+1

if you're pretty sure it's gonna go off 5way you can call pretty liberally with suited cards too, stuff like 54s and T7s would be on the bottom end of the range of hands i'm playing here

By the way, it's weird to say we are "hoping" to get implied odds and that's wrong.

You are always "hoping" in poker. When you raise KK, you are hoping someone else doesn't have AA. Obviously, they usually don't.

The point is there's good math behind DougL's "hope". In a tighter game, or a more aggressive game, the math could be different. But so long as a reasonably high percentage of the time we are seeing this flop 5 ways for 2 bets, the implied odds are not "hope"; they are there.

I still think you're fighting this, he thinks at least the blinds are calling. He's hoping for many more. It isn't an up to 4 way pot. That's the difference between being in MP and OTB. In the distribution of things that could happen, we often get 4 or better. You see 4 as a rare top end, and I see it as disappointing to get only 4. That's a loose/passive game. He said at least the blinds would call.
I'll try hard not to be snarky here. Maybe I'm wrong for seeing this as another little dig.

Have you ever been a reg at a casino, played 20-30 hours a month for years? One of the things you get as a live player is the ability to get the feel for a game. No idea if the OP has it. However, you can sit UTG and know that 4/5 of the time, the pot will be 6-8 ways for 1 bet. You've been sitting here for hours. The monkey in the box is barely getting out 15 hands in a down. You have nothing but time to observe. In some live games you don't need years, 10 minutes after you sit down you know the score is that every pot is going be...

While I agree you don't know for 100% sure, you can know pretty darned well that cold calling 22 UTG+1 is correct because everyone is still playing 80% of their hands for the raise. Sure, they might all get 73o and fold. However, your educated guess is based on solid information. To throw up your hands and say, "we're OOP, so we can't know" is the same thing as saying the Monte Hall paradox is 50/50.

In other games, you know that you can't know. In most 20/40 games, pots aren't like this. So, because you don't have information you have to fold. I've played in 50/100 games where the majority of pots were 6 ways for 3 bets. If you enter a pot, you'd better have a hand that loves that situation. Makes AJo UTG not a treasured holding...
I assume this is sarcasm. It is fine to question the OP. You just have to do so clearly, as in "I don't think you're right about the game because no game is ever like the one you described". If you make plays based on other assumptions, it kills the conversation in the thread.

Analyzing hands isn't mostly about figuring the worst case situation. It is about looking at the most common one.

No, not fighting this. I just think this post ... is confusing in it's layout or the poster may be confused. That doesn't really matter I suppose as things should be taken literally in this forum.

No Doug, this is not sarcasm. I failed to respond clearly. I failed to take OP's post to the letter. I think it is an obvious call if both blinds are 100%. I'm not sure that was his intention as it's a fairly mundane preflop question adequately covered in most texts on the subject. Yes, I've seen players like this in the blinds. No, I would never respond to this thread if I actually thought the question was, "should I call 2 cold getting AT LEAST 4 to 1."

what if its 90%?
80%?

Kit, do you mean 90% as both? or 90% per blind?

As a guess I would say you mean % per player. If that be the case then I would measure as such:
5 bet in pot + .9*1 + .9*2 = 7.7
7.7 to 2 (3.85 to 1)
Still probably close enough if the 3 players to act are only 20% per player then there's another 2*.2*3 = 1.2 (thus 8.9 to 2 (4.45 to 1))

So 90% looks like a play.

5 + .8 + 1.6 = 7.4 to 2
+ 1.2 = 8.6 to 2 (4.3 to 1)
80% is essentially the same... and depending on how close to 5 to 1 you care to get, it may be more important to have an idea about how often one of the 3 behind will call. I think if they are only calling 20% then even a 100% blind call is going to be 9.2 to 2.

So really, with 5 players 'left to act' you need them to each have an average of 40% to call per player because 2*.4 = .8 and .8 *5 = 4 giving 9 to 2 if the pot is 5 sb.

ty kit, nh.

+1.

Here's an interesting situation.

I have JdTs in the small blind. There is a raise utg and four people call. I call. The sb calls and the bb 3b. Its 4b and then capped. We all call.

Should I not be in this pot?

I'm not sure what this has to do with the first hand. I think you might want to edit your second hand here, I assume you're in the SB and cool called?

It is called "getting in on the installment plan". When you make the first call, you have to factor in the chances of this happening when looking at the value of calling. If the BB is a spewtard who loves to pump it up and UTG is only opening hands he'd be happy to 4 bet, your initial call could be bad. You'd have to consider the value of JTo with bad position and good relative position. If the BB rarely raises then you got unlucky.

The fact that you got stuck here isn't really the question. It is all about the quality of the decision that got you here. You didn't really post any of that.

Yeah, it's really no different than a much simpler situation we see all the time:

We are on the button with K8o. It folds to us. There are huge nits in the blinds. We raise to steal. It folds to the BB, who 3-bets. We obviously have to call getting 5 1/2 to 1.

Now, when this happens, we're way behind. We've just put 3 bets into a pot that we're not going to win all that often. But it wasn't like we decided "let's get 3 bets in with K8o against a supertight range". Our raise was sound and our call of the third bet was sound, based on the information we were getting at the time.

Happens all the time in poker. The caveat is that in situations where you have very aggressive players acting after you, you sometimes want to adjust the range of hands you play if you find yourself getting it in on the installment plan with poor holdings too often.

I posted it BC it was kinda like ccing two cold in what was a mw pot.

The bb caught me totally off guard. He was a youngish white taggy ... not great tho...

Sounds standard. I like the term "instalment plan" lol

You're on the button in that second hand, right?

I'd like it a lot more if you were suited than not. With suited JT and a lot of passengers, I'm happy no matter how many bets go in. In fact, if I had a read that the big blind would string along for any number of bets, I might consider 3-betting suited JT on the button with a bunch of callers between me and the opener.

But offsuit it's a trouble hand. I'm a lot less tempted to play it, even in this spot.

And for the 59th post itt,

Also, there are hands that even the loosest sb will toss when he has to call 1.5 bets.

Why do we need to be getting paid off 10 to 1 if flopping a set is 7.5 to 1 against?