KQs flop vs pot sized donk

You definitely spazzed that out. He could've been afraid of the potentially drawy board otf, that's why you had opportunity to witness a donk. It doesn't give you any explicable reason to raise him for bluff (unless you consider that one value raise). You had yourself commited and called on the turn, that's another thing - control the pot in order to avoid being commited in the future.

yeah i know i'm ~52% otf vs one pair type hand so the raise is technically value / makes my hand easy to play.

But from villain's POV he can't just call flop fold turn either.

Villains limp call donk line is pretty weird. I would play this cautiously and just call otf.

You can raise the nut draw or the weakest draws. With your hand I like to call.

The reaction versus a donk is both natural (people don't like getting donked into) and illogical (exactly why do you raise?). This is the reason that donking with nuts is more profitable than check-raising versus many players. Don't be one of them.

Originally posted by YohanN7
The reaction versus a donk is both natural (people don't like getting donked into) and illogical (exactly why do you raise?). This is the reason that donking with nuts is more profitable than check-raising versus many players. Don't be one of them.

I don't think I've once in my life got the money in vs the nuts because my opponent donked into me. It just doesn't happen. I already said why I raised. And I'll point out that you didn't give any advice in this hand did you notice that. You just tried to put the blame on me for losing the hand. You didn't say why calling flop missing the turn and getting potted into again when you may have to fold is a better option.

In your experience maybe the range is tighter but as you can see villain has 75o

Originally posted by NothingIsForSho

Originally posted by YohanN7
The reaction versus a donk is both natural (people don't like getting donked into) and illogical (exactly why do you raise?). This is the reason that donking with nuts is more profitable than check-raising versus many players. Don't be one of them.

I don't think I've once in my life got the money in vs the nuts because my opponent donked into me. It just doesn't happen. I already said why I raised. And I'll point out that you didn't give any advice in this hand did you notice that. You just tried to put the blame on me for losing the hand. You didn't say why calling flop missing the turn and getting potted into again when you may have to fold is a better option.

Spoiler

I don't think it is

In your experience maybe the range is tighter but as you can see villain has 75o

No, you misunderstand. The conclusion about the donk-with-nuts has nothing to do with you or you losing the hand. It was just an observation, and now you confirm (strongly) that donk-with-nuts is a very viable alternative to check-raise-with-nuts. (If you have never seen it, you haven't played for very long.)

I obviously gave the advice of calling, did I really have to spell that out?

Calling flop and folding turn is no disaster. Winning all pots is not the objective in NL as it is to some degree in FL, the objective is to maximize EV. You can't win them all. You'll get other spots versus this guy, and he is giving excellent implied odds (do doubt he'll pay off to a K or Q on the turn), and there is no fold equity whatsoever.

Originally posted by YohanN7

Calling flop and folding turn is no disaster. Winning all pots is not the objective in NL as it is to some degree in FL, the objective is to maximize EV. You can't win them all. You'll get other spots versus this guy, and he is giving excellent implied odds (do doubt he'll pay off to a K or Q on the turn), and there is no fold equity whatsoever.

Okay that's a fine comment. Still I feel bad calling flop and having to fold turn, or not knowing if he will get scared of a diamond or king or queen and check fold. It certainly makes my life easier to raise I think.

Originally posted by NothingIsForSho

Originally posted by YohanN7

Calling flop and folding turn is no disaster. Winning all pots is not the objective in NL as it is to some degree in FL, the objective is to maximize EV. You can't win them all. You'll get other spots versus this guy, and he is giving excellent implied odds (do doubt he'll pay off to a K or Q on the turn), and there is no fold equity whatsoever.

Okay that's a fine comment. Still I feel bad calling flop and having to fold turn, or not knowing if he will get scared of a diamond or king or queen and check fold. It certainly makes my life easier to raise I think.

It does make your life easier, but not necessarily better. There are other even more uncomfortable spots, like calling a check-raise on the flop or the turn (a reasonably small one holding a hand that beats all bluffs and possibly some value hands), knowing that most of the time the hand will have to be to a forthcoming bet. These calls are still profitable in the long run.

Think about this: If you call, and face a pot-sized bet again on the turn forcing you to fold, do you really feel bluffed out? Your hand is now a king high!

