1/2 NL $40 fixed buy-in. I'm the short stack ($50 in front of me). 7 players to the flop but only three opponents and myself make it past the flop. One is clearly a newbie. One I have almost no experience with and the other I thought was an ABC player - but I did see him bet on the flop from the blinds with the nut flush draw and an over card - that surprised me.

So I have 35 in the SB. EP raises to 4. 7 to the flop.

2 4 7 ($28)

I check. I want to see how the action develops. I could easily get blown off my draw by aggression. I'd rather not start building a pot only to fold to a raise/re-raise. BB bets 5. Newb calls. ABC calls. I call.

4 to the turn

2 4 7 A ($48)

I bet 12. Newb calls. ABC calls.

3 see the river.

2 4 7 A Q ($84)

I ?

The real questions I have are on the turn and river --

Turn I elected to bet. Upon review I think my sizing was horrible. Not that any of these players pay attention to their odds but I should be taking advantage of that and making them call with bad odds and not giving them immediate odds to call. May be I should have shoved and may be I should have check raised ai? If the ace hits either them, they'll probably bet. But if they're both on a draw, it will probably check through. The obvious draw is a FD. Not so obvious would be A3 A5 56 A7. But I block most of those. I think all flopped two pairs would have bet bigger / raised on the flop

On the river should I bet/fold or check/call or check/fold? I think everyone sees the FD came in - even the newb. What could they have? Their ranges are incredibly wide.

All comments are welcome. And I already know the fixed $40 buy-in is a loser and is arguably not even real poker. I also know I suck - that's why I play the $40. But never-the-less at least I'm thinking.

Thanks ...

Folding pre if i'm taking the game seriously.

Jam turn.

C/f river as played. Someone prolly has a flush.

pf I'm getting better than 8 to 1. With implied odds I'm getting more. I'm calling extremely wide in this spot. Almost everything - easy call with 35s.

Can others chime in with this pf decision.

I agree - jam the turn although one could argue the A is likely in one of their hands so they'll probably bet and then I can c/r ai.

I don't think the action makes much sense. Neither of them can have a set or two pair and be on a flush draw. So, really flush draws are the only thing that makes sense in my mind.

I wish I could think better and not get so distracted by all the possibilities.

It's nice that you're getting good odds and it's an implied odds hand. However, you're far too short to be playing this. In addition, you're oop and your fd can easily be dominated when playing 16 ways.

turn's just an easy c/r. if you're going to donk, just jam.

Thanks. I don't want to come off facetious or flippant - but somehow I often do. Sorry.

If I'm deep stacked and my FD could easily be dominated when playing 16 ways, isn't that a reason to NEVER play 35s oop? It seems like you're suggesting a deep stack is necessary to play this hand. I think, or for me, FD's are one of the hardest to sniff out. You really have to be aware of card removal and player tendencies (betting and raising to protect when you're strong but vulnerable). Flushes are hard to make but boards often end up with a flush possible.

This was a 7 way pot and I was covered by most of the other players. 50*7 to 3 is great implied odds. Not that I expect to turn my $50 stack into $350 when I hit but the immediate odds of 25 to 3 plus the implied odds I thought justified a call.

I think a check on the turn could easily end up with a check through. Then a completed flush on the river sets up a great stealing opportunity for the in position player.

There was $48 in the pot when the turn came and action was on me. Betting $12 like I did gave opponents with a FD better than even money odds to call. I think I should have bet $20 (half my stack) on the turn with the intention of shoving ($21) on non rivers. Or may be I should have bet $25 with the intention of shoving ($16) on all rivers. Even betting $20 on the turn gives the in position player better than even money to call if the in between player calls. Even betting $25 gives the in position player just short of even money odds to call when the in between player calls. Now I think a turn shove was the way to go. I'd get called by sets, 2-pair, and overs that include an ace and shoving gives FD's improper odds to call.

All this writing and thinking really helps sort things out.

Thanks!

I'm just pointing out the multiple cons to playing the hand. You said 35s has implied odds and I'm saying you're not deep enough to have implied odds matter and even if you were deep enough, it's probably still a fold. Assuming you're 100bbs deep, you pretty much have to hit a straight or a flush to win because if you flop 2p, trips and get all-in, your equity is never going to be good as you'll be against a better 2p/better trips/set/combo draw the overwhelming majority of the time.

This math only works if you get all-in vs. everyone in the pot, have the best hand, and hold. It's very flawed. You're getting 49 (taking away your sb) to 3 against each player which is 16.33:1 and not nearly enough. When you're IP and with a hand like T8s and you're strictly looking at implied odds, you'd want 25:1. As a basic rule of thumb for implied odds, it's:
Pocket pairs: 10:1
Suited Connectors: 20:1
Suited One Gappers: 25:1

Of course I typed all that before reading your next sentence:
I think I addressed this enough above.

It could happen but it's a great card to bluff for the other players especially if they're on a draw. If that stealing opportunity comes for him, you make a decision on what to do then, and make the best one possible.

It seems like you realize now that you shouldn't give them even money on a call. You want to force your opponents to make mistakes, that's how we make money. Betting something like $20 is silly. The pot will be $108 and you'll have $21 left behind. When you're leaving so little in your stack compared to the size of the pot, you should shove. Even $12 is silly as you have an $84 pot with $29 left behind which is why a shove makes so much more sense.

Thank You! Everything you say makes sense and gives me better understanding and perspective.

I had seen the rule of thumb for pocket pairs, but I thought it was 12:1. No matter though as I think it's just a rule of thumb. 10:1 is just a small bit looser. And I assume we're looking at the call size to the effective stack size (biggest stack of all opponents in the hand constrained by our stack size).

I had never seen the rule of thumb for suited connectors and suited one gappers. Thanks for that. I fooled around a little in Poker Cruncher. 53s is a pretty big dog against any reasonable ranges. And only has slightly over 10% equity against 6 opponents with random hands.

I do still have a question. It's the sheer number of opponents that causes me to want to call in this situation. I see you say I'm getting 16:1 against each opponent individually. But If the hand ends with 2 or more opponents seeing and calling the river, doesn't that mean I'm getting 32:1 or more on the call. It seems reasonable to expect at least 2 opponents seeing showdown? Does this justify the call?

And since nobody else is chiming in here I assume everyone is in agreement with you. If anyone has a nuance to add, please chime in.

The reason the number's so high for SCs/SGs is because of the times that you're going to hit your hand and lose. imo (and I may be wrong, idk) your implied odds should be higher when you're expecting to showdown vs > 1 player. At least that's the way that I intuitively think of it. Also, please realize that I said calling T8s in position when saying 25:1. Here you're OOP with a much worse hand. It may still be a one gapper but it's also a lot less likely to hold up with two pair at sd and still makes those weaker flushes/trips.