I don't understand how getting people to put in money bad is a bad result.

Just because someone puts money in bad does not me that we profit. In multiway pots it can take equity from us.

Consider 77 vs AT. The sevens are a small equity favorite. If someone decides to come along with K9 they are taking the worst of it by far, yet the sevens become a very slight loser and AT becomes a winner.

In this spot the equity is coming to us.

Super +1

OP the results of this hand show that you played it perfectly. I will let those who cannot see that refer to Garrick's posts above.

Really tilted that results are being viewed in a flawed manner here and thus shove pre is justified. That is totally wrong.

Also, this thread shows the flaws in democracy. Another deep thought I will let you all ponder.

Of course it was my own way of thinking. But persistent bad results led me to doubt. I was wondering if my reasoning was wrong or if I was just unlucky. That is why I asked for your help.

This is one way that live is much harder (psychologically) than OL. If this happened OL, you could just check your database and see the long-term results. In live, it takes soo long to get to the long term, and we tend to forget hands that were "standard" (aka, the suckout didn't happen) so it always seems like we're running bad and variance is killing us.

Only mpethy has the stats to back that up. The rest of us just have a "feeling" and a temptation to adjust based on short-term and traumatic results.

I agree with you!

Let me take a swing at this...

I'll assume the Hero has 45% against 3 opponents (AI, + two more 100bb stacks).

Before the flop, Hero's equity is .45*$70*4 = $126. So flatting so 2 more players can call wins Hero an additional $14 compared to if Hero shoves and picks up 80% of $140. (.8*$140= $112)

However, "What flops are we folding to?" Well, with $280 in the pot, and $130 left in stacks, none.

So Hero is losing $200, the 55% of the time He's not good. 0.55*$200 = -$110.

Case 1: Villains both miss, and fold flop. Hero wins $14 more 45% of the time, and loses $110 more 55% of the time. $280*.45 + -$110*.55 = +$16.

Flatting the $70 thus is a disaster unless Hero can be relatively sure that villains will put in more $$$ when they miss, or when they still cannot beat KK.

Uh... this should actually say, $280*.45 + (-)$200*.55 = $16.

at a normal 1-2 game i would raise to 14-16 table dependent in BB

at super tight tables where the normal raise is 7-9 and 13+ would get 0 callers then maybe i raise to 11-12 and at super action tables 20-22 would be perfect here

regardless 10 is too small at 90% of games given the action

as played i flat here to induce a shove or a loose call

with QQ i would shove but with KK only 20% of flops will be bad

i flat

Lapidator, you can't use all-in equity (45%) when analyzing whether villain calls the flop. Since all-in equity includes situations where villain flops a pair and rivers a second/trips.

Either they wrongly call with one pair in which case we win, or they surrender their equity with one pair and we win.

Even if they flop a strong draw and call we won't lose every time. Just like with one pair they won't know when they will hit.

Your analysis does show that checking and allowing them to better realize their all-in equity is a mistake. Shove all flops.

Bremen, what equity would you use for the situation where we shove all flops and we *hope* they all fold?

Separately, if we flat and get two more callers, the pot is $280 and we have $130 left. Hero shoves and...

Giving 410:130 odds to the first caller. 3.2:1, 24% equity.

Giving 540:130 odds to the 2nd caller. 4.2:1, 19% equity.

Basically any draw has the correct odds to call our flop shove. (Of course, their mistake was calling preflop!)

We're really really hoping that V2 and V3 both completely miss the flop.

This seems like way too much trouble when we can just 4B shove and pickup 80% of $140 uncontested...

We're not "hoping" they all fold. I'm hoping they call with an overpaid or top pair. Or maybe they call with AQ ui.

If they flop a strong draw/hand so be it. It is trivially easy to show they didn't have implied odds to hit it.

I am at work so I haven't much time to do the math, but I feel like if everyone flats, then MP has close to correct odds to call with SC looking for a flop of 8+ out draw (FD/SD), trips or two pair. I think roughly MP will achieve a flop like that 30% of the time. Pre MP has to call 70 into 210, right? And post flop, if BB jams, and UTG folds, MP still has odds to call for draws or with 2 pair +.

I think implied odds maybe makes up for small differences in equity vs pot odds.

Am I on the right track here?

