Friend asked to post this, after post-hand table talk criticism.

Loose passive game. Lots of 1/4 and 1/5 sized post flop betting.

1/2. Button straddles to 5. Blinds call. Villain UTG (220) is talkative and LAG. Raises to 17. EP calls 17. Hero (350) KcKh raises to 47. Cutoff (stack unknown) calls. Folds to Villain, who calls.

Flop (166). K8c7c.

Villain checks. Hero bets 100.

Thoughts so far?

More pre-flop. There is already $49 in the pot when it gets to H. Go at least $60. I'd go $70 or $75.

Flop is good, and could be a little more. (Please put pot size on each street.) I'm definitely betting this board with two loose callers.

3! more pre, to like $60. Basically enough where you can shove most flops vs V.

AP, I would bet more on the flop. We aren't folding under any circumstances so no sense in betting small. By my calc, there is $173 in the pot and V has about a psb left. I would go $125-$135 here.

raise to 65 pre flop

100 into 166 otf is fine

Yeah, any less than $60 is criminal. I'm going $75 here most of the time.

2/3 OTF - go slightly bigger, $110 or so.

I got the same as shorn7: $173. $100 is not bad, but I think you can go a little higher. I guess after rake it will be a little less

Edit: Just saw OP was edited. Maybe that is after rake. $100 OK.

yeah but we want calls. Since "standard cbet is 1/4 to 1/5 psb" I think OP was chewed out bc everyone folded am I right?

We want V to shove. I don't want to bet really small and let two players come along with clubs or straight draws and then feel like an idiot when they hit on the turn. Granted, they will hit anyway, but I want the money in when I'm ahead.

Wish we knew CO's stack.

I don't care if the standard is 1/4 to 1/5 -- it makes the bigger bet look like protection or we want them out, so maybe it will induce.

And I'm fine if everyone folded It's a big pot for a loose-passive 1/2 game.

he can't have any more than $350 and our perceived range screams AK and since we block AKcc I don't think they would have too many draws, mostly pocket pairs below a king. A bigger cbet could scare them away, yes the bet would look like protection meaning we flopped at least a pair of kings or better won't it?

I already explained my reasoning. If you want them both to call, bet 1/4 to 1/5. Maybe that will get them to shove.

They either have a hand they will shove with or they don't, but they are definitely calling a 1/4 to 1/5 size bet with a draw -- probably almost no matter how weak. I hate letting my opponents get off easy.

Edit: the big difference is that I wouldn't be making 1/4 to 1/5 size c-bets, regardless of what the rest of the table was doing, so it would be moot.

i see my pot size mistake. Was forgetting that blinds completed. So 141 for the three players, 15 for straddler and blinds, plus 17 for limpfolder is, indeed 173.

So three to the flop - pot 173

Hero bets 100. Cutoff folds. Villain verbal tanks and keeps saying "you can't have a set or you wouldn't bet so much." He calls the 100, leaving 70ish behind.

Turn (pot 373) Villains checks dark. Board pairs an 8, giving Hero top full.

Hero?

LOL, glad it worked the way I hoped it would. Sorry he didn't shove.

Check the turn, bet the river.

And wait 24 hours before posting results to let others chime in on flop and turn.

Agree with everyone that more pre would be better, like $65ish or so. I like the $100 on the flop into ~$170 and assuming the turn was an easy jam of like $70 into V than I think it was ideal or very close. Can’t let V miss any possible draws and fold river. That $70 over an 8 then session is an additional 4.4 bb’s / hour.

Thinking about it, I can't decide if most Vs would be more wiling to put their last $70 in on turn, when they have a card to come, or on river, when they figure they can't fold now. On both streets they can think, "OK, I can just fold and save $70."

However, if he "hits" the river, he'll call.

P.S. I hope this isn't a bad beat story.

Why on earth do people want to bet more on this flop

73 into a pot of 373 (less rake). so pushing turn gives villain 73 into 440-ish.

"Oh crap, I can't bet enough to stop you from drawing profitably. Damn, oh well, I'm all in to make you pay for sucking out on me."

Isn't shoving the last 70 better OTT? Villain likely has either a draw, or, given the speech-making, he has a set of 7s. He isn't folding either, given that he's getting 6-1 on his money. If we wait and he doesn't hit his draw, He folds to Hero's last bet and we miss out on his last 70?

I'd also raise closer to pot preflop ($75 ?).

On the flop as played: you pretty much crush the board but with the small raise preflop there are still plenty of draws available to get value from. You aren't getting called by QQ-TT almost whatever you do since they'll put you on AK+ here a lot. Therefore don't worry about them folding - that's inevitable. Target the draws and 2-pair+

Therefore I can see 100-125 working fine but much more and I guess you'll probably lose the draws altogether on the flop. You could get away with going smaller since you have one of their FD outs and you can make a boat too but I doubt you can go low enough to get pairs to come along so I'd just go for max value vs the draws.

On the turn I'd just put the rest in. It's not much relative to the pot and I don't think V can fold anything he called on the flop with here but he can fold all the busted draws on the river.

Obviously if V just made quads it's a cooler and nothing to worry about.

Definitely betting the last ~70 OTT. Nobody is folding OTT for that amount after already putting ~$150 in the pot. If V has a draw and we check turn then we allow him to fold OTR when his draws brick and he's left holding no pair.

So Hero did bet the last 70 OTT and Villain called.

Obviously the Kings full held up and Villain apparently didn't show, although I'm not sure how that worked, since he would have been first to act after river card and he was all-in.

The criticism of Hero (coming from Villain) was that his 100 bet on the flop was an "overbet" and a bad play, because he ordinarily would scare everyone away.

To me, it begs this question. All of you were advocating a bigger raise BTF, and many of you were suggesting a bigger raise OTF.

When you are playing in games where what 2+2 people would consider "normal" sized bets are viewed as huge bets, how much (if at all) do you adjust to the culture of the game?

I adjust to pre-flop raise sizes, but if they are really small I tend to bet on the larger size. I do not adjust my post-flop raise sizes regardless of what the rest of the table is doing. I let them adjust to me.

I don't adjust my bet sizes to suit opponents' whining that's for sure. Of course they'd prefer a better price to draw against you! No need to oblige them though.

I'll do other things though like having an open limping range and limping behind plenty of hands because it helps me fit in and it can be profitable in and of itself. I may even go as far as to limp big hands with the intention of lrr or flatting to trap aggressive raisers.

I'll adjust my raise sizing and opening ranges as the table dynamics change but I'm always going for what I think is most profitable given the table conditions. This includes expanding my open range and reducing raise sizes for deception and protection against tough opponents in position to my EP/MP opens.

If you do actually find a player or players who simply refuse to play when you raise or bet "too big" (rather than whine but still call) then I would simply expand my opening range to punish them and just keep running them over till they adjust.

Weak players love to slow play big hands but the good players know how to go for max value.

You got the money in OTT and won the hand.

Next time ask him "If I played it so bad, why do I have all your chips?"

I assume you're being facetious, but that's the last thing I would ever say to someone (while they were still at the table).

After they were out of earshot, might not be able to resist.

My usual line is "I'm new at this game - still learning."