So I'm sitting in very possibly the greatest 1-2 game in history. There are 2 mega fish at the table, who are both sitting with over $1000. 1 player was shown down calling a shove for $300 on the flop with Q2ss on J53r, the other called my river overbet with 87cc on AA48K with 4 spades.

Anyway its towards the end of the night and we're down to 6 handed and I open 67hh to 15 in UTG+1 (~650 in my stack and both fish cover me). CO, Button (fish 1), SB (fish 2) and BB call. 5 ways to a flop of 643shh. checks to me and I c-bet 35 into 75. Any thoughts on this sizing? My thinking was I really don't mind taking a turn as so much of the deck helps my hand, but on the other hand this is a board that should hit the callers (specifically the blinds) ranges more than mine, so maybe I should size up and have a more polarized range. As played the button (super aggro fish) minraises to 70. Folds to me and what is the play here?

You do not want polarized ranges against maniacs. Price setting bet is fine.

AP, call, LDO. Wait until you hit more than a weak TP to shovel the money in. It's not like you have FE, and you have great expressed and implied odds.

I see where this is going, don't be results-oriented.

Easy call dude, x/c nearly any turn that is neither paint nor >1/2PSB (up to 3/4 depending on the board, callers/raisers). Leading if we improve.

I hope you didn't fold this, so the real question of the hand is on a later street. Just post without results up to the real decision.

Also bet more OTF. Fiddy sounds better, but it won't significantly change the hand (i.e. take it down or get HU).

Check flop.....

I dont know why you’re trying to bloat the pot here with tpnk in a 6-way pot where they have all the sets and straights

Ap snap call

If there's no fold equity, don't raise

Clear call

This.

Cbet is fine, both from a sizing standpoint and protecting our Equity from a random overcard spiking on us. Against these opponents I'm sure the minraise is pure nonsense so nothing to be worried about there, but getting 3bet off our hand would be a disaster so definitely just call and take the wonderful odds he's laying us to out draw him. Our goal is to just check call down until we hit then check raise allin no matter how obvious it looks that we made our hand I'm sure they don't even care if they're calling allins on the Flop with Queen high no draw. The only time we're probably folding is if God Almighty himself smites us by putting four hearts out there

Can you explain why a polarized range against a maniac is bad? My thought process is its really easy to play, vs having a linear range where figuring out the call/fold cutoff can be hard.

I was between calling and raising, ended up flatting and c/f a board pairing turn to his 200 bet. He showed a 6

Cant fold that, typically all your outs are live vs a maniac. Only way I fold is if he jammed the turn or something.

LOL @ all these posts. Wtf? We have top pair + flush draw + straightdraw against the worst players on earth. I would be overbetting the flop and fistpump jamming over any raise.

LOL and wtf? @ you, dude. A lot of your posts are really awful, especially for live poker.

TP + FD + SD is not a reason to bet. You bet for value (to get called by worse), bluff (to get better hands to fold), or for more advanced theory to deny equity. This is what a lot of inexperienced players or bad regs think. "Lol i have TP + FD, I betz" or "lol i have SD + pair, i betz" without any consideration with ranges, range adv, range disadvantages, calling/defending ranges, protecting checking ranges, etc.

You sure as hell talk about a lot of GTO (which isnt very practical in live poker, esp low stakes but is definitely useful for improving your game/winrate), but you're suggesting an overbet range OTF as PFR in a 6-way pot? LOL. I'm pretty sure Snowie would not recommend that, or GTO wizards like Doug Polk. You overbet in general when you have a range advantage. You obviously do not have one here.

Our equity vs a GII range 200-300bb+ deep is awful too (~40%). I mean, hey, if you like putting in your money as an underdog, go ahead.

Hey man, if you don't know what you're talking about, maybe just don't post. Talking about "GTO" lines against the opponents described is clue 1 that you are leaving hundreds of dollars on the table.

Thanks though for the herp derp explanation of why to bet. Oh gee whiz, we can bet for value? You don't say. Maybe that's why I'm overbetting with a hand that crushes my opponents' calling ranges.

Because your goal is not making easy decisions, but profitable ones. You have no FE against a maniac, so you don't want the bottom half of a polarized range, and you often have a range advantage even with mediocre holdings, so you don't want to throw out the middle portion of a linear range.

If he's a maniac "super aggro fish" you are very far ahead of his range. He should have lots of straight draws (which we beat), flush draws (which we beat), one pair hands (which we beat), and two pair (which we beat). We are only slightly behind a straight and have 39% equity against a set. On the whole, we clearly crush his range, and I can't imagine he finds his fold button too much, so we must raise for value.

