A few scenarios I ran into this weekend at a table full of normal loose passive players playing fairly deep in the wee hours. I'm curious about what sizing we can use to squeeze in these spots. Assume the opening sizes are normal for how the table is playing and the competition is your standard loose passive recs that aren't to creative. They open to wide from all positions and call raises pre to wide.

All hands playing 1/3 in Houston:

1. (9 handed)

UTG+1 ($800) opens to $15
MP ($500) calls
LJ ($900) calls
CO ($700) calls
Hero ($1k) on BTN looks down at AQ
Blinds cover hero

Hero?

2. (6 handed)

BTN ($1k) straddles to $6
SB ($700) raises to $15
BB ($700) calls
LJ ($800) calls
HJ ($400) calls
Hero ($1k) in CO looks down at JJ
BTN will most likely be interested in defending his straddle if we go to small

Hero?

3. (9 handed)

UTG ($800) limps
UTG+1 ($700) raises to $20
MP ($covers) calls
HJ ($covers) calls
CO ($700) calls
BTN ($1k) calls
Hero in SB ($1.2k) looks down at AK
BB has about $500

Hero?

Thanks for any and all responses!

My default is 3x + 1 for each overcaller when in position and 4x-5x +1 for each overcaller when out of position.
Hand 1: ~$120

Hand 2: ~$100

Hand 3: ~$160

All good raises, only none of these are a squeeze. Every hand is a legit raining hand with good equity. I was of the impression a squeeze was basically a bluff with cards that have modest/poor equity.

I'm not good at bet sizing, but Quatum seems to be agreement with most of the advice I've read. Sure, some may tweak a bit, but the general principle is the same. I will have to incorporate some kind of sizing rule myself.



I think there are value squeezes and bluff squeezes. OP is showing value squeezes.

I'll extrapolate a bit and suggest that the amount of the squeeze should not be determined by it's type. Although very few of the players I play with (1-3) would be able to determine a pattern if I had one.

I prefer to keep things smaller myself. There's nothing wrong with getting multiple callers. Especially in Hands 1 and 2 where we are IP.

Hand 1 - AQs is premium that's going to dominate soooo many hands and plays great multiway. ~ $75 is a good balance imo that will find a call or two (maybe more and that's fine!).

Hand 2 - JJ is also a premium that's going to play just fine IP facing multiple callers. We don't need to flop a set to win. Being IP and having the betting lead is going to nullify the vulnerability of this hand imo. $75 seems fine for me but I don't mind $100 at all.

Hand 3 - Pot is a bit bigger and we're OOP. Def going big somewhere around $150 +/-

Table full of idiot passive calling stations. I would NOT want to blow them out of the pot by betting 10x the first raise here. Kick it up to $60, $75, or so. Figure on outplaying them after the flop; you'll get paid off if you hit.

Against a table of good players, yeah, I pump it up to $150 or so, cashing in on my equity then and there. Not a bad outcome if everyone folds or if I wind up heads-up.

Backwards thinking. Giving bad players good odds to call only outplays yourself. Giving good players bad odds to call so they have easier decisions is equally bad.

$120+ is the correct bet. Also as someone else mentioned, these arent squeezes, these are standard value raises. A squeze would be JTs.

As a fellow Houston poker player, I assume you're getting called in at least one spot no matter what...and as others have said, these are all value squeezes. Therefore, bump it up! $100, $125, and $200 will all get the job done.

By the way, where in Houston do you play? You can PM if you want.

Not really. It's never strictly an odds calculation preflop, because there are other factors such as the skill of your opponents postflop. I don't mind giving good pot odds to people who don't know what to do with them. I raise with QQ, some nimrod with J8 calls and then calls down all three streets postflop when an 8 hits. I want that guy in the hand. Blowing him out with a big manly raise would be a mistake.

^ Basically what you're advocating for is playing small pots with bad players and big pots with good players. I dont like it.

This is a good discussion as these spots come up all the time.

