10-15 minutes into the session so reads are minimal.

V1 is drinking and borderline drunk (or delirious), annoying the table by keeping his chips in a blob rather than stacking them. I've seen V1 raise once earlier for $15 and check/folded the hand. $175 effective.

I've played with V2 before who is decent but not creative and plays pretty straightforward. Likes to drink while he plays. $300 effective.

V3 is passive and not relevant to the hand. $300 effective.

Guess I'm wondering if you guys consider this spew or standard. I am starting a new project where I am going to 3!/fold the bottom of my OOP calling range (AJo-ATo, KQo, KJo, QJo, A9s-A2s, mid-SC's) rather than call and play a middling strength hand OOP. I think these types of hands have too much value to open-fold but don't play well enough to passively call. So that leaves me with 3! them. I'll make a 3! containment thread to track my progress.

OTTH,

One limper in EP
V1 raises to $20 in HJ (roughly standard for table, especially over a limper)
V2 calls $20 from CO
V3 calls $20 from BTN
SB folds
Hero raises to $100 from BB with KQ
V1 calls after 10 seconds
V2 tank calls after 20 seconds
V3 tank folds

Pot: ~$315

Flop: Q 7 5

Hero shoves for $200
V1 calls all-in for $75
V2 folds

There may not even be enough reads/info to definitively say what action is better. I didn't expect to go to the flop 3-way but can't complain with flopping TP2K. If I just called - playing this 4-way and first to act seems less than ideal however.

If you are going to play KQo from bb, this is the way to do it.

In EP I'd open fold all of those hands except the Axs (which I'd open limp attempting to get a very multiway limped pot). Honestly, they're all pretty junky hands and I would never consider calling a raise with any of them (again, maybe the Axs if it looks like it's going very multiway).

How often has V1 been raising? If it's like all the time, then I really don't hate this play at all, especially since the dead money of $60 is huge compared to the target stack of the Villain ($175). I think the sizing is a bit of a problem. I'd rather either leave myself with a PSB left on the flop to flex some FE on the flop, but then that means a raise of only to $50, which obviously ain't gonna fold anyone. So if I'm raising here after a very loose raiser and some very passive calls, I'd just ship the $175. If he hasn't been raising very much, I just fold.

Postflop is obvious.

As for tracking results, my guess is you'll never play enough hands to get any real idea whether your method is working.

GcluelessNLnoobG

GG, I mostly mean from the SB/BB. I'm not going to limp/3! 76s or QJo or something.

He's only raised once, but I've also only been there for an orbit or so.

Not sure I follow your logic behind raising to $175 as that leaves a weird $125 behind if V2 or V3 decide to come along which means I might as well shove the $300 pre which of course would be dumb.

I make a pot sized raise to $100 because I am accounting for all 3 players and not just V1. Pot sized raise is my default 3! sizing when stacks are sufficiently deep (>100 BB's) vs. multiple players.

Love your line here OP, especially since the openraiser is drunk and probably is in there with a pretty wide range. The other callers ranges in between is also pretty much capped to non premiums like JJ or worse, so 3 bet squeezing here is likely massive +EV.

Once you get this flop with top pair good kicker the flop and ultrasmall SPR, a ship is a no brainer of course.

From the SB/BB these hands are pretty much never a call, so I guess that does make them by default a 3bet vs fold hand (and I'd lean towards fold in most cases), so I'm with you there.

Having only seen him play one orbit, I'm probably going to fold before I get a better handle on what he's raising with, unless I'm really getting a drunk gambooley vibe from him.

I (like you) aren't really expecting any of the other villains to come along, so I'm just targetting raiser with my 3bet size. The problem with $100 is that it creates a $240 HU pot with him just having $75 left (we have pretty much 0 FE on the flop if we whiff, and we need that against A high / small pairs).

GcluelessNLnoobG

Seems pretty standard

I love where you are going with your thinking!

I also really like the way the hand played out.

One things though:
When you rr to $100, you are handicapping yourself, if V1 shoves all in, you cannot rr all in, if the other players know this they may call to see the flop...

I would rather raise to 95 (75 on top), then if the short stack shoves for 175 total (80 more than our bet already) we could shove or at least threaten to shove over the top, this would prevent attentive villains from coming along as they may notice we raised an amount that allows us to re-raise, which prevents them from wanting to get involved.

I've been experimenting with light 3-betting for value as well. However, IMO (and what I've been taught) is this kind of hand works better if a tighter, solid player opens and is called by a loose rec player. It's going to be hard for the solid player to continue with most of his range and you get it H/U versus a weaker range/opponent.

I have a much more polarized 3! Range pre but I like your thinking mostly. Esp with the drunk. Just a thought... In the small 1/3 player pool where you play I suspect your merged 3! Range will get adjusted to by the regs in that game so you will probably need to stay at least a little balanced.

This is a really good point and something I didn't even consider. Thanks for pointing it out. I doubt most LLSNL players are paying attention to that degree, and I am kind of annoyed at myself for not picking up on that!