Well, I'm happy to be the one, for once, who views this a bit simplistically (I think a true EV calculation of possible holdings is so difficult as to make it completely impractical at the table).

Basically, if he's bluffy, as he is, I call. If he's not, I fold. He's bluffy, so I think your hand is good to go. I make the call against that player.

Honestly, given my observations concerning the psychology of this kind of player, I don't think he moves in here on KQ or TT, and, aside from the fact that I doubt he's minimum raising AA or JJ, those two hands are extremely unlikely given your own holdings and the board. If he does beat you, I think he'll turn over TT rather than KQ, but I'll be interested in hearing the results...

I'd call it almost everytime.

Results....

He had the worse possible hand that I thought he might hold to my cards TT which I knew was possible but I did have outs.

Turn as the A, and river the T, one good suck out deserves another, but this was a pretty massive pot for .25/.50 in excess of 120 or so. I'm pretty happy with the way I played it and the way I thougth my way thru to my incorrect decision. One of the weird things that happened after reading Harrington on Hold'em, is that I rarely tilt due to losing this kind of big pot, if my logic wasn't completely flawed in making my decision. I didn't think he was bluffing at any point that he actually held something just figured that I had to be ahead enough times with sucking out myself enough make it profitable. I didn't count on the river one outer though, and all the money would have went in at the turn anyways.