I would size up otf as we have so much equity against everything.Especially with fish callingstation involved that call with trash hands and will pay u when u improve.Im never ever folding ott against an super aggro fish.

Considering he showed a 6 and theres only 1 combo of 66 left on the turn, i feel like making it 200 OTF would have worked in this case. I think this guy is basically clicking buttons and would make this flop min raise with any 5, flush draw, and 6, as well as straights and 2p/sets, and would never fold to my raise (because he hates money). given that he's calling any 2 preflop (again, he hates money, and has repeatedly shown me calling 3bets with trash like 92s because "it was suited"), i feel like I could be ahead of his continuing range if i 3bet the flop. Like you said I have no fold equity, but I feel like hes gonna continue so wide that I have more than enough equity to raise. Worst case I have 36% against the 1 combo of 66, and more than that against 75 or 52, and I'm 100% certain he would put the $ in with a J or higher FD. Is my thinking correct?

We don't beat two pair wither.

I am with the rest in that I think calling his min-raise IP is the best line here as we can't be assured that we have FE. And if V has a FD and overs, we are flipping with him. I just don't think the absolute value of our hand is as strong as it looks given all that we have (top pair, gutter, FD).

Wow, how can you submit this post without even checking? We beat two pair by a lot.

V: 64s-63s, 43s, 64o-63o, 43o -- 43.07%
H: 6h7h -- 56.93%

Also not true, unless you consider 59/41 a flip.

We CURRENTLY don't beat two pair. And the idea of shoveling $$ in here thinking that we might have great FE against 2 pair is insane.

Hey, you play about as high a variance strategy as anyone on here....great. But without your image, most of us won't play the same way as profitably.

OP, and ATC, yes we can raise for value and it will be +EV, but calling and getting him to stack off after we hit will be +++EV. By calling we can pot control with our medium strength hand, which I still wouldn't be folding often unimproved, and bloat the hell out of the pot when we do hit a monster.

Yes we do CURRENTLY beat two pair. Saying that we don't is like saying that "AQs is just a drawing hand" and that you'd rather have the 22 side of an all-in scenario of AhQh versus 2d2c, even though the former has more equity. What is the difference between having to catch cards and having to fade cards? All that matters is one's equity.

I'm not shoveling money in because I think we might have FE. I don't think we have hardly any FE. I'm shoveling money in because we have the best hand (more precisely, our hand has a large equity edge against Villain's range) and we want to make max value from his weak range.

Whale rules apply. Definitely piling it in early in the hand against the somehow-deep maniacs. Pairs are goddamned gold. Value now and more value later in the hand.
Save delicate equity-preservation lines for tomorrow afternoon against the grinders and the blue hairs, game flow is everything.

AP once he raises, re-raise.

This point is at least reasonable, but I don't agree since

(1) we have a very large edge now, above 60% equity against his current range, so raising is massively +EV. I would agree with this sort of thinking with like AhKh, where we are still maybe a slight favorite, but much less so.

(2) We are oop, which makes it harder to guarantee that Villain pays us off when we get there. We have to start leading when we hit, and it's not like our hand will be disguised on a four-straight or three-flush board. Although Villain has shown propensity to make bad calls, he can still find a herofold with lol A4 when we barrel the four-straight turn or the heart.

(3) we have top pair, and this guy is "super aggro," so if we call, we have to continue calling, even most of the time on the river UI, i.e. we'll be forced to put money in when we're behind his range but priced in to call from the pot odds.

How exactly do villains have a range advantage? FWIW I would be opening 75s with described villains. If you actually think they have ALL combos of sets/straights, then their overall range is trash and they have a set/straight at a pretty low frequency.

TP+FD+SD is plenty of reason to bet. Our opponents are completely clueless about poker and we have a good hand which is certainly ahead of their continuing ranges, can happily continue vs. a x/r and plays really well on future streets.

I might re-raise for the same reasons. This guy's actions don't necessarily correlate much with his hand strength. He might not even know what his cards are.

Says the guy who constantly advocates minimum defense frequency vs lol passive 1/3 live players to avoid getting exploited and overbluffed. What a joke. You dont know what you’re talking about for live poker. When was the last time you walked into a 1/3 game? 50 years ago?

And advocating stacking off 300bb in a 3b pot 3-way with KK vs a check-raise? Really? I didnt need to see results to see how awful and wrong your analysis was. At least if you have AA the limper has 0 combos of AA he might have trapped pre, and it makes it slightly more acceptable to stack off.

It’s cool you’ve been studying GTO for the past 50 years in your shell at home, but it’s not super practical for 1/3. You’d do a big favor for these LLSNL players to stop posting your GTO nonsense and awful advice.