X/jam flop is probably the most common line taken by pros here, but I think the other options are worth exploring even if they are less standard. I think the key question this hand turns on is if flatting to keep the PFR in the hand is worth the value we lose if a spade hits on the turn.

2/5 I have $950, the other two villains have about $1000. Hero has been winning a bunch of small pots without going to showdown but hasn’t been very active over the course of the four hour session. I’m up around $300. I haven’t shown any bluffs.

Limp, V, a rec raising a tight range, opens to $30+2, loose passive rec calls HJ loose passive rec CO calls, and I call in the BB with TT, limper calls.

Flop: Ts8d3s.
Pot: $150

Lead or check? If we lead is it big or small to induce a protection raise from the PFR?

As played hero checks, x, PFR $115, HJ $250. HJ has T3s in his range and maybe T3o. He never has spades unless it’s like J9ss, 79ss or A8ss but I don’t think he even has those that often here. I just read his hand as two pair+

It folds to us. If we x/jam I’m fairly confident the PFR folds his entire range. If we flat I would assume PFR is going to flat, but him folding or jamming is a very real possibility. I’m also very confident we stack the HJ on any non-spade turn and we can still likely get some river value if a spade hits turn and turn goes xx.

So in addition to the question I posed in the preface, there are a couple of other considerations such as HJ having a small raise/fold range on the flop and keeping the PFR in and having him still a bigger set.

That's basically a min raise from HJ. I usually aim to fast play but if we flat the pfr will think he's getting good odds to peel with his overpairs (even though he's peeling almost dead). Then I check shove all turns to get it in with HJ, PFR can come too if he wants.

I'd just lead in this situation, making it look like I'm protecting my Tx hand. As played, I'd just call the flop. The pot is at least 765 and there is 670 behind. After the HJ min raise, he's going to jam the turn for you. In an ideal world, the 3 will pair and he'll think you're an idiot until you reveal your cards.

Whatever you do. Please don't donk lead here. I see this in my games from seemingly solid players - they always donk lead their sets in multiway pots because they think it is the highest EV line.

It is hard to say either way if it is from an exploitative point of view - but theoretically it is really bad.

There is an equation to Donk Leading. I'll use technical terms to start but try to give examples to make it clearer.

We donk lead at a high frequency when we have an aggregate hand advantage of high equity holdings relative to our preflop distribution.

So a good example of this is an UTGvsBB situation in a 10 handed game.

Let's assume UTG opens 12% of hands (~159 combos) and BB defends with 15% of hands (~199 combos). Obviously both of these preflop compositions are going to be completely different.

So while UTG will have all

AA/KK/QQ/JJ/AKs/AK

BB will almost never have any of these combos (save for JJ/AKo at some frequency).

So let's say the flop comes out 543 tt.

FD boards are always more beneficial to the caller because BB will have more suited hands in his range and UTG will have more high cards/pocket pairs.

Now let's look at who has the aggregate hand equity advantage.

BB always has

76s
A2s
55
44
33
54s

So immediately we see that BB has all the super strong nutted hands while UTG will almost never have ANY of these hands in his range. And even though UTG will still have an EV advantage on this board because of position. The equities will run very close and the top end of the equities will always favor BB.

This would be a situation where we Donk Lead at a high frequency. When we have more nuts hands (remember BB has 20 combos of 80-90%+ equity holdings out of 199 combos) than our opponent - we should theoretically be donking at a high frequency.

So in this hand Donk Leading obviously makes no sense and just weakens your checking range. If any players actually pick up on this donk lead exploit - they can make huge folds vs you in the future OTF.

But back to the min raise. I think just calling will probably be more profitable. We can let the Rec come along with his 10% equity hand and stack him OTT.

How would you size the lead here?

I understand donk leading this texture here is theoretically bad, and in some of the tougher 2/5 games I play in I would never even consider leading this hand on this texture, lead is pure exploit.

Rec population rarely leads sets, they tend to lead marginal one pair hands to find out where they are at/deny equity and they also do it as a blocker bet with their draws. Recs also tend to respond to these leads by raising their overpairs because they know what the population leading range looks like and they don’t want to get sucked out on. Finally, population massively under-bluffs as a check raise here so check raise looks a lot more nutted than lead. All of this is why I’ve strongly considered, and sometimes have, played my sets as a lead in spots where it would be bad in theory.

I dont know if donk leading is theoretically bad or not. I really dont care. Do you want to be theoretically correct or do you want to win the most money? A poker table isn't a symposium where intellectuals gather to discuss theory. Its a contest to take money from people.

This talk of poker theory reminds me of when movie critics talk about how bad a movie is because its not up to their highbrow standards for movie making....but its the one that brings in $300 million in a weekend because it has the coolest special effects and car chases.

+1.

