Yeah, 2pear is minimum for me. I might continue with just TP but it's pretty action dependent (who's betting from where and for how much and whether they got called/raised or not and by who, etc.). I'll of course sometimes accidentally fold the best hand once and a while, but overall I think it's a ~relatively small mistake (especially compared to the times we are crushed and start putting in some real money drawing dead). It's not my favourite preflop spot, but I just try to do the best I can here with the situation I've been dealt.

I'm basically treating preflop like just getting really good immediate odds / IO closing the action with a speculative hand. We're rarely looking to continue postflop with a speculative hand that hits just TP. If we are, then preflop is meh.

GimoG

Why is checking better than betting small?

When we are best, we are facing like a 74 out draw between all those Vs, but even a small bet will make calls by most of them bad individually. Especially because we are folding to heat.

It's very unlikely that someone bluffs. I like our chances of getting action from worse much more via bet call than check call. Is JJ, or an 8 or even Q9 betting? Aren't they calling a lot?

We can fold if raised. If called, we can observe how everyone reacts and reevaluate the turn.

I also think we can wind up losing less to sets. For example, we bet 1/3 and fold to a raise. Vs, we check, call 2/3 pot. Maybe call on the turn. Maybe fold on river.

I don't think I hate betting small, but this board is so drawless that there is no reason for big hands to announce themselves, so we mostly just bloat the pot for difficult decisions OOP on the turn.

Gpreferacheck/evaluate,butabetsmallprobablyain'thorrible,imoG

There are a number of reasons not to bet, but relative position is a big factor here. With the pfr to our left, and 4 players behind, there is a remarkable amount of info to glom via checking which is going to help us determine the best line to take.

That's why we bet smaller than a V would bet their set. We are naming the price. We are making the pot less bloated. A set might very well slow play now by not raising us, but either way we lose 1/3 pot by leading into a set. If we check, a set always bets, especially because the PFR will have checked if he missed and will obv bet his sets. They probably bet more than 1/3 and we call. The pot is bigger and we're a little less informed, I think because we are reacting to them instead of vice versa. (e.g. did he think about raising us on the flop, or make a quick call while trying to look strong?) I think the turn is harder to navigate now. Especially because we are always checking the turn. Just seems like a guessing game.

Same thing applies when the PFR has KK or AA, I think.

FWIW, we can do the same thing with sets. We're value targeting many of the same hands, plus AA and KK which will not be eager to put much in.
While the field has fewer outs, gutshots and higher sets will be brutal.

But as Amanaplan says, we get so much more info for cheap by just checking. After all, we're probably not going to put any money in if someone raises the flop, or there's a big bet and a call or two, or maybe even simply a big bet, or the preflop raiser continues into the world, etc. It's not all about just setting our price when crushed.

GpreferscheckingG

I don't agree. If we check and PFR bets, that is true. Though he might check AA. If it goes crazy, with bet and raise, then we saved a little money. But as you said, that shouldn't happen on a dry board. If someone bets, or even if it goes bet/call (after pfr checks), I think we are purely guessing, but often calling.

So we rarely really save the lead bet from a being lost to a better hand, but often face a larger bet that is more likely to be ahead of us, than are the hands that would call a smaller bet.

As I said earlier, it's not just naming our price to bigger hands. It's about being called by bad qs, gutshots, 8s and also preventing those hands from drawing for free. There are 5 other players. Let's say it's like, AJ, KQ, 22, 44 and JT. Look how much crap can get there! Plus backdoor draws. Yet KQ calls and nobody ever bluffs or bluff raises. Checking seems downright bad.

I'm not cherry picking too much either. Mix in 9t, any 8, any K, any Q any PP and maybe the odd 34s. That covers a lot of their possible hands.

@ ES

I think we're kinda stuck between the two evils of not giving the world a free card during the times we're ahead versus not putting in decent $$$ when in a bad spot (behind and OOP). I tend to lean towards the first evil, but maybe it's because I'm really just treating this as a drawing hand preflop and I'm wasn't looking to hit just TP, so I'm more cool mentally with just check/folding. Kinda like if we were setmining with 77 and the flop comes 6 high or even T high; yeah, we might be best, but for the most part I didn't hit my set so I'm mentally done with things. If the flop checks around (which indicates I might have the best hand and admittedly just gave everyone a free card) then I'll deal with it on the turn as best I can.

GimoG

We are taking the initiative in a situation (TPTK first to act in a six-way, raised pot) where doing so is more likely to get us in trouble OOP than get us paid by a worse hand. The time to try to take control was PF with $60 of dead money in the pot and a chance to just win the hand right there. If the UTG raiser had 4-bet your 3-bet, you could've folded and moved on. If the raiser had called, you would have been playing HU OOP against a likely range of TT, JJ, AK, AQs, and KQs.

To me, donking this flop screams, "I have a made hand that I need to protect!" I feel like we're defining our range to top pair, 99-JJ, and some 83 & Q3 that said, "Fuggit," PF when we lead here. Sets of eights and threes and Q8 would check, and queens would've 3-bet PF. If we were called by a worse hand after we bet this flop, I think that villain's intention would be to move us off our hand on later streets, not to simply call down with a worse Q and hope they're good.

When we call PF with AQo in this spot, I feel like we're relegating ourselves to playing it like a speculative hand post-flop like GG said.

Interesting. I can't say how it will be interpreted. But I can say I'm leading 88 and especially 33 here much of the time. I want action from overpairs, gutters, Qs and even 8s. Now might be the best time to get it. Most of this, I'm also targeting with AQ and maybe even KQs.

