KTs is a playable hand if you're careful with it. I raise it preflop because limpers are weak. Whether they'll call me regardless depends on the player; you may be correct that at 10NL they are more prone to do it, but that's a read specific issue, that they're too passive. In that case I might raise less hands that require lots of fold equity.

I don't think a call is terrible here if villains get value towned easy.

Preflop I'd raise to 60c. On the flop raise his donk bet to 3x then call his all-in bet. You have 15 outs so you are in good shape. You can go all-in on the flop. Good luck, Yojimgari

In NLHE, I agree, although factoring FE can make shoving other draws profitable. Omaha has a number of situations where getting it allin on the flop is right. 15 outs in Omaha is not uncommon.

preflop is wrong imo, you should not have made that size raise

I agree. Re-raising gives them the opportunity to come over the top on you like we just saw. I never would have re-raised but if I did and then was put all in, I would fold. Your losing less than $2.00 on a hand instead of risking losing $10 on a mistake in judgement. think of it like this, You had about something like a 30% chance of hitting that flush.
You would hit the flush only about 30% of the time post flop.

, if you ran this hand 10 times all in for $10 you would lose $70 and win $30 for a net loss of $40

If you are only questioning the call of the jam (and not the line that led you there) it’s a simple math problem. I could do the risk/reward calculation to determine your equity, but I don’t have to. You actually are a favorite to win at the decision point, assuming your flush and straight outs are clean.

You have 9 flush outs and 6 straight outs for a total of 15 outs with two cards to come. It’s easiest to calculate villain’s equity here - he wins if you miss. Since we know 5 cards, there are 47 remaining. You miss ott with probability 32/47 and otr with probability 31/46 (assuming you missed ott). The probability of both is just 32/47 x 31/46 = 992/2162 which is about 45.9%. Your equity is therefore about 54.1%, so calling the jam is clearly correct. As others pointed out, the line leading you to that point is questionable, though.

Why has this been bumped from 14 years ago?