Hello guys and gals,

I'm looking for feedback on a hand I played in a $1/$2 NL live game. We were playing 4-handed at this point.

To give you some context, players were limping and calling raises preflop quite light. Probably pretty typical of a standard $1/$2 game. The effective stack of this hand was my stack, with $273.

I look down at Qs Q♥ on the BTN. CO limps, I raise to $8, and everyone calls. 4-way to the flop.

Flop ($32): 9♥ 4♦ 4♣

Checks to me, I bet $10, fold, fold, CO raises to $35, I call.

Turn ($102): K♦

CO bets $80, I call.

River ($262): 4s

CO bets enough to put me all-in (~$150)

Hero: ???

Here was my general thinking:

My standard raise size over a limp in this game is $8. There is a reason for this that I will not get into. On the flop, I make a small bet, one that I would do with many backdoor draws and smaller pockets as well. Sometimes, I will bet medium-large ($20-$25) here though, but not on this occasion. Standard call versus the raise on the flop. The villain could have lots of backdoor draws and maybe could even be raising a 9 or lower pockets for protection.

On the turn, I begin to worry a bit. This is not to say that the villain has many Ks in his range, but it seems as if they are repping a K or better with their large sizing (Kx, 4x, or 99). However, I call thinking that QQ should not be giving up at this point seeing as there are some flush draws as well as some gutshots that would potentially play in the same fashion. It is also kind of nice to block some of the KQs combos, but obviously the meaning of this is likely close to negligible since I presume most villains would open-raise preflop. On the river, this is a bit of a weird spot. A third 4 appears on the board. Some questions pop up in my mind, the main one being: Does the villain recognize that they should greatly lower their bluffing frequency on this river since their combos containing a 4 are greatly reduced?

So my question is: How should have I played this hand?

Do you think $1/$2 opposition will rarely be check-raise triple barrelling as a bluff or do you think they will with an expanded range (including offsuit hands that are relatively junky)? Do you think the villain has quite a few Kx combos or practically none?

I notice when playing live I have trouble when facing aggression across multiple streets.

My hunch is that I should call flop and turn and let it go on the river. Also, I presume many would also opt for the larger sizing on the flop which is definitely very valid. I think using both sizings to some frequency with this hand makes quite a bit of sense.

What is your opinion on the hand in general?

Thanks for any input and I look forward on hearing it!

In general, if you find that your flop C-bets is getting raised alot (or more than "normal), its a good chance you are over C-betting. People are then likely recognizing that you are betting flop a whole lot and adjusting to that in some way. If you can handle that just fine, its no problem really- but since you are posting about it here i would guess it puts you in alot of tricky spots so i would consider toning it down.

Also i am not a fan of the one third C-bet sizing in live low stakes games. It simply doesnt accomplishes much, neither when you have value or a bluffing hand. Also it can lead to unwanted levelling wars that potenially can set you up for costly mistakes.

I used to think this way, but I disagree with it now. I've found versus most opponents, we can bet 1/3 for range on every texture. Just about 100% of the villains won't be able to profitably defend versus that sizing and we'll print.

This is correct HU of course, but doesn't typically apply 4-ways.

OP- our pot share is fairly low in a spot like this with an overpair, despite usually having the best hand vs. the field, because we don't have any 4x and all three V's could have that- especially live. So I think we can get away with checking all of our hands here and can always go for two streets on a brick run out.

AP turn seems like a fairly easy fold no?

I didn't read the HH closely. I just read Petrucci's comment. I was referring to HU. I'd fold turn, too. I don't have a problem with flop sizing, but we could also go larger because it's LLSNL.

Curious as to if you and others think a flop bet 4-ways is profitable here, because I'm not sure it is given rake considerations. I think we have to find a check here somewhere and flop seems best on a dry + rainbow texture like this where we don't have to protect against much.

Grunch from title alone: fold. OK, off to read post now.

I don't see why we wouldn't bet the flop. Every pocket pair and 9x is gonna call. I expect a lot of Ax to call too, versus that sizing. If an over to a 9 comes, we won't be able to get value from a lot of villains' 55-88 anymore.

Post grunch: OP, please don't include results, which includes your last action. I edited it out. Also, I see that the actions in your title are over 3 streets, whereas my assumption from the title was that it was one. Still a fold, imo.

You can not get into pre if you want, but I'll still note that that's silly small by 1/2 standards and will likely go 4-ways basically always.

I also agree that 1/3 pot on a 4-way flop is pointless. LLSNL Vs are unbelievers on paired boards and their calling range is pretty bet-size inelastic, so get that value. 2/3-3/4 pot sounds good. And you seem to really have a mirror-imaging issue if you think that a c/r on that board is "lots of backdoor draws and maybe could even be raising a 9 or lower pockets for protection." 1/2 V's don't c/r backdoor draws basically ever, and certainly not without huge reads. I mean, given how tiny your c-bet is, I probably still call, but your thought process seems much more appropriate to online than live.

Turn: Easy fold. It is simply not true that "there are some flush draws as well as some gutshots that would potentially play in the same fashion."

Just repeat this mantra: "they are not playing back at me, they are not playing back at me, they are not playing back at me." Without very strong reads and/or very wet flops, multiple streets of aggression at LLSNL is value, pure and simple.

1. At this stakes level, I don’t think most opponents are thinking as deeply as you are, so I’d underweight a semi-bluff triple barrel line.

2. Given the configuration with V closing action from the CO, his L/C range is wider. I don’t think the opponent has many KX combos, perhaps just K9. Without reads, it is possible he has all of those (9 combos), not just K9s (2). His range can clearly include 54s/A4.