99-JJ I'm never betting here. THOSE would be my check/eval hands, along with worse queens and 8s. Mostly hoping to check around. Often folding to bets. Occasionally bluff catching or getting tricky.

I'm guessing you meant "underpairs" since KK and AA would've most likely re-raised PF, although the original raiser could have those. Anyway, you say you want action from the hands you listed, but it's important to note that you want passive action. You want to be called by worse hands. You don't really want that smoke on later streets though because you'll likely be facing a decision for the rest of your chips in a big pot with one pair.

Maybe you're used to getting more than one street of value from a worse pair by betting out in this situation in the games you play. But I don't see how if, by your own admission, you're only leading this flop with the very top of your range (AQ, sets, and, I'm assuming, Q8). That's pretty exploitable.

Put yourself in the shoes of one of the five villains. Would you call a 1/3-pot lead from the SB on this flop with "[under]pairs, gutters, Qs and even 8s"? Let's say you would, and you're the only one who calls that bet. Are you really going to just call down two more streets unimproved?

GG again winning the thread by not even wanting to flop top pair after limping AQ. "Oh no, the SPR is lol massive and we're multiway, so I can't PSB my way to an easy stack-off, which is basically the only tactic I'm "cool with" post-flop, so let's just check/fold to even the littlest of action! But hey that's me, to each his own! Oh, by the way, I suck at deepstack."

Sorry for this cheap shot. I am just a grumpy old man who wishes there was an ignore button.

Here you go homey

gobbledygeek
This message is hidden because gobbledygeek is on your ignore list.

I did mean overpairs, held by the PFR. But, it would be nice to get 1 street from JJ or TT as well, which is possible. Hadn't thought of that.

In another world, where I worry about someone exploitatively folding top pair at 1/3 because they know my donk into 5 people range is strong, even though it's a bit unconventional, I could lead with some gutshots here. I might do so anyway, occasionally. Not for balance per se, but because I might be giving myself an OK price to stack a set that slow plays, or bluff someone who looks weak or something as it is quite possible nobody really hit this flop hard enough to put much money in. And a flop bet would get through right away sometimes. Like, if the PFR was loose or had AK,JJ,tt and GG was closing the action with bottom set.

No, I am not looking to stack off with this hand very often. We'll be seeing how people react and re-evaluating as we go. We might make small leads each street, we might check fold the turn. We might check the turn and bet the river, etc. On the whole, I will be checking the turn pretty often when called. All of those pesky 44s and KJs should be cleared away. This seems a much better street to check than the flop.

Unless we are advocating the check fold, I still don't see what's so different about checking and usually calling. Except now we are naming our price. When we check call, are we playing for 3 streets of value, or for stacks? I think their ranges are STRONGER when it goes check call, and we're often playing for MORE money.

Vs are playing their hands very straightforwardly here. We've got TPTK and were' scared! I'm not too worried that someone calling with a gutter is going to bluff me later. It's possible. Hopefully someone prone to going nuts here does so when I have a set!

Instead of repeating myself more, I guess I'll just layout what I see V's having and someone can tell me where I'm wrong there.

PFR: AA,KK,JJ,AQ,QQ, misses. Leading into him is maybe not ideal, but it does force him to play pretty face up and at least we are really annoying him with anything but QQ. If he calls or raises we are generally done. We lose a 1/3 psb. Big whoop. He was very unlikely to c-bet bluff, so we don't lose out on that. The most likely hand that beats us is KK and we gave ourselves a fair price to suck out. We don't let AK or lower PPs draw. On the whole, I'm not very concerned with him.

Everyone else: 1) Cards that have great collective equity but would make mistakes by calling individually: All PPs, all pairs, gutshots, kings, backdoors. We charge them now, rather than letting them draw for free.

2) Hands that have us beat. If they raise, we fold and lose a 1/3 psb. Big whoop. If we check call, we probably lose more. It should be noted, there aren't millions of hands that beat us even though it's 6ways. 33 (sometimes folds pre) 88, qq (sometimes 3! pre, 1 combo), q8 and q3 and 83 (often fold pre and we have outs).

3) Worse hands that will call us. Varies widely by player. Very few will fold a Q. Some will call gutters and 8s. Maybe JJ or TT. Some people will make even worse calls because it's LSNL.

4) worse hands that will bluff raise us. Almost none. Even if someone was wont to spew in a 6 way pot, there are no combo draws.

5) Worse hands that will value bet if we check to them: Not that many, depending on players. Worse queens. But maybe they'll be scared too. Again, WE'RE scared with AQ. Maybe they check QJ.

Maybe JJ from the last guy. Since they all act after the PFR, if he does check they will be more apt to bet a Q, which is one argument for checking. But by the same token, if the PFR folds to our bet, they can comfortably call with a Q or another light hand. Especially if they believe we always slowplay monsters.

6) Worse hands that will bluff if we check to them. Very few. Again, maybe the last guy takes a stab with a gutter or something. When it checks to him, nobody should really be trapping much except for possibly us.

7) Hands that will call and bluff us later: Possible, but I'm not too worried. Most pairs will probably just take a showdown. You could do something like check the turn, then check the river if it goes check check to get a worse Q to value own itself, lose less when crushed and pick off some bluffs if the player is aggro. If the player is passive you could go B/C/B, B/B/C or make a more standard bet on the turn and then another small bet on the river.


If this is at all accurate, I think a bet is right.

I'll shