Super lag game. At least two better than average players. One of them is just having fun gambling it up. He's raising and re-raising and talking up a storm. But he knows what he's doing and doesn't care. I think he's a NL player because he keeps saying "what? this is limit". And he likes to c/r. The other is playing to win. Another lady is a 8/16 player. She's quiet and seems loose, but I think she knows exactly what's she's doing but she may just be a fish. Another guy is your typical fish who thinks he's good because he can lag it up and get lucky. He's re-raising with speculative hands (any suited connector). All these players are in the hand + 1 or 2 others.

I have 66 (no heart) in LP. There's no raise pf which is rare. We go to the flop 6 handed.

[6 sb]
2 4 5

ep bets, call, the good player playing to win raises, call, action on me.

[12 sb so far] and it's a 2 sb to me. I've only invested 1 sb thus far.

I have a gutter and the smallest over pair. My 6's block a higher straight if the 3 comes but 6 7 is possible. Aces will pay me off if I get lucky and make the straight. It's likely someone is on a heart draw - so 3 is a bad card. A 6 is also a bad card imo. What's my plan?

Turn is off-suit 9.

River is 5.

Raise pre

3 bet the flop

Why is there no raise pre when you hold 66?

I dont think 66 is a must raise pf .

Winning with pair of 6 is pretty hard 4 way plus unless we hit a set which kinda of happened pretty rarely .

You have to 3 bet the flop imo , you have the chance to thin the field and you have a hand that should be in the top of your calling range pf with an overpair + gutshot .

It's worrisome that you mention how much you have invested in the pot. Can you elaborate why you care about that?

I'm also worried I don't see you say something like "i have the best hand quite a bit, this pot is starting to get big"

I would just call preflop after a couple limpers.

Flop it probably depends on which one of this colorful characters bet and which one raised.

NIT TIME!

I just call pre w/ small pairs multi-way and what I want is to hit my set. Sometimes you get a flop like that and wonder what to do. What I do, facing that action, is to fold bec it's nothing but trouble. Players at that stake limp w/ hands like 10-10 to make sure there are no over cards of the flop before they get froggy which makes 6-6 really iffy when it's 2-bets to you and the board's draw heavy.

'I played to hit a set, I didn't hit a set, there's too much action, and my draw sucks, I fold.' That's my motto.

Your draw is weak, but you have the best hand quite often. Doesn't that count for something without a strong read on who raised (he plays to win)? In your hypothetical TT situation, we have 6 outs to beat an overpair, getting about 5:1 in position, not ideal but not bad considering we have no evidence to confirm this TT hypothesis (how about A5, 56, FD, 53, 43, 67)

Giving up in this spot without a strong read is awful poker. Being uncomfortable isn't a good enough reason to fold.

When I wrote the post I wasn't sure about including that. But I did. I think it's relevant because the table is lag. How much more should I be willing to put into this pot? I've got players left to act for the first time behind and players behind them that will act for the second time. I may have the best hand now, but it's super vulnerable with two cards to come. Pretty much any card could beat me. I don't see any safe card except an off-suit 3. I think that's the essence of reverse implied odds, right?

Why am I not saying something like "i have the best hand quite a bit, this pot is starting to get big"? Because I folded. I feel like a heel after reading the replies. But in my own defense I'm also not seeing anything that's constitutes a plan in the replies. And if there's no contingency plan, folding may be the best choice imo. What card comes on the turn and/or river that isn't an off-suit 3 and you like your hand? In descending order of like I guess it would be 7 8 9 10 no and the 10 is questionable. That makes 12 to 15 good cards. The rest (more than 2/3 of the stub) are bad and who knows what the action will be (the table is lag)?



I'd still love to hear a plan that I can get behind.

In order to make an informed decision on the flop we need to know: what RANGE of hands can the bettor and raiser have. You've been at the table for a while, so only you can tell us that. Otherwise we need to speculate.

A couple of tangential points:

Unless you have a set, any time when there's a flush draw you'll lose over 33% of the time by the river, so do you fold all flops that aren't rainbow?

When you hold AA pre flop in a 9 way pot, why do you raise if you aren't winning even 30% of the time? What are your safe flops in that situation?

Good point. May be I'm asking for too much OR for the impossible. I am the only one who was sitting there.

Many times there's 3 [or even 4] of a suit on board and nobody has a flush. It's not sane to assume there's always a flush draw out against you. But in these lag games it's more likely - especially if the pot is multi-way and nobody raised pf - I think lag players limp frequently with any two suited. Even tight low limit players limp with 95 suited - incorrectly imo, but they do it.

When I hold AA in a 9 way pot I'm putting ~11% of the money in the pot and I win ~30% of the time. Easy raise, re-raise, shove if I can. There are more safe flops than dangerous ones. Safe is K 8 2 rainbow. Danger is 9 10 J monotone and I don't have that suit. Folding AA post flop is in my bag of tricks.

Honestly, I'm just not sure if I misplayed the hand in the OP. It was sickening to watch the turn and river get checked through and then seeing that I folded the winner. But that's results oriented. Is Howard Beale really that nitty? Or is he advocating winning poker? Reverse implied odds and laggy game must factor in somewhere, right?

Sorry to be a nag, but you haven't answered what RANGE of hands you put the bettor and raiser on. This is what we use to make the flop decision.

My point about the AA is that when the flop comes KT7ss, there's a bet and a raise in a 6+ way pot you still need to dodge half the deck but that's not enough reason to fold. You need to put people on ranges, look at your equity and make a decision based on that.

By the way, this is not NL. When we are ahead and get sucked out on the river, we lose only ONE bet. When you win, you win the SIX+ bets in the middle.

Not a nag at all. I appreciate your input. I find it valuable.

Ranges are tough for me - especially in lag games. But ranges are key.

The bettor could have a pair better than mine. Or hit any part of the board with a strong draw. Ax hearts. A pair and a 3. Two pair. This game was lag and pf was limped so anything is possible.

The raiser I had identified as a good competent player. He definitely has something with equity. He could have a set or a pair with a strong draw. I doubt he has an over pair because he would have raised pf. But I suppose 77 or 88 is possible.

The guy after the raiser called. That strongly correlates with a strong draw but not a made hand.

As it turned out -

The raiser had a pair, inside straight draw to a steel wheel, nut flush draw, and an over card.

The guy who called the raise had a OESD, 2nd nut flush draw and an over card.
I likely re-raise in this spot. I definitely re-raise if I can put 3 bet pressure on a good number of opponents. I'm not sure if people who have already bet or called a bet will fold to 2 bet pressure when it comes back around to them. I have think I'm in the lead with significant equity. I do want to thin the field, but if I don't thin the field, given my equity, I don't mind that much. This situation makes more money than it loses. But, it does lose a proportion of times that is not insignificant imo.
Yes, but this is a lag game and multi-way. 2, 3, or 4 bets can go in the middle on the flop, turn, and river.

I recommend you familiarize yourself with an equity calculator and input these ranges to see what your equity is. Then do the same with the AA case just for comparison. When behind, we are in worse shape with AA and we don't even fear overcards!

Play around with the ranges, add/remove 77-88 from their ranges, take them out, then sets, etc. Observe how you equity changes in all cases.

After getting your equity estimate, if close then consider that being in position allows us to see what happens on the turn. We aren't commited to showdown this hand, turn action is normally more straight forward, but if all call the flop we are betting safe turns if checked to!

The reason ranges are important is that if the raiser is an old nit while range is sets+ we have an easy fold. On the other side of the spectrum, folding this hand with typical online aggression at the lower limits may be suicide poker.

At the end of the day, the important thing is to do the homework with Equilab or equivalent app.

