poker into a a spesific hand, and that described villain is more likely to perform random buttonclicking based on his feelings in the moment rather than any rationale.

Late to this one but obvious call. Even if we stove a range of only AK, KK, JJ and KJ, we are at 40%. Pot is $1137 and $425 to call meaning we are getting 37.4%.

So throw in ANY other hand OR a 3% propensity to spazz OR some probability that he 4!'s KK pre (meaning he is less likely to hold all KK combos because he didn't raise) and we are easily there.

As Chris said, sorry you lost dude.

Honestly surprised this thread hasn’t been locked.

bbv is >>>>>

Many posters are in disagreement and/or had the wrong read about this guy's donking range. It's not a slam dunk at all but thanks for contributing nothing.

I get what you're saying, but the fact that he is bad means he is just as more likely to play more face up in a 3-bet pot. Seriously, who donks into into a PF 3-bettor with an underpair? It would be one thing if it was checked to him. It's so rare it has to be completely discounted, unless we have reads, which we don't.


Overall, given the price I agree it's probably a call. The hand would probably be more interesting if he bet, say, $700 in a pot of 287 or something like that, giving us worse odds.

But one thing I tend to notice is people assume that "bad" equates to maniac spewtard, when that is so rarely the case in LLSNL. When we don't have reads that a guy is spewy, we should be assigning very conservative ranges imo. Calling off big money with one pair is not how we crush in poker, so I disagree that this is a fistpump spot.

But those that provided the math make a good case for calling.

Sure, i can get behind some of your points in this post. However, its still my opinion that this is an instacall all things considered.

Making a +EV play (call it off in this instance), doesent mean we win the pot 100 percent of the time, or that we are ahead everytime the cards get tabled. This is a common misunderstanding i see on this forum all the time. Being a good winning player doesent mean never losing big pots, or dont stacking off with anything but nutted hands. Thats why we should have a bankroll and manage our roll good and responsibly- to smooth out the swings as easy as possible.

Like, he manage to show up with topset here- cool story bro, well donked you get my money cause i have AA in a bloated 3 bet pot. The money should have gone in pre regardless, and same result you lose your stack when he binks his 2 outer. Sometimes you are destined to lose your stack in poker, its just the way good +EV poker works. If you are never getting your money in behind, you are simply playing too tight.

snap call.

Nice post.

We should be trying to get away from coolers when possible and not just throw our hands up in the air and say every big hand we lose was a cooler, but this one was unavoidable.

So are there ever times in poker where you should go with the “feel” or “read” over the maths? Is that only for fishes? Is that results based thinking?

It seemed like OP knew villain had KK here and could make the lay down. If villain turns his hand over we know it’s a fold and OP is saying that this player is most likely playing with his hand face up in this scenario. I kind of like playing a bit more exploitative here instead of just going with the math. It’s a 3 bet pot with a K and J on the flop. Both cards are very likely to be in villains range. Plus, we have to take into consideration OP’s image at the table. He said ”taggy”, could that be more toward the nittier side of the tag spectrum? You don’t always have to 4-bet KK against a TAG from villains perspective.

Depending on OP’s position (didn’t see it in first post) this is taking some very snug ranging into account. UTG open, UTG 2 flat, and 3 bet looks like a squeeze play. Maybe he thinks you have AK here and he’s going to stack you.

it is what it is.

We can never fold here, especially HU, ESPECIALLY to an unknown.

Reload and take his cookies.

I'm snapcalling because I would expect villain to try to slowplay his set here. I've seen many Vs just go with AK or KQ here. Would he not go for a c/r or a lol smaller bet to massage stacks in if he has KK or JJ?

Obviously you ran into it here but I would keep this information and pocket it away for use in future pots against this villain, he may be the type to protect and just always have it when he overbet ships like this