I play in a deep nl low stakes /mid stakes private game with a variety of skill levels. I find, even with the spots, I agree with Javi's take. Big raise pre, especially in position. Not saying you're wrong MR, just my take...

$125 first hand.
$135 second hand.

3rd hand, can get behind something larger as you are oop with the best drawing hand to start. $175.

You have it wrong. I never said anything about what size pots you should play with any type of players. Let me rephrase.

Preflop, one reason to put in big manly reraises is to drive people out. You might want to do that because your opponents play well postflop. Say you have QQ and re-pop preflop. You won't make any real money postflop against good players who call, because they're smart enough to realize that their J9 isn't necessarily the equivalent of a royal flush when the flop comes J 6 3. At most, they'll call one continuation bet.

Bad players, in contrast, will ride that pair like a barrel over Niagara Falls. Their postflop play is poor--that's why they're bad players. So I don't want to blast them out of pots preflop.

Conversely, I do want to blast out good players, and I won't be playing very many big pots with them because they'll usually fold. And if they do call, I'm usually in coin-flip territory.

This is simply my approach and certainly not the only one. But I'd rather play small ball with the fish than use a high-variance approach. I know that makes me unmanly.

Never seen anyone refer to a big raise as "manly" before. Not quite sure what to make of it. Oh, I know what you're talking about, it's just that the reference strikes me as odd. If I heard you make that reference in a game, I would consider it a character flaw and look for a way to exploit it.

hand 1 is just so valuable to play this IP for a big pot, i'm going 60 here expecting a cascade of calls and lots of fun flops

hand 2, his raise to 15 from the small blind is puzzling and polarizes him to medium drawing hands or the nuts...I'm going a flat 100 here to try and iso the SB or just win the blind money.

hand 3 is extremely interesting and i can see a range of sizings depending on table dynamics, as default i'm just gonna go 200 here, expecting to win the dead money most of the time. we don't need any callers here but we aren't sad when we get one. if we get a caller we have very low SPR which helps us play our AKs

I'm not sure how you would do that, since I was referring to an old Irish Spring commercial

I do think that there's a bit too much testosterone on these forums, as everybody seems to recommend "SHOVE!!!!!" as the answer to all problems. One needs a more nuanced approach than that. When the opposition is weak, a huge bet may drive them out when they were going to pay you off (subsequently). Yeah, I know that betting smaller carries risks of its own, but if I feel that I play better than my opponents postflop, why wouldn't I want them in?

Um, I think you're mixing up threads a bit. A preflop squeeze, by definition, leaves room for a flop bet, though you hope to take it down preflop.

As to other threads when people say to shove, you will almost always have more than one opinion and some discussion. Like so much else in poker, it depends. You have to think on your feet, at the table. I've shoved for value and been called and shoved as a bluff and gotten a fold ... it's context and villain dependant.

$115, $115, $175 imo

I get what people are saying about playing in position with strong hands against bad, passive players and I agree you're going to have a significant advantage. I just don't think that advantage is going to be better than a guaranteed $15 dead in the middle or calling $50+ more. Like I'm pretty sure you could do whatever the **** you wanted in these pf spots (as long as you don't fold) and expect to be +EV in the long run, but trying to get some of the passive money to fold is probably going to maximize your EV.

Also yeah, anthropomorphizing bet sizes is really ****ing weird and prob projection more than anything else. It's not about being "manly," it's about picking the right tool to maximize an edge.

Well, bet sizing is important as sometimes it will be a limp/reraise, forcing you to fold. Also, you will sometimes get called and they will hit.

I'm not really sure what you're referring to, sorry.

Sometimes you squeeze and lose the pot.

You mentioned limp/reraising though? Only person that is eligible for a limp/reraise was hand 3 where hero has AKs, which is probably player dependent on what hero should do.

I still don't really understand what you're getting at. I understand we're going to lose the pot sometimes but we should win more money than we lose in the long run when we choose to 3bet, whether it's to $65 or $130. $130 may lose bigger when it loses, but $65 loses more often due to getting more action.

I am referring to choosing the bet size.