UTG and UTG+1 limp, I'm in MP with A5 and I limp. CO, BTN and SB call, BB checks.

I flop a nut flush. UTG checks, UTG+1 bets.

This feels like a textbook slowplay. The pot is not big (8 small bets minus rake, BBJ and future tip). There are 5 players to act behind me. My only real threat is if someone flopped a set, and that's really rare. This seems like a trivial call. I'm hoping someone behind me - preferably UTG - has a smaller flush and raises so I can 3-bet. Heck, I won't mind if someone raises a set or two pair.

Is this as obvious a slowplay as I think?

If this was a RAISED pot, i.e. if UTG raised, 4 cold-callers, SB calls and I call with that hand in the BB and flop a nut flush, and then SB donks the flop, so there are 15 small bets in the pot, I probably raise.

There's really no such thing as a "textbook slowplay" since slowplaying is almost always terrible. An 8-handed pot is definitely big.

I am trying to think of an advantage to slowplaying here. It's not coming to me. We just deprive ourselves of the opportunity to 4bet the flop when UTG+1 3bets which he should be doing fairly often given that he is strong enough to bet into 7 opponents on a monotone flop.

What are these turn cards that are going to make us be like "Trapped you, owned bitch!" I don't think that they exist.

What does it look like when we call the flop and raise a multiway turn? It looks absolutely terrifying... even to fish!

Most LHE players don't take flop action especially seriously. And when we bloat the pot on the flop, we usually end up getting more (not less) action on the turn and river simply because nobody wants to fold a piece of the board getting insane pot odds.

raise pre, and dont slowplay

I think that this is actually a textbook fastplay hand because we don’t want action killing cards to come on the turn, we want to project strong = weak, and we want the opportunity to have coldcalls and then possibly trap someone else to cold call another two bets.

Also if he did happen to flop a flush he might actually lead into us again on the turn even when we 4bet, allowing us to build an even bigger pot.

When we slowplay and then raise the turn we are essentially announcing our hand, or if we slowplay and then the turn comes a fourth spade the action is frozen for the rest of the hand and we look exactly like we have an ace high flush.

All things considered it just simplifies the game tree to always fastplay when we flop the nut flush.

Edit: I feel like also on a metagame consideration when we raise the flop we want to be able to always represent the nuts when the turn comes and the board dynamics don’t change. If we are habitually slowplaying our turn betting range after raising the flop actually becomes more capped on non-dynamic changing turns and we become susceptible to calldowns in spots where we might have been able to win outright if our opponents are bad at math. Generally calldowns are going to be better for our opponents so anything that allows us to more consistently win hands outright is going to be better for us, even if it is a metagame or image consideration.

What turn cards do you think would kill action?

Another spade. An ace. The middle card pairing

I mean without knowing what cards are on the board, another spade, a top pair changing card, a card that puts a straight on the board, a board pairing card…

I was going to type a detailed post but I don't see this needing to be overly complicated.

I get that we want to maximize our chances of winning a pot once it's big, and 8 small bets theoretically could be considered big. But if we raise, the only hands that are going to fold are hands we have badly beaten. Sets and two pair aren't folding for two bets (though a raise would overcharge two pair to chase their boat, but it's so hard to have two pair on the flop I'm not sure it happens often enough to alter our strategy). Also, if we raise, we don't allow for the possibility that one of the 5 villains BEHIND us might raise, allowing us to 3-bet or even 4-bet if UTG 3-bets. By the way, we don't know that UTG has a flush - he may not even understand how strong a hand is "supposed to be" to bet into 6 people on a monotone flop. I'd argue the probability that someone BEHIND us has a flush is higher than the probability UTG has a flush.

I don't see how the pot's going to be any bigger on the turn if we raise than if we let 4 of the 5 people behind us call with any piece of the board, pocket pair, ace, backdoor draw or spade. Also, if we keep those villains in the pot, cards that would otherwise kill action on the turn could encourage them to STAY IN THE HAND on the turn.

Maybe I play in the wrong games, but I just don't see the other metagame considerations in the games I play. They're all thinking on level 1.

I'm really trying not to be difficult, I'm just trying to understand if I'm misplaying a hand and not seeing why.

Thanks for the meaningful discussion.

You’re not raising the flop for protection or to maximize your chances of winning the pot. You’re raising because you have a really strong hand and want to bloat the pot while your opponents still think they have the best hand (or at least are drawing live). The best way to keep them in the hand on the big streets (whether or not an action killing card comes) is to create a pot that is too big for them to fold. You can’t do that if you slow play the flop.

