It's an EV calculation.

$200 raise with 75% equity against both players and x% fold (which is debatable what this actual number is) + $110 * 80% on river.

vs

PSB shove with 75% equity and x+z% fold.

Nah, taking definitive position(s) makes it easier for an argument - I do not think I am right, but I do lay out very plainly of my thought process. It would be easy to see why I "could" be right and I appreciate those who prove me wrong.

Moving goalposts on the other hand, not so easy to argue.

"x" probably includes most of Ax, especially in OMC's range, and will likely include almost all of flush draws in SB's or even OMC's range.

"z" probably includes elimination of Ax (except AT and weird A2/A3), and probably all but combo draws such as QJss, KQss, and KJss.

Logically without actually doing the calculation, 2nd option would yield a lot smaller EV.

If raising Turn (not all-in) and get called by both Villains, what rivers do we plan on x/f to?

We do not fold on river.

Losing on river is part of the +EV calculation.

So are we gonna get the rest of this...

What were kimchi's first thoughts after the hand?
Do you think there are better outcomes? (trying to avoid spoilers)

@castaway80 Your thoughts?

We are three pages in, so I don't think spoilers are necessary.

The money was going in one way or another.

I don't like leading flop, but vs. two players, one of whom probably has an A and will at least call, it's not horrible. Check/raising the flop really defines your hand to your opponents -- or it should. I disagree with wanting to get rid of SB. We just want him pay the wrong price if he's on a draw. I'm fine with how you played it. Pretty much a cooler vs. this guy. (BTW, OMC players do not spazz or call flop with worse than an A, so I don't think he's an OMC.)

FWIW, I don't believe in the idea that one line is always better than the other, but in this case, you simply said that leading flop is "not horrible" and offer very little else as to why.

Care to elaborate why donking is bad?

If offering him the "wrong price" is at the expense of eliminating all of OMC's weaker range and all of SB's non-drawing range, then it is pretty bad.

Most LLSNL players are so caught up with the idea of losing, they make -EV plays to eliminate draws. This is such instance as laid out in previous posts.

I screwed up. In the 2nd option, 75% would drop significantly as well because it would be against only the top of V's range, hence the drop in EV.

I don't like donking because it usually indicates a really strong hand and they will fold most of their holdings if they don't have something worth continuing with. Then, they usually give up on turn if they don't "hit."

Do you play live poker?

Funny you ask, because I am curious about you. The term "donking" or betting into preflop aggressor came from the idea that it's a "donkey" bet to make.

In LLSNL, it is heavily weighted toward weakness, not strength.

There are two objectives with donking in this spot:

1. Against someone who's weak as in unimproved PP or broadway gutter draws, giving free turn doesn't increase EV - it diminishes it. You are essentially hoping to extract a cbet and risk V improving his hand on free turn. And if V does cbet, CR would obviously be very unbalanced toward strength, and flatting would likely lead to a cheap showdown against V's weak range.

2. To appear wider (and weaker). Donking is wider than CR flop and definitely wider than CR turn.

Most LLSNL players do not simply auto fold PP especially on a dry board like AT2. And depending on your donk sizing, it may even induce a hero raise.

I agree with you kimchi. The outcome is pretty much inevitable. Sometimes you get a very strong feeling in these spots that you are behind and this can very well be one of those. Still it makes no sense to fold. This however, makes you want to have more info about the hands in play, in case you don't happen to have the nuts yourself and the following streets are blanks (still could use the info though ).

There was disagreement about the flop decision and that's good, that's why we are posting and learning here. In general, the way I think, there are chances to narrow down V's hand on the flop more cheaply when the pot is still reasonably small. This is why c/r or donk-bet could have their advantages.

I'm not a fan of donk-betting and if you had the best hand here, like it's probable, it would be hard to get whole stacks to the middle eventually as a winner if you only get calls. All the draws would have the right odds to continue without potsize/overbets or you could still be blind to what they have. I guess it's not very likely to get raised by OMC, if he's behind. It could be a way out of this, but in most cases, I think this is not the best way to get a double-up here.

You can very well expect a continuation bet because of the board texture, but the call(s) from SB (somewhat aggro) is something to think about. By check-raising, you get more info and possibilities to win for later streets. You don't give away your strength (imo), because of the draw-possibilities. If your opponents don't think you would bluff or semi-bluff here, then it's another thing. Your reads and image matter hugely in these games, but people can still do unordinary things.

The more I read the comments about letting the draws hang in there with no-brainer odds, makes me want to be in SB's shoes. I have witnessed all kinds of plays in these spots and it's not a bad result to collect the pot on the turn. With very strong reads on both of them, you might want to try something else. If I played with you on the same table, I'd probably be suggesting all kinds of other weird moves here

If I were semi-bluffing, I would probably do it on the Turn and not the Flop, given that there are more hands that I could have.

I think the takeaway from this hand (for me personally) is like you said, to either donk or x/r flop. The end result would have been the same, but I think those would have been the correct plays.

As I said in another of your threads, I question whether small pairs are actually profitable, especially OOP, especially if only going 3way (where we are getting very little immediate odds and thus will likely need 3 bets going in postflop in order to make a profit). Closing the action and for this price I can't hate, but it's still questionable whether it's actually profitable (the only thing that matters), imo.

I'm either/or on the flop. The more multiway it goes / the more drawy the board is, the more I would just donk. As played, with getting the caller on this drawy board I probably check/raise at this point (even though we'll probably lose most mediocre hands).

Think I would mostly donk the turn as played for fear of it getting checked thru. As played with the caller again, I would check/raise. If we run into AA/TT, then that's part of the problem with preflop.

ETA#1: Regarding perhaps not wanting to raise because we might end up offering flush draws the correct odds: in Limit poker, almost all big street bets are offering the correct odds for draws to call, but that doesn't make betting incorrect.

ETA#2: I don't think it's necessarily as much as a "cooler" as you think it is. Yes, a flopped set-over-set is rare. But a flopped set against an overpair will end up losing about ~10% of the time by the river (if our plan is to hopefully get in stacks ASAP against an overpair) due to them setting up / runner runnering something. And these cases are devastating to our overall "set mining" bottom line. When you start adding in the times we flop a set and make nothing postflop (such as on A2x flops against KK-), or we get a little out-of-line postflop in weird cases without a set and spew a bet or two (such as when preflop raiser shows some weakness with a monster), and all OOP to boot (where it is both harder to play and get paid off), preflop becomes more and more questionable as to whether it really is simply profitable (the only thing that matters).

GcluelessNLnoobG

I called this hand into CLP out of curiosity.

The short answer that was given to me was to x/r flop. As played, Turn should be x/r all-in. He also disagreed with me when I said I felt the flop was not super wet; basically, play the hand aggressively and hope OR has AK or Ax.

I think that's the interesting thing about poker - usually there are varying opinions about how a single hand should be played.

Regarding the wetness of this flop; it isn't sopping wet, but it isn't exactly dry either. Of the two options, I would consider it wet myself.

Gthat'swhatshesaidG