OK here's the breakdown and some followup questions

P1, flopped a set of As
P2, flopped a set of 7s
P4, as you most likely guessed, stumbled into a runner runner nut straight. He had a suited 9T.

P1 flopped the nuts and chose to slow play. P2 flopped second set and chose to slow play. P4 flopped next to nothing but got to see a free turn which gave him a nut OESD, and IMO, was priced in every time the action got to him.

After the hand, P1 went for a smoke break and to walk off her frustration. P2, the grumpy old man, went on a huge grumpy tilt, repeatedly calling P1 a complete idiot because she played the hand so poorly. I ignored him for a while but when she returned and he was calling her an idiot to her face, I firmly told him, "STOP IT, THAT'S NOT NICE."

He then shoved his finger in my face and yelled at me. The dealer, an older woman who is very nice but puts up with no crap, squashed P2 quickly. He was warned to can it or she would get the floor to take him out. He shut up for a few minutes but then P1 and P2 started a long chatter that didn't end until P2, still on super tilt, lost the last of his chips and went home.

P1, first to act flops the nuts, a dry board. Should she have bet out on the flop? I think it always a mistake to not bet a strong hand into 3 opponents, and that one move cost her the hand. If she was HU, definitely check. P4 would probably have folded his runner runner flush draw and runner runner straight draw to even a small bet. But I understand her reluctance, she has almost all the As, so there were not a lot of hands that would have call any bet.

P2, I think his mistake was worse than P1's because lowish middle set is even more vulnerable to a suck out in a 4 way pot. He had no reason to check the flop. P1 had opened pre from UTG so she had to have something and there had to be an Ax somewhere in his three opponents.

P4, I can't find fault with anything he did at any point.

Can anyone find fault with my evaluation? Can anyone justify, not the poor poker manners, but the position of P2 that P1 played the whole hand like an idiot?

Was there anything P1 could do to salvage the hand once she checked the flop? I'm thinking no. If she had gone all in, c/r on the turn, I'm pretty sure P2 would have called with his set, and P4 would still be calling with his OESD.

No, his mistake (and it is the worst in the hand) is because of lost value, not because of vulnerability. He loses the chance to get stacks in vs TP by skipping the flop bet.

Next worse was P4's first turn call. He was far from priced in. He had an 8 out draw, good for 16% equity by the "rule of 2 and 4" estimate and 18% by the actual math. The first call is particularly bad, as he has no way of knowing P1 has anything and P2 could be stabbing or betting a weak made hand against which P4 would have no IOs OTR if his draw came in. That call of $75 represented 31.65% of the pot, WAY more than his outs justify. The second call at least could make an IOs argument, since by then it is clear that one or both of P1 and P2 have a hand they will pay off a river bet with. He's only paying a couple percent more than his direct odds, so the call is fine with good expectation if he hits.

Third worst was P2's turn call, as I discussed above, as it basically forced the river call.

P1 played it fine, imo. I would mildly prefer a bet OTF, just because it is so multi-way and we want to build the pot, but I understand her thought that she crushed the board so hard that she wouldn't get value.

Good points, Garick, thanks for your perspective. I disagree with you only a little, but only because I have info on the players you don't.

I think P4 did have IOs if he understands P1 and P2 like I do. P1 didn't open UTG with anything less than AQs and QQ+. So maybe with QQ or KK, she folds to any bet, but there's a good chance she is calling the turn with TPGK. P2 is an uncreative ABC, almost never bluff player. He's got something when he sticks money into a 4 way pot.

I've played with P1 and P2 many times but P4 was new to our game. They had already played about 6 hours together, and I'm sure P4 was good enough to read them fairly well. They play obvious enough, that on the turn, P2 had range limited to a set or 78; P1 had to have a set to c/r and because of her UTG opening bet, it left little mystery which set; and P4 was almost a sure thing to be on a draw.

I consider myself a poor card reader and am working very hard on improving that skill. So the fact that I was dead on this hand is not a brag; I'm more often wrong. But AP, these players left little doubt and once P4 river raised, there was no doubt. P4 was definitely capable of bluffing, but would not do so into 2 players who have already shown a lot of strength and commitment to the pot.

Here's the thing on P4s first turn call, though. P1 had checked twice. She likely never does that with AK/AQ. So her range given your read is QQ (6 combos), KK (6 combos) and AA (2 combos). So she's folding turn 85% of the time. P4 has to assume that he's going HU with P2.