Also, raise preflop. Suited ace wheel is a great multi-way hand.

Yeah not much more to be said than this. I wasn’t suggesting to raise to protect your hand, that’s for sure. It’s more about maximizing your value.

For whatever it contributes to the discussion, according to Flopzilla, if I give the limpers a range of any pair, any ace, any suited, any 2 broadways, any ace and most offsuit connectors (TT-22,AKs-A2s,KQs-K2s,QJs-Q2s,JTs-J2s,T9s-T2s,98s-92s,87s-82s,76s-72s,65s-62s,54s-52s,43s-42s,32s,AJo-ATo,KQo-KJo,QJo,JTo), and I choose a flop of J72 there's a 7.76% chance that the first villain also flopped a flush. As before, I believe to calculate the probability that at least one of them flopped a flush, I calculate the probability that NONE of them did and subtract that from 100. So the probability that the first villain did NOT flop a flush is 92.24%, so the probability that none of the other 7 villains did is 92.24% ^ 7 = 56.8%. So the probability that someone else flopped a flush is 43.2%.

Whether or not that affects our decision is a discussion for another post, I'm just being a math nerd.

I’m not a math expert but intuitively 43% seems high.

bruce you might be right, I'm still trying to figure out flopzilla, I think I did that first example wrong.

I just now did an example where I only gave one range, specified a flop of J72 and made the A and 5 dead cards.

My standard loose limper range of any pair, any ace, any suited, any 2 broadways, any ace and most offsuit connectors (TT-22,AKs-A2s,KQs-K2s,QJs-Q2s,JTs-J2s,T9s-T2s,98s-92s,87s-82s,76s-72s,65s-62s,54s-52s,43s-42s,32s,AJo-ATo,KQo-KJo,QJo,JTo) is 577 combos. Only 28 of those 577 combos make a flush on that board. That's 4.9%. I didn't save my work from the previous example so I don't know why it came up as 7.76% before (I'm guessing I wasn't using the dead cards feature correctly).

I do believe 28 is correct because there are 78 ways to have two different spades, and you have to take out 12 aces, 11 jacks, 10 7s, 9 5s and 8 2s (a total of 50), leaving 28.

So 95.1% ^ 7 = 70.3%, so there's actually a 29.7% chance one of the other 7 villains flopped a flush.

So once again let's say UTG and UTG+1 limp, I'm in MP with A5 and I limp, CO and BTN limp, SB completes and BB checks.

7 players, 7sb (I had the count wrong in the OP, sorry), flop J72

UTG checks and UTG+1 bets.

Here's the question: In the games you guys play, what are the villains calling a raise with here?

I'm honestly not sure what they'd call with in the games I play, I probably need to pay better attention. But I'm pretty sure they'd call with a gutshot (there are no OESDs on that board), a flush draw or top pair. Villains are rarely 3-betting an overpair on a monotone board, slightly less rarely 3-betting two pair. I feel like most villains would 3-bet a set on a monotone board (some wouldn't though - trust me, some are so passive they won't even raise without nuts, and some won't even raise until the river for fear of getting sucked out on). The same applies to a made flush - it would have to be a BIG made flush for them to even consider a 3-bet.

What are your villains calling an overcall with here?

I can tell you in no uncertain terms that they're calling ONE bet with any piece of the board, any flush or straight draw or even ace high or even KQ.

I'll pause there.

I think your combos for loose limpers are pretty off. You have every single suited hand, but not even some high unsuited hands like KTo and QTo.

I'm not even a loose player, and I play those for one bet from late position, but I never play a lot of the crap suited hands you have there.

I don't see the point of slow playing. What are you hoping people to catch that will give action? You may lose action if another spade hits. You want to charge 2-pairs and sets which have some outs against you.

You got pretty close the first time, I think. I took the bolded range into odds oracle, gave it to six players, and gave the seventh As5s on Js7s2s (a flush). The probability of "at least two players have a flush" is 45%.

Regardless, I agree with bruce that this is probably higher than what you see in reality because humans don't uniformly limp all suited hands like that, even in your game.

Strategically, whatever builds the biggest pot is best here. That's nearly always raising after a bet and a call. You might call for a specific reason which you'll identify when you *look left* before acting. If the people behind you include someone who loves free card raises, even on monotone flops, it could be worth calling now intending to 3bet. But in a hypothetical with just randoms from the player pool behind you, raise now.