(Equity, Win, Tie)
Player 1: 8.798% 8.051% 2.006% {AcAs, AdAs, AdAc}
Player 2: 14.99% 13.77% 2.975% {88-77, 55-22, AhTh-Ah2h, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, 52o+, 42o+, 32o}
Player 3: 48.00% 47.56% 1.396% {55-44, 22, Ah6h, Ah4h}
Player 4: 12.99% 12.14% 2.238% {Ah3h, KJs, Kh3h, QTs, QhJh, Qh3h, J9s, JhTh, T8s, Th9h, 97s, 9h8h, 86s, 8h7h, 75s, 7h6h, 64s, 6h5h, 53s, 5h4h, 42s, 4h3h, 3h2h}
Player 5: 7.613% 6.522% 2.738% [??]
Player 6: 7.605% 6.512% 2.741% [??]

Board: [2h 4d 5h ? ?]
Deal To: River
Dead Cards: {}

Monte Carlo Simulation: 8145229 trials

------------------------------------------

(Equity, Win, Tie)
Player 1: 11.38% 9.807% 3.354% {6c6s, 6d6s, 6d6c}
Player 2: 15.31% 14.18% 2.451% {88-77, 55-22, AhTh-Ah2h, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, 52o+, 42o+, 32o}
Player 3: 47.74% 47.25% 1.149% {55-44, 22, Ah6h, Ah4h}
Player 4: 12.63% 11.74% 1.989% {Ah3h, KJs, Kh3h, QTs, QhJh, Qh3h, J9s, JhTh, T8s, Th9h, 97s, 9h8h, 86s, 8h7h, 75s, 7h6h, 64s, 6h5h, 53s, 5h4h, 42s, 4h3h, 3h2h}
Player 5: 6.464% 5.476% 2.191% [??]
Player 6: 6.482% 5.494% 2.192% [??]

Board: [2h 4d 5h ? ?]
Deal To: River
Dead Cards: {}

Monte Carlo Simulation: 6595143 trials


66 do better than AA but that was expected. It seems like a fold on the flop was the right thing to do.

But I feel a little blind when I use the equity calculator. It's not that I don't know what they are and/or how to use them. But I don't know how to extract meaningful information from them. Sounds stupid - but I do feel a little lost.

It's sort of like I don't know what else to put in the flop raisers range. What else would he limp pf and then raise the flop with?

The range you have for the flop raiser is far, far too tight. Among other hands you should potentially include: 33; 43s; 53s; A5s (not just hearts); A4s (not just hearts); 32s; 67hh; 86hh; 64hh. He may also have other flush draws. It's hard to construct a range because we have no idea where he limped from, but your stove shows you have poor equity because you gave the flop raiser an excessively strong range. Try building a stronger range and seeing what happens.

^ If he is a solid player as OP seems to think, he should not have all those low suited connectors you mention.

It's a 4/8 game and I wouldn't put it past even a "decent" player to overlimp a bunch of weak stuff after multiple limpers in middle position. And the better he is, the more likely he is to raise any pair on the flop.

Ha! So what if he's got the best hand right now, at which we are guessing in the first place. He's facing 2-bets for no particular reason? Meanwhile he's got to fade 90% or more of the deck on the next two streets. What do you think a safe turn card is in this spot? And we don't even know if it gets 3-bet behind us. He missed his set and flopped a little something w/ which he MIGHT continue and that's a problem that comes up all of the time. I'VE GOT SOMETHING! HOW CAN I FOLD!
Well, if you have to guess in the first place there's the old saying 'When in doubt, go out.'

(Equity, Win, Tie)
Player 1: 11.24% 9.753% 3.130% {6c6s, 6d6s, 6d6c}
Player 2: 18.77% 17.38% 3.038% {88-77, 55-22, AhTh-Ah2h, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, 52o+, 42o+, 32o}
Player 3: 21.41% 19.91% 3.273% {55-44, 22, A5s-A4s, A2s, Ah6h, 8h6h, 7h6h, 65s, 6h4h, 53s+, 42s+, 32s}
Player 4: 33.52% 32.31% 2.657% {Ah3h, Kh3h, QhTh+, Qh3h, Jh9h+, Th8h+, 9h7h+, 8h6h+, 7h5h+, 6h4h+, 5h3h+, 4h2h+, 3h2h}
Player 5: 7.523% 6.678% 1.898% [??]
Player 6: 7.534% 6.687% 1.903% [??]

