$4/8, kill pot. Lady who won last two pots posts the $8 dollar kill. Two guys limp. I have KJ of diamonds on the button. I raise to 16. Lady calls, two limpers call. Flop QT4 rainbow. All check to me, and I bet. Lady calls. One of the limpers calls, other limper folds. Turn 6. They both check. I considered taking a free card, but I bet instead. Lady calls, the limper folds. River King. She checks, I bet, she calls.

The street I am unsure of is the turn. How many check behind here? I thought with 3 opponents on the flop and 2 cards to come, betting the flop was for value. Not so sure about the turn. I think with only one card to come and two opponents, betting an OESD here isn't really for value, but it could get one of the limpers to fold something like middle pair, which would be to my benefit if I miss on the river. I think the chances of both of them folding are optimistic at best.

Everybody always assumes you have AK. You have somewhere between 8 and 14 outs, which is 16-28% equity, against a pair.

Check.

Interesting. I take it you'd bet the turn if it was just one opponent vs. two.

I check the turn. As played, I bet the river. Think betting is far better than check-calling river.

Lady had J9, for low open ender. The king on the river made her the straight. For some reason she did not check-raise me, but only called after I bet.

I think my bet on the turn could have made the third player fold middle or bottom pair, although I don't know. If so and the king hadn't come, that might have won me the pot, as king-high would have been good. But I realize this isn't usually the case. The pot was pretty big, so wondered if betting again in an effort to get a low pair to fold, is a viable reason to take another shot at the turn when it's three handed. Some of these loose passive opponents will call the flop with almost anything, and then muck on the turn if you "show you are really serious" by betting again. Another interesting decision would have been what to do on the river, if I still end up with K-high.

As is the case with all things in poker, it depends. Probably 90% of players in low stakes are classified as loose-passives, which means they simply don't fold often enough. Good news for us, is they also don't bet often enough when they should, which means we can realize our draws and reach showdown more cheaply when we choose.

If you bet the turn and are trying to fold out better, don't expect these kinds of players to fold Qx/Tx on this board. Even 4x calls a lot, because they put you on A-high, or just want to see the river and spike a 4. The range I would target with a bet would specifically be A-high (no draw), and small pp's. AK/AJ isn't folding. We also can value bet our king high against some weaker hands, such as J9 and any other cheese our opponent's might peel with (e.g. 65s).

So if you think your opponent will peel one but not two with a large enough range, a turn bet as merit. Against two opponents, you're just not going to get that to happen often enough.

In some situations, if you are instead first to act with 1 or 2 players to act behind you, I might bet, with the reason that they'll (correctly) value bet with their bottom/mid pair when checked to, so I only gain fold equity. This depends on how often they check behind, or defer to raising the turn, etc.

Excellent points; thank you. I think expecting both of them to fold on the turn was not very realistic. As it was I just got lucky that the only one that stuck around had a worse hand (J9), although that changed when the K hit. I think if there had only been only one opponent on the turn then betting would have been mandatory. With two people hanging in there I should have checked.

I'd check the river unless you have evidence she will fold a six but can't fault a bet.

I also check turn but physical tells help a lot.

Jesse, I think you must have misread something. Hero has top pair on the river.

Kids who don't read good

Obviously bet river lol.