How many times have you heard "I bet because I knew I had the best hand." The concept that nothing worse is ever calling is completely lost on them, and I'm fine with it.

We need to revive the donkalicious LLSNL thread, it was pretty entertaining.

Worse did call

I'm aware of that. I've also had good nights playing craps. It doesn't make playing suddenly a good idea though. V bet 99 into 3 players on the river on a K-high board. There are a couple possible reasons for this:

1. V has read the hand perfectly, and has correctly narrowed down everyone's ranges to hands worse than 99, and/or knows his bet will get better to fold. He is also aware that no one will bet their hand on this board, so check/calling and bluffcatching is not an option. He is hoping his bet gets mistaken for a bluff and gets looked up by weaker pairs. His plan works to perfection and he gets additional value.

2. V doesn't know what he's doing and is clicking buttons.

I actually remember a fact now going over this hand again, when I called him, he said in the most weak ( you got me voice ), "I only have a pair of nines", and he had the body language like he knew he was beat and he was embararsed. I think he was actually trying to bluff weak jacks off the hand and rep the K, as he was the first caller to my bet on the flop and thought it would be HU, I believe his initial call was hoping his 99 was good, but then when it checked around and the king came, he bet to his hand hoping better would fold. The dude isn't ******ed, he works for NASA and is a losing reg who poker recreationally.. Also he has anger problems.. so aggression is instinctual for him.

I can relate to this as this is why I used to bet my SDV hands as well, I didn't understand I was mostly getting called by better and rarely by worse, unless I had a fish like me at the table who thought his 33 was calling a bluff, lol!

As alan shoonmaker says, author of Poker Pyschology, he prefers live games because he loves figuring out the motivations behind fish, and I know I can figure out the motivations for most LLSNL villains with practice and DISCOURSE WITH 2p2 NON-DOUCHEBAGS, which half of you are and half are not. But **** the haters.

Also, criticizing someone for making a level 2 mistake is pretty ******ed guys. I wasn't calling hoping my 33 was good, I incorrectly analyzed V's continuation range and betting logic based on incorrect assumptions. I can improve this. You can't improve your game if you don't think at all and only play your hand. I didn't realize his rational. Now what's important is figuring out what his logic was so we can win his monies..

YAY MONIES!

Don't take it to hard Op. I butcher a hand or two every session i play...we all do..even the best. That's why we are all here learning from each other. I'm not all that familiar with flopzilla so i wasn't sure what i was looking at there. I just posted that hand as an example of the the plays i see at the tables.

Your call wasn't horrible. It was bad just not horrible.
A raise on the other hand would have been brilliant?

yes. definitely something that needs to be considered vs this type of bad aggro. If we tag villain as a someone who does donk weak hands to try to bluff better, using whatever sizing/line/history tells we have, we can put ridiculous pressure on him, and of course take the same line when the king does hit vs him, as he'll have a lot more weaker hands in his range then nutted hands in his line.

Knowing a subset of the population plays like this, it's important to be include the river raise play in our toolkit. Don't overuse it, but have it available, knowing your attacking his low equity non-sensible bluffs.

Granted if we know V understands SDV, then calling on the river is defensive vs the bluffs he has in his range and must be taken on a case by case basis.