Board: [2h 4d 5h ? ?]
Deal To: River
Dead Cards: {}

Monte Carlo Simulation: 23002022 trials

In the above

Player 1 is me.
Player 2 is the bettor.
Player 3 is the raiser
Player 4 called the raise
players 5 and 6 are random

The action went bettor, random caller, raiser, called the raise, me, 1 or two randoms behind me.

I like these ranges. I like my fold. You all are awesome. pokerCruncher is awesome.

A few comments regarding the ranges: this is a starting point, now you can adjust them a bit and see how your equity changes:

Bad players can have all sorts of offsuit hands here.

Why is the guy who plays well to win holding 86s, 76s, 54s, 23s? He's more likely to have 33 than those hands.

Why can't the original gambler bettor have A5 or 56?

The caller can have a lot more hands than just monster flush draws. What happens if he's calling with all pairs with an A? Do some bad players call any pair with a high heart?

How much equity would you like to have in this spot to continue? How far are we from it? We are on the BTN getting 6:1 if original bettor calls and 7,8:1 in the unlikely scenario the blinds call (they both checked already)

It's important to differentiate the two cases. The blinds' equity will be distributed among the 4 players if they fold, so even with your original pessimistic ranges you are probably approaching 14%

Yes, but doesn't tightening their ranges reduce my variance? Of course, at the expense of WR.

I gave him 55-44, 22, A5s-A4s, A2s, Ah6h, 8h6h, 7h6h, 65s, 6h4h, 53s+, 42s+, 32s

33 is a weak made hand and still on a vulnerable draw. I don't see him raising. I gave him hands that I thought were raise worthy from him. Not 86s but 86h and not 76s but 76h (both no hand, strong draw). Granted 33 is better than 32s.

He could. I tried some adjustments. They didn't impact my equity. The equity changed amongst them.


Yeah, you're right. I should give him some weaker stuff I guess. But he should have strong hands/draws imo.

It's not so much my equity but the reverse implied odds in this case. I just don't know how many bets I'm going to have to call. Had I known this was the last 2 bets I'd have to put in the pot, I would have called. If I 3!, I'm obligating myself to call another if it's capped (4 is a cap at this casino).

I removed the randoms and my equity went up to 16.3% (~1/6). 4 players now. ~24 small bets (12 big bets) in the pot assuming all 3 opponents call my 3!. With that equity, I break even if I now have to put 6 more Big bets in the pot assuming they all put 6 more too. 6 * 6 = 36 and there's 36 Bigs Bets in the pot (6 * 4 + 12). But that's just too loose for me.

Thanks for your input on ranges and everything. Extremely helpful and eye opening. Like I said, I feel kind of dumb - but these range calcs are new to me. And hard! It adds a lot of overhead to thinking at game speed - but I think they'll prove invaluable.

Good analysis, these type of situations aren't trivial to analyze on the fly. As you do more of these you get a better grasp of where you are at in future situations.

With equity over 16% in this spot 4 ways, you don't need to 3bet, calling can also be considered since we have the BTN and act last on the turn when the draws will play more straight forward. It's certainly close between all options.

How are we looking if the caller had folded? I suspect the early comments missed there was a caller (i did at the time)

Not specific to this hand, but one more thing to consider in the future is that when we give extremely reasonable ranges to others, your equity estimate is a lower bound. As you are probably well aware of, people will blow your mind often at showdown with their holdings. Because if this, when pots start to get big, we are in position, slightly +ev, we should consider continuing and fight for it (using what we consider the best plan for the situation)

The flipside of this is to consider folding in a smallish pot, oop, when in a slightly -ev to neutral spot, where we have concrete reasons to believe we are going to make big mistakes in the big streets when behind.

All good stuff itt. Limping is fine ...grit your teeth and three bet the flop. I also don't understand why only having invested x amount up to this point matters at all. Don't post results in the op.