Also, if you call and hit (about 2:1 against his particular holding) and he check-folds a pair of sevens, are you extremely disappointed? You can't expect to get a pair of sevens to lose the stack if the owner of the stack has a few brain cells left anyway. But by you playing passively, he might fire again.

His range can be quite weird here. He could be donking for protection, as a semi bluff with equity, for pure value (and again for protection).

Not much reason for you to raise here. With most of his range, You're either a small favourite or way behind. There's a lot of good turn cards and will let you reevaluate where you are.

We must not pump the poy eith our hand. Better call and evaluate.

I thank you all for your input.

I believe that the decision is very close, and depends upon how you think your opponent will play. For example, if you do put your opponent on 88-JJ and you think he will fold on and over card or diamond, then it can be demonstrated that raising is superior to calling. I have even done and analysis of this in cardrunners ev as follows.

Suppose villain has 88-JJ and pots the flop. We make the following assumptions about how he will play the turn if we call: If the flush hits and he has an overpair with a flushdraw he will put the money in on the turn. If the flush does not hit and he has an overpair on the turn still he will put the money in on the turn. In all other turn spots he will check, we will bet every time, and he will fold.

I have input this into cardrunners ev and ran the equilibrium solver with this constraint. In that situation, the result is that calling is +EV of 11.88 big blinds. Basically villain will want to put the money in on the turn 57% of the time, in which case we will have to fold almost 90% of the time.

Now if we simply go all in on the flop and villain always calls, we have a +EV of 14.21 big blinds.

I have also assumed that there is exactly 16 big blinds in the pot going to the flop and that we exactly 100bbs deep preflop.

I will post the file on request for anyone who is interested.

Of course if you assume the opponent will play much worse in various imaginative ways on the turn when you call the flop, you can put almost anything into crev to make your numbers come up the way you want them too, for example if you get rid of the key idea that your opponent really doesn't like a flush card and will try to fold on that.

Now if you assume that your opponent does indeed have sets on the flop along with these overpairs it's undeniable that calling is better, but I really do not expect this.

Based on common tendencies on NL5, no-one is donkin close to pot with air. Thus we should assume, that he is ahead of you at that point. Thus, raising isn't an option as it's rare to see a fold here.

I would be very interested to hear what you guys have to say about my previous post. very interesting imo

Your post is not worth a penny, imo.
1. You do not provide any info on villain ( and it is vital to have one ). If he is a fish, he can wake up with a made hand on this board.
2. His range is not JJ-88... Of course it depends much on villain, but apart from JJ-88 he can have QQ, AK, AQs, other pairs...
3. Villain pot donks - it means he got something.
Raising with our hand is not ok. We should call.

Yohan or anyone else what do you think?

Raising OTF is not good. Villain will not donk with air very often. Villain calls our raise and bets pot again OTT. Now it should be clear that villain most likely has better hand than one pair. We have 9 outs max imo -> 20% equity and we need 27% to call. I think we should call flop and fold turn if we don't have the odds to call again.

I think moving in directly is superior to raising small. Better yet, I believe, is simply calling. The rationale for this is that you have to make a string of assumptions about your opponent, and what he is actually holding in order for a small raise to have the desired effect.

The string of assumptions does not actually add up. What if he checks turn after your call (for whatever reason) and you bet and pick up the pot with K high? This is not a bad result with K high vs UTG open raise/donk. This is not the only objection I have.

Others have said this; when a player donks, he has something - NL2 or NL5000 - same thing. There is equity behind the donk, and the thought behind the donk is to extract money, presumably more money than a check-raise would yield (in his view) or else he wouldn't donk. It is a completely a different issue that donking is "out of fashion", and players automatically label the donker a fish because "only fish donks". The reaction against a donk is then that the assumed fish has nothing. Result: Fish wins big pot (and I am not referring to this particular hand) and fish is exploiting player, not player exploiting fish.

I showed a proof that if he has 88-JJ or equivalent my play is better (based on the assumptions I made, which were probably correct given that he had 75o), and you challenge the assumption that he has as weak as 88-JJ even though he had 75o. Your entire argument is based on a joke read that the player is strong here and he's demonstrably not. Show me some hands from your own database where player donks pot with nuts. It doesn't happen and if you say it does I don't believe you, so show me the receipts.