MP is getting 260 to 60, plus the 130 implied if he hits

With suited connectors:

2.02% flop two pair
1.45 trips
0.84 flop flush
11.0 flop flush draw
1.31 straight
10.4 straight draw

total 27.02

so .7298 MP just folds the flop (although as I pointed out he may call with top pair type hands and lose more, but I'll ignore that)

-.7298 * 60

.0562 he'll flop a better hand trips/flush etc (I'm going to ignore redraws for all of this)

-.7298 * 60 + .0562 * 390

.214 to flop a flush draw/straight draw, for simplicity I'll assume he is 40% to win these hands

-.7298 * 60 + .0562 * 390 + -.214 * .6 * (60 + 130) + .214 * .4 * 390

-43.788 + 20.5218 - 24.396 + 33.384

-$14 on average

In reality MP will do far worse as I ignored redraws in all cases. For instance 2 pair will get counterfeited quite often. He will also be tempted to incorrectly call with top pair hands. I also ignored flops where UTG also calls. If UTG has trips we're already behind and don't care about MP's draw. If they both have a flush draw we profit greatly. Also I'm not sure if 40% is a good estimate for how often he wins with a draw. Depending on the actual flop odds vary greatly, if anything I think I'm high.

Is there anyway that the IO of stacking both other players post flop make a difference? Say MP draw beats our KK and UTGs set by the river.

Raise more pre. As played flat to bring along another player and shove any flop that doesn't have a K in it.

okay I follow the math and I'm pretty sure I understand why the positive results for him are a product of MPs equity and the expected winnings (390$). Why is it only 390$ and not inclusive of his 60$ call pre when addressing the FD/SD part.

If u shove u basically win $100 80% of the time. u have 50% equity even against 3 hands. Just by flatting u can win 280 50% of the time (and this is assuming villains get to river) which is $160 long term compared to $80 long term. Obviously this doesn't take into account the rest of the money u can win from their stacks. Yes the pot is big enough that an 8+ out is correct in calling but even SCs only flop 8+ out draws 20% of the time and flop 2 pairs+ 5% of the time. That means 75% of the time u pick up an extra $120 by flatting or get ur opponent to put their money in with 5 outs or less.

And check fold ace high flops. Very unlikely villains will bluff here. But hey if u hate variance then by all means shove even if that means throwing away lots of EV. Even qq I'd flat here but anything less is a shove or fold pre. I'd proably flat qq+ and shove aq+, 1010+

I definitely like a flat in hopes we can get a caller cause i doubt anyone is calling a shove or a flat but you are more likely to get a call or two from flatting and we want as much value as we can get here.

I definitely agree here that it is very unlikely that a villain would be bluffing post flop here. so why are we shoving all flops? What about Ace high dry boards vs 1 and/or 2 opponents.
For instance: A 9 4 flop rainbow

Would we not expect to only be called by an ace or better? and if we check and they shove are they really shoving as a bluff against an all in player w/ no side pot?

I could see making a case of shoving into draw heavy Ace high boards but i don't think we can say all flops. Maybe i'm wrong but would like to see what others think and why if they don't agree.

We bet ace high flops because if we check we allow them free cards to beat us. If they flop bottom pair they're not calling, but if we give them a free card and they bink a second pair that is a total disaster for us. Also assuming they never bluff us is a bad assumption. I wouldn't be shocked if someone bet pocket tens on an A92 board with the reasoning we would have bet the ace if we had it.

Checking an ace high flop is just lighting money on fire.

I agree with this completely. Given the stack sizes, obviously we're shoving all non-K flops, and check/shoving K-high flops.

Deeper stacks would allow for different play, IMHO.

Also, Bremen, thanks for running more math on conditions for flopping hands worth continuing.

So restating the situation, with one villain all in (V1), we have the following:
80% equity against V1 (all 5 cards)
72% chance to out flop V2
50-60% chance to out flop V2 + V3 (not derived, give V2 and V3 roughly 80% of their flop equity to account for overlap in range. Could be much worse for them though, E.g. both villains have A-BigX)

Looks like if we can get it to go 3 ways, we're way ahead, and 4 ways starts to become problematic.

Just to make it easier next time id raise more preflop, 10 way too small with that many limpers. As played, iso shove pf,

Grunch.

Flat pre, let them make a mistake by calling with their 77-1010 type hand. Shove any flop.

What kind of range does UTG or MP have to have to make checking an A high flop okay? Assume only one of them calls pre. Say Villian mostly calls with suited As and aq+.

Or to restate, how much of Vs range has to consist of Ax hands to consider checking the flop. And is such a range even likely. What type of player would this require?

Just being speculative.