6/12

4 limps, I raise AA, BB 3's, all call, I cap. Pot: 23.33sb

Flop: 9 6 3 (rainbow)
I bet, BB raises, 3 calls, I 3!, BB calls, rest call.

Turn: Q
I bet, all call.

River: 9
I check, BB bets, 2 calls, I raise.

My thoughts: I checked river for fear of there being a 9 out of 4 players, and that I couldn't find myself bet/folding a 20+ BB pot. For BB, I think checking loses value from JJ/TT a large % of the time (if not 100%) and potentially more hands (such as KK that scare-checks). The other players after BB are pretty passive, so they won't bet worse hands that often when it's checked to them.

The hands I'm targetting for value on the river is BB's near-entire range, Qx (held by other players), and some wtf-calls with stuff like 88-77/A6. Is this enough to justify a bet?

As played, thoughts on the c/raise?

FWIW, I typically bet/call this river and was honestly nervous with this ~25BB pot.

The larger the pot the more you should keep things simple. Checking here leaves you open to making a large mistake. It will almost never go raise-3 with worse hands on the river, but once you show weakness it can easily go bet-raise. You will also, as you said, miss value from a number of hands.

FPS, imo.

I'd think being nervous would cause you to make the "typical" play. Were you willing to call two bets back to you? (In case one of the passive players gets jiggy and decides to rep a 9 in this huge pot.)

leo - in my 6/12 game, I've yet to be bluff-raised in a protected pot by our garden-variety LP. That, or I haven't caught them yet. :/ Bet-call > check-eval >>>>>> c/f?

I do think there are some spots in my game where check/call may net more profit, though I am not vouching for that here necessarily. (And not to induce bluffs, but to keep people's calling ranges wider having shown weakness.) Here, for instance (and completely results oriented), with me checking and BB betting the river, the field is much more likely to call with their medium strength hands (88-77/A6/Qx) than to overcall had I bet and BB called.

Is it wrong to say that, on the turn with 5 people calling, we need to mathematically be ahead of 66% of the field combined to make bet/calling the river correct? This means that, if 5 people have 17 or more outs, I should be c/cing river?

The problem here, my bovine friend, is that you're playing a m-way pot with five opponents otr and you're oop. Your money goes in better when you bet, than when you call against passive opponents- especially if one of them raises.

Your river c/r is spew. You were given the opportunity to overcall and should have seized it.*

*ETA: Unless you were planning to r/f, which would have been an even worse plan.

River is horrific. Cry call and expect to lose to a 9 almost every time.

Just bet the river, as others have said.

As played though, river is a pretty easy C/R for value given the action back to you. We lose to like 1-2 combo's (maybe) of A9 from BB. One of the callers could have a 9, but its unlikely. Ton of value in a C/R. I think you got lucky the action went this way once you checked, but I don't agree that river is a crying call.

Just noticed that bb 3 bet pf which makes him less likely to have a 9 but I wouldn't rule it out entirely.

BB ain't got a 9... at least not in that game.

FYP first.

If that river is 3-bet, it's waaaaay closer to a fold than a crying call.

Umm, the river was not 3-bet? I assumed your first post was arguing the we should just over call the initial bet on the river once we checked?

I fail to see how we don't have the best hand on the river once we check and the action rolls out like this. I think your assumption that the other two callers are likely to have a 9 is just too pessimistic.

+1 to betting and +1 to r/f being a distant second