There is some merit to knowing what is theoretically good or bad. We can’t exploit someone for instance until we know what they are doing is actually bad/exploitable. But obviously we shouldn’t intentionally be taking lower EV lines against face up opponents just cause it’s what the solver says to do in a vacuum.

I don't like a donk vs. these players on this board, but I can't tell you why. I only donk here if I think it will check around, and I highly doubt that's going to happen.

As played, I don't mind a flat, but I probably just jam. I highly doubt HJ is folding anything, and if we lose V, so be it. Our check/jam looks a lot like a big draw, so maybe he'll come along.

Those aren't mutually exclusive.

Do you know why live tables are all 10 handed/9 handed? It's to keep players from realizing they are outclassed. A weaker player can hide among a sea of 9/8 other people for a long time before variance evens out.

Most live pros only play 50k hands a year at most. In 2009 I was on a 150k hand heater (online) and won a bunch of money (70k) before realizing I was awful. And this was at 6max. I can't even imagine how long some live players can hide at a 10/9 handed game before realizing they are just clicking buttons.

The difference between poker and most other areas of competition is knowledge vs execution.

Poker is knowledge dominant. Meaning if you don't know something - you are just clicking buttons and maybe it will work out because lol variance.

Sports/movies etc are execution dominant. Meaning your knowledge of how to play a sport or how to make a movie is probably very similar to every other professional. But you execute the act much better - so you make more money.

You'll care whether you know when to donk lead or not when you lose $. It just hasn't happened yet.

I gotta agree that I also feel pretty certain that there are times where donk leading is the easiest way to get the most money in early. Most of the time we’re playing against rec players who react very poorly to this with their premium hands. I definitely only do it in certain specific situations, but it almost always works exactly as planned when I do.

“... I don’t always donk lead, but when I do...”

Villain should be tossing overpairs whether you flat or raise so I don't see how it makes a difference. If he would seriously shove an overpair after a bet -> raise -> call then please tell me where you play so I can hop on a flight ASAP. Checking flop seems assuredly better than leading.

50,000 hands of live poker is a **** ton for a live pro whose edge over rec players is massive compared to edges online. That argument has nothing to do with anything.

I know when donk leading is an option. This hand is one of them. There are other good ways to play the hand also, but dismissing leading out because its allegedly not good theoretically is just dumb. If leading out will lead to the other guy making a big mistake then its a good option.

Vs a bunch of loose passives not really a big fan of checking, also with 5-way pot the PFR is never going to cbet light here unless he’s actually braindead. I mean yeah we r supposed to check here but i’d imagine it has lower EV in this pot, and i dont care if my checking range is weak against a bunch of braindead loose passive fish who cant read ranges in the first place. If people were splashy and aggro i’d snap x flop and let them hang themselves.

AP oop i probably just rip it, think trying to get 3-way all-in/drag the reg along is very greedy and we cant control how much money goes in or pot control very well OOP or if a spade hits. Also if we rip it now it’s very likely we just stack the guy who raised flop whereas if we call and then PFR calls along or folds, we dont win a stack on some runouts

50,000 hands is literally nothing, even live. Donk leading is +EV because you have the nuts. That doesn't mean it's the correct play.

You can lead as an exploit but you have no evidence whatsoever to suggest it's better than checking.

Feel free to quote where I said leading was better than checking.

A lot of different opinions here. Would like to know what line you do like Mike and for those of you that like lead, how would you size your lead?

As played I decided to x/call even though I do think lead and check jam are good. Preflop raiser still folded so at least being results oriented I should probably have led or check raised. V snap jams an offsuit 9 turn, I call and stack 33.

MW im always leading this for about 100 maybe more without better reads that the pfr will be always betting with air. Yes its an exploit but in my experience this play gets stacks in a lot easier vs TP/OP then c/r

I'd like to point out that there is a world of difference between the OP and DDP's examples. The biggest is that the OP's example is a 5 way flop vs. HU in the DDP's. To take a HU example and use it as proof that you should never donk bet is logically the equivalent of saying 2+2 = 4, so 2 + 2 + 2 +2 +2 must also equal 4. Both equations just have "2s" and "+s" in them.

Normally it depends on the position of the callers in relation to me and the preflop raiser. I want to trap them between me and the preflop raiser.

In this case, I believe the callers are behind the raiser, so I would just check. Once the preflop raiser bets, if they have anything to call with they are trapped between the raiser and I. If the callers have to act after me but before the preflop raiser, I would be much more likely to lead out and force them to call a bet before it gets to the raiser who will likely raise the flop especially on this wet board.

I also wouldn't lead out very often with top set because its less likely someone has TP to call with before it gets to the preflop raiser.

+1

I think leading sets on wet, multiway flops is often a good idea (as PFR will often raise to protect an overpair) but *not* top set. TP is a big part of the range we hope to get paid by, so if we're blocking it I'd much rather check.