KK - bat river call

I believe villain would have raised sets at some point before river. So, on the river he is left with AQ which is not calling and flushes mostly. And eventually some combo 88 or 66. I doubt he is turning set into bluff otr. You get 22% odds to call after he raises. Even if he turns occasionally some A♠::Qx: (3 combos in totall) into bluff on the river you don't have the odds to bluffcatch. So, otr the bet is debatable and fold after his raise is correct imo.

Odds aren't measured in percentages. There's obviously some article (or something) that uses this terminology because people around here often say things like "I have x% pot odds". This is a nonsense statement in English. Here the odds are 22.01:6.51 (he covers us). They are also not 6.51:22.01 as even many coaches would say. The latter would be six point fifty-one to twenty-two o-one which is upside down.

"Odds are most commonly expressed as ratios, but converting them to percentages will often make them easier to work with."

Then they aren't odds any more.

Not many hands that we beat will call your river bet. Flush is also possible. X/C would be safer.

Originally posted by YohanN7
Odds aren't measured in percentages.

Those odds can be converted to percentage. For me it is easier to understand and calculate with % and I see no reason why we couldn't measure odds in %.

Originally posted by YohanN7
Then they aren't odds any more.

Okay we can call them probabilities.. Same thing.

No (probabilities of what?), but required equity would be acceptable and even descriptive. The longer version would be required equity for calling of our hand versus villains range as perceived by us.

With xc we give villain a chance tobluff at us on river. I prefer xc.

The only hand you basically target here is KQ. A set OTF and OTT from villain wouldn't make much sense, since he would raise these for value and to protect against FDs. A set OTR he most likely would call that one off.
I would x/c this one as well since I would not fold a set of KK here.