Hero and villain are both about 80bb deep in a 2/5 home game.

Villain limps, Hero raises to $30 with AA, Villain and one other player call. Pot ends up about $95.

Villain and other player check to Hero who bets $55 on K42 flop. After the other player folds, Villain announces an all-in, simultaneously throwing in the $55 needed to call.

Hero leans back in his chair and rolls his eyes, sighing heavily. Villain sits quietly for a moment before piping up with, "Come on man, let me win this one"

Hero ???

AA with 80 bb's. Who cares about lollivereads. Cawl.

I'm assuming it's rainbow board.

Yeah, think it's pretty hard to get away from this one. Although I do think that villain's statement does make it more likely he's on the strong side (although who knows what he considers strong). More likely to be strong for a couple reasons: it implies weakness, and it's a bit goading. But yeah, would never be confident enough here to fold.

I have made folds in such spots where villains gave me even more verbal info (like telling me exactly what they had and me believing them) but don't think this is a spot you should be folding unless you had an amazing read.

Hi apokerplayer:

I can't say who but a well known high stakes player once told me years ago that a good thing to say when you're trying to pick up the pot is "Let me win this one and I'll let you win the next one." Now this isn't quite the same but it seems pretty close, so I would certainly call with aces.

Best wishes,
Mason

Even if we could be sure that was a reliable tell of strength, we still have no clue if villain thinks KQ is the nuts here..

To really make use of a tell like that, we need a situation where we know we are beat most of the time villain shoves for value

Phil Hellmuth said that in WSOP Main Event last year.

Not sure if he is the 'high stakes player', but he said the exact same words.

And the guy just fold the hand...

Phil H was over-using this phrase last year. They showed it both for bluffs and 'strong' hands. I think Phil just wanted to take pots down without a showdown, which is typical of him and the statement was used to suggest folds to his opponents ...
1) Phil wanted the other play to know he knew what they had ...
2) Phil wanted the player to focus on the board more in order to 'see' a fold ...

I do agree in OP's case that this player was enticing a call. Once Hero rolls eyes and sits back I believe V felt compelled to do 'something' to get the Hero 'back in the hand' by making the statement.

I have found 'in general' that when a statement is made that most V suggest the opposite of what they want you to do. In this case V doesn't actually say 'fold' or 'call' but the statement is strong enough.

I like to get more conversation going in these spots ... "So you hit the King or do you have 3-5?" Usually offering some ridiculous scenario like the 3-5 will get a facial response from V that you might be able to use something. A stone cold response to a ridiculous statement will generally mean a bluff or weaker hand than Kx IMO. GL

I don't care if he rubs his belly and whistles Dixie. I snap call with the dollars at hand.

Phil H might have been over using it, but I have noticed it used more at the tables now because of some youtub clips showing him on bluffs or weak hands over and over there are players who thinks this is a thing to do IMHO.

i played a similar hand in a 1-2 game at the casino

few people limp, V opens the cutt off for 12, sb calls, im on bb w AA make it 52.
V calls sb folds
flop comes 854 rainbow
i open for 85
V tanks for like 1.5-2 min looks at me looks at his chips counts out a call plays with is chips then goes all n for about 340 total
i started the hand w about 560

only played w V for about 2.5-3hrs but seemed like a solid player
i felt like he had to have a set n hope id snap him off w overpair so i folded

ive talked about the hand n just about everyone says i shoulda called n now idk how to feel about it either... theyre tough spots

I'm calling with KQ but I'm a fish

When I have done this (new-ish live player)...it is always the nuts.


YMMV

It is all about what image you have of each other.

Villain Deep Thinking Levels

Level 1 - No tricks. He is asking you to fold because he wants you to fold. You Call.
Level 2 - He is asking you to fold, to make you follow Level 1 statement and call. You Fold
Level 3 - He thinks you put him on Level 2 image, so he asks you to fold to make you follow Level 2 statement to fold. You should do the opposite: You Call
Level 4 - He thinks you put him on Level 3 image. You do the opposite of it: You Fold
...
Odd Levels: You call
Even Levels: You fold


I believe kids/parents/partners can be on Level 1 on very recreative games.

From level 4 and above, both players "know that you know that you know...", what makes these statements worthless.

Most players are on Level 2 or 3, but the ones that like to make these statements would be slightly more on Level 2, because they think it can have some effect. Players on level 3 would use it a little bit less because they are closer to Level 4.

If you know the villain you can try to classify him, specially using the game momentum and personal disputes between players on the table.

snap call hahahahahahha

I was curious what people thought about this. In my Verbal Poker Tells book, I did it a little differently, and talked about Level 0 being honesty, and Level 1 being the first deceptive level (weak means strong, strong means weak), and so on. So it started with 0 being honest and continued from there.

I struggled it with for a while, actually, because I couldn't find a definitive, accepted way to number those categories/definitions. I was curious if anyone thought one way was better (or more widely accepted) than the other and why.

I'm surprised at the consensus here. Absent any other information, I confidently fold here. Maybe it's just where I play but I feel we are usually beat here.

I prefer level 0 = honesty.

I don't think it is relevant if you call it Level 0 or Level 1. But I don't like the idea of Level 0 being the 1st level... and Level 1 the 2nd level. It's a personal thing, for me the 1st level is Level 1.

This is a hand where I dont need any reads because a super weak play like folding aces on a K high rainbow flop is not something I will ever do.
I've seen a lot of people playing KT-AK (yes KK too) the same way as villain in this hand for a lot of reasons.
Call is the right play in these spots, long term.

There's no possible hand that makes sense that beats you except 22, 44, or KK... He wouldn't be betting that much pre-flop on K4 therefore he really has nothing that can beat you unless he has a 3-5 suited and he just plays crazily and looking to his draw ..... You definitely snap call because you're in the lead

Unless the board is all suited, you have to make the call. This is the IDEAL board for AA (except another ace of course). hero over raised pre flop to get rid of K-low, so you gotta go in no matter what the guy does.

I remember Amir Vahedi telling it to Sammy Farha in 2003 WSOPME FT and he had airball. I actually think it represents weakness, and would make me want to call even more.

I might actually show the aces just to see if I can get a reaction. I've done this a couple of times after getting a speech and my opponent could not help but be shocked (such as by widening their eyes 100%), at which point I was able to call recognizing they did not think my hand was *that* strong.

I like this.

What stage/level is Limbo?...