3. I haven’t worked with a solver (disclaimer). Imo, I think the small Cbet sizing might be more optimal HU, perhaps 3-way. 4-way, I’d go larger, maybe $18ish, for value vs. JJ/TT/88 which represent 18 combos.

4. I just fold the turn based on the above.

Apart from three combos of 99s, we don't have any nutted hands. All three of our V's do and since there's three of them it increases the chances one has trips. So it will hard to get three streets with our range profitably, because we'll run into that far more often when called on the river after b/b/b than when HU.

I have no clue, maybe I'm missing an extra street of value in these spots and it's an automatic c-bet w/ 10s+.

Makes sense though. Agree about the action killing turns.

You have some good points. I guess AA is a better check than QQ due to less vulnerable to overcards, but on some table dynamics i definetely like a check better and take it from there. Often it can contribute to navigating easier in the hand+ getting more value on turn/river than the other way around with flop/turn bet.

Maybe i am being outdated in my thoughtprocess regarding this topic, but in general i just think betting flop for tiny sizings like 1/3 or 1/4 is fancy play syndrome that isnt neccesary in live low stakes games.

I could se merit to employing such a strategy approach against good regs that you log alot of hours with on a regular basis, but not much beside that.

In for the Large Pockets

I'm not as concerned on a 4 paired board as I would on higher cards. We'll run into trips and boats, sure, but people are so so so stationary at LLSNL that I'm planning on going for three streets right from the get go. Most people will call down 9x, unless the turn and river both bring overs. TT-JJ are calling down unless the turn and river both bring overs.

I used to think that and was super stubborn about it for the longest time, but my view has since changed. I assume you own Flopzilla; plug in some live calling ranges and play around with boards and look at how frequently people are completely missing the board. A 1/3 c bet only has to work 25% of the time to be immediately profitable, 1/4 only has to work 20% of the time (I know you already know this.) Really look at their ranges, and you'll see so many hands just can't call. I promise almost no villain is actually defending 75% and 80%, respectively. Also, I noticed people will start letting A high and K highs go instead of defending versus these sizings after they see us show down a strong hand after down betting.

Except that 1) If you don't also downbet your strong hands you'll have a huge betsizing tell, and if you do also downbet your strong hands, you'll lose a ton of value; and 2) your math is only correct for HU. This hand is multi-way, and 3 Vs get to share the defense burden.

Size up pre on a call happy table even 4 handed. Could probably go $12+ and still get one or two calls.
Flop seems totally fine to 1/3rd range bet on this board to me, but you have to be aware that when betting into three opponents with two in the blinds and a CO limp they all have 4’s in their range.
Since it’s CO who x/r’d I would call flop and evaluate turn.
Turn is a snap fold against population. Population at 1/2 is massively under bluffing here, especially with no flop FD.

KK and AA are even easier to play as a 1/3rd range bet here.
Multi-way spots on a board like this often benefit from smaller bets as PFR IP.
We are almost always crushed or way ahead here.
I agree that we can and want to size up against 9x, but against 3 ranges there’s actually a ton of 4x out there and betting larger doesn’t really help us unless we think V’s x/r worse than us and put us in gross spots on later streets (live 1/2 population won’t do this basically ever).
Also, it works both ways, if V’s start to see us betting 1/3rd with hands as strong as this then they’ll also have a harder time when we bet 1/3rd here with plenty of hands that want folds in other situations. Just to play devils advocate, as I seem to enjoy lately due to extreme boredom.

ye I really like a range check because of our nut disadvantage.

I agree we have a massive equity advantage though and betting seems very standard, even 4-ways.

I didn't say I was against it because it would make things hard to play. i said I was against it because of the loss of value.

For sure, and against loose passive 1/2 players I don’t necessarily think you’re wrong. I just think we’re losing more with a bigger bet fairly often and also making worse fold that we want calling as well.
It’s a difficult spot to objectively prove what is right. Both approaches have their advantages/disadvantages. Like I said, I’m just advocating the other side of the coin. Probably depends largely on population tendencies and OP did describe a call happy table, so not arguing your logic. Just pointing out the flip side.

I agree with Garick on most points but here are some things to think about.

Raise bigger pre IMO, more value for QQ and less chance for weird ass multi-way pots. If this is casino, around $15 to go. If it's a home game, at least break the $10 barrier... $12?

Flop you should size up to close to pot value bet, the problem with 1/4th & 1/3rd bet sizing is that it can act as check raise bait and take us out of the driver seat (especially multi-way). Someone check raises you on this board and immediately you're like "ah **** he's repping the 4 or 9's full, he's loose too, this succkksss". You have a monster 2 pair, bet close to pot and get tons of value from 9x, TT, JJ and dummies that are calling light with underpairs to a 9.

Turn I would fold, although I do feel that you might have forked the V into a bluff. V can imagine that you do have Kx in your range (like AK type hands that cbetted flop and called the c/r). V is continuing aggression and if he is bluffing, expect a massive bluff on the river. I would usually interpret a flop c/r and turn bet as continued aggression for value.

As played, river I would snap call, it's super unlikely V has a 4 and you only lose to AA/KK/99 combos (V probably doesn't have AA/KK due to preflop action), you beat his 9x combos that he may have turned into a bluff due to your weak cbet sizing and his other weird bluffs. Don't fold boaattssss.

Umm. This is not correct. You lose to every Kx combo as well, and of course every 4x combo, of which V has at least one in his range (45s) and 34s and 46s wouldn't surprise me.

Would we really be surprised by A4o or Q4s? I think he has plenty of quads

Yea, A4s for sure. A4o maybe. Q4s seems like a stretch. Still, as you said, plenty of quads.