Making up IOs is much harder than it looks With his overpayment OTT of $32.25 and only hitting 18% of the time, he has to average making $179.75 when he hits (because 4.55 times out of 5.55 he doesn't hit and has no opportunity). Since it's always non zero that P2 folds river, that means that he has to bet more than that and hope P2 calls often enough. So pot is $237 going to the river. Is P2 really going to call a PSB over 75% of the time OTR when P4 hits? Because that's what it would take for him to get the IOs he needs.

Going to disagree here, implied odds and position make this a very reasonable turn call. You'll have options if you miss and options if you're good, with the position it's easy to max your payout.

Show me the math. And what, exactly do you plan to do when you miss on a dry board. Bluff river and expect V to fold 2p+ often enough to make it profitable including not only your river bluff amount but also your turn overpayment?

Making up overpayments with IOs is much harder than people who haven't done the math think. You think "oh, I'm only overpaying by about $25, that'll be easy to make up if I hit." But you don't have to just make up the overpayment, you need to make enough to make up for all the times you miss, so in this case you need to average 5.55x your overpayment.

Thanks Garick. I stand corrected. I need to go back and do some homework on IO.

In a somewhat similar mode and without specific math to justify it, I have created a personal rule that set mining generally needs 15 to 1 stack to call because the more standard rule of 10:1 isn't profitable enough in my experience. I wasn't getting paid off with stacks often enough. The set hits so seldom, and when I do, too many of my opponents fold before they pay me 10:1. So I can accept where you're coming from on the IO of the OP hand now that I see how you've worked it out.

You're trying both ways here. You're saying we have to get villain to fold 2p on the bluff and questioning the implied odds. You can't have both ways. If you put villain on such a tight range, you clearly can make the ~175 or so on the river. If you don't put him on such a tight range, we have bluffing equity. Out of position you'd have a fair point, as it's hard to play both sides. In position, it's much easier.

Floating in position isn't some horrible awful thing.

As I said, shoe me the math. The difficulty getting called often enough OTR has to do with the final board. On a blank, 2p is likely calling, so our bluff success frequentcy goes down.

You can't just make blanket statements like that if you can't support them with math.

i just did my friend.

Let me say that another way. You can not be so lazy if you have any desire to improve or for your posts to be taken seriously.

Dude.... I literally told you how much you have to make on the river. You are putting this person on two pair plus saying he can't fold. If you think that is the case.

It's 175 with the two people in the pot, 250 with the one behind.

Since you're putting this guy with 2p+, we easily hit those implied odds. Shocker, the hand shows him paying out 800.

You're mistaking a low post count with inexperience, and just being rude frankly.

Check the posts again. OP put V on 2p+ and included pretty specific reads he said OR would have picked up on. I would not have put V on that based solely on his flop check/turn bet line myself.

And I'd already posted the required IOs before you did. I asked you specific questions about what your plan was and what EV it needed, include the reminder that your bluff has to be profitable not only OTR, but overall.

You're welcome to disagree with me, but you can't just say "no, that's wrong" and be taken seriously. I'm sorry you think that's rude, but it has nothing to do with your post count and everything to do with you making sweeping statements without supporting them.

Look you can argue about being right I suppose, but saying "You can not be so lazy if you have any desire to improve or for your posts to be taken seriously." is indisputably rude bs.

If you feel the need to mathematically using whatever model and assumptions you choose to prove that you can play good poker in position on the river go right on ahead. At the end of the day, the advice of folding the turn with 109 in position is based on that you can't play in position on the river against the mediocre at best set of players at LLSNL.

live low limit cash game players get a lot of disrespect in this forum. Admittedly much of the disrespect is deserved. However, if you get to show down, you still have to produce the best hand to scoop the pot.

One of the frequent comments is about bad live players only playing their two cards. LLL players over commit and don't fold. Both comments are often true.

If P4 has any card reading skills at all, he has to know P2 is strong on that $75 turn bet. An argument could be made that P4 could have used his position and skills to reraise the turn bet if he erroneously believed P1 was folding out and that P2 wasn't 2P+, but then you are arguing that P4 is good enough to out play them but bad enough to not see obvious reads. On P2's bet, P4 has to fold or win at show down. There isn't another choice.

Once P1 does the c/r, she is also going to show down, P4 has to hit his OESD to have any hand that will beat P1 even if she is just over playing AK, and P4's position and superior skills are not a factor in the outcome. P4 had forced himself into a fit or fold situation.