Sb is 40/27. 27% agg, 17% donk, 31% sd in 300 hands
MP is 76/4
Btn is 43/7

Standard flop call? Still standard with 9765?

If I call fop, turn is a brick and we're hu, he jams, we...

guess you gotta fold both flop and turn. a bit nitty imo but he still donks in to 4ppl. flop call is fine imo if not so many behind but 2 remaining to act is a bit ****ty..

Why do we have to fold??

Don't think I fold flop, maybe turn vs shove.

There are four players in the pot and two players still to act after you.

Villain probably has some goods betting into three players, so you are either inches ahead or miles behind. This is a very clear fold.

i fold flop

+1

The two players still to act are pretty loose so the chances of playing the turn hu are slim and ott you are still at best hoping for him to check.

agree to fold. (although i hate folding)
in addition to everything that's been said, you block villains semi-bluffing range, which pretty much consists of AKQx (i doubt pretty much anyone would lead a set there a lot)

as i said and a few after me. still 2 ppl left to act and we can be drawing dead.
if we were only 2 in the pot its totally different. if we call we may have a chance to bluff with blockers but the pot will be too big for him to fold for that so we cant count in on that. the only way to be happy continuing with the hand is call and get folds after you, then he shuts down his betting with his own QQblockers or something. but its a guessing game. it's hard to believe he doesnt has it when donking in to 3ppl on a board that certainly hits someone.
i'd say fold is fine otf and move on

i do think there is a little value to having a 2nfd and we get in a lot of profitable spots on a K turn, but not enough.

If you can somehow gather that the better does not have straight as he never bet pot then you need to count the Q9 in the other two ranges and compare the lieklyhood vs the pot odds to with small raise.. certain players mostly pot or close to pot a straight here into 4 opponents. I prefer raise over call to attempt to eliminate split pots.

I work out as each player has 8.5% each of having Q9 straight to bet after us.

SO. Assuming a hypothetical read on SB as not having Q9 for not potting its easy to beat 18% + redraw with a raise.... Maybe we can even shove and still show profit

I think you are wrong MFN.

First off, I dont think we can assign that hypothetical read 100% that SB doesnt have Q9. I'd even say he must have it 20%+ of the time?!

But even if we had that read 100% locked. im guessing that some % of the time (maybe your number 8,5% is right) we will be having maximum 20-22% or something if we shove into Q9. and we arnt even folding out everyone everytime they doesnt have Q9. We are only just ahead of AKQ with no bfds etc...

I dont know the maths but if we could assume 100% sure that SB doesnt have it and players behind only call/shove when having Q9 and folding everything else, we might show profit +$5 in EV

I agree its a fold. Just thought some rationale would be good. Def folding

You can if SB is polarised to potting the nuts, i.e you have noticed he always pots the nuts and he overbets/donks weaker equities to some fractional amount like clockwork it deffo happens.

People play SB in pretty standard uniform ways I notice, like the variance in BTN play compared to SB is huge, fish rarely mix up or balance their SB strategy. You know its flop nuts better pot or CR pot... have marginal strength bet half pot or CC. Standard manualised brains.


It would be a raise fold to play the pot vs the bettor or take it down right there.. and we would have alot less than 20% vs better straight I'm reckoning. The problem is people making incorrect shoves which are actually correct. I'm pointing out there are potential meta scenarios you can raise in this spot, a hypothetical lock meaning raise is deffo profitable-When it so happens that we are ahead of SB or splitting - it automatically reduces the action - lowering the 8.5% which I already made slightly generous - due to blocker weightings. So it may be like 7.2. Anyway sizings are plenty easy to beat this and we have good equity vs everything but Q9 in SBs range... When we raise we kind of assume BTN is only continuing with Q9 - players will be worried bout reshove. This play is certainly thin without redraw though.


Nah the profit is pretty big, say you size to be right 40% of the time there is 23% profit pre redraw there so its gonna be >0, its a big cluster **** to think about tbh - i.e if say last but one to act is total spazz you can bluff profitably but then price yourself in to call off.

SOMETIMES YO SOMETIMES THATS ALL NOT SAYING RAISE AS STD

edit: JUst noticed hero is 50bb thouht he was 100 so not raise folding too much...

you give me headache when writing like this
but i answer points i understood...

- I agree with most common SB-plays are pot or c-r with the nuts but we dont have any kind of read for that now.

- we have no raise/fold option imo
- ppl will not fold AKQ, not BTN either,... (which we have like 60% vs if they have no bdfd)
- and some wont even fold QK+bdfd or a set 50bb deep,

- we have 21% vs naked Q9, but obv a lot less vs Q9 + KA/bdfd/top2 etc..


all in all I think you only can raise(shove) profitably if you have good meta game reading skills here, or good reads generally, or really nitty opponents or something.
but im no good at this theory/math

Pretty clearly stated in original post suggesting raise fold and several times that it was conditional.

Yes I thought 100bb in whcih case raise fold is certainly viable, 50bb then a raise fold is certainly exceptional.

I find this hard to believe but think I'm maybe confused with how our pot ownership works with split pots. Like say 10% of the time we split does this give us 5% equity or 10%? Might aswell look PPT.

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation

7,880,200 trials (Exhaustive)

board: jt8

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
Kh9hKc7s	18.78%	1,421,126	117,909
q9**	81.22%	6,341,165	117,909

18,7 unweighted

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation

3,287,380 trials (Exhaustive)

board: jt8

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
Kh9hKc7s	17.32%	542,189	54,410
q9**:40%!aa**	82.68%	2,690,781	54,410

17.3 weighted somewhat, I think you can take off another ~ 0.8 giving like 16.5% - which ain't actually DAT BAD (50bb)

ye i maybe missed out to understand everything from ur posts. I know it was conditional but i just ment that for this problem i dont think we can exclude SB has nuts OTF, and its hard to say how often he has it and will he ever fold when he bet out like that?!

well I was only trying to say that we had max 21% vs Q9(45dd) or some hand like that... when we never split pot, hitting the Q. ur numbers is more probable if they have some hand selection, like Q9K or whatever connected cards are more probable so we have obv less than 21% in most cases.

conclusion for me is still that i wudnt raise and i think its hard to give this problem a good answer mathematically due to so many factors. But i can see your point raising is intresting tho'

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation

820 trials (Exhaustive)

board: jt8

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
Kh9hKc7s	21.71%	175	6
qd9d4d5d	78.29%	639	6

Ok I see you are correct, by naked you mean pretty much a holdem hand, I interpret naked as just blank/random sidecards.. My bad.

yep, i ment like whatever cards that cant improve... but its more likely to have at least one backdoor since his hand should be somewhat connected, so Q9xx simulation is probably more accurate in this case anyway

An average is always more accurate than an absolute bottom of something. Using an absolute bottom of a specific range as a reference is mostly redundant past interest but I have just learned some places where I might have some assessment leakage. This certain depth in a potential weight I don't ask too much when playing. How much is the bottom worth.... I automatically look at an average - maybe there are tells as to the bottom I don't even know because I don't even know how it impacts my game- What change occurs when you have the bottom Q9 to the top... I would say I want more fold equity with the bottom which has impacts on a i.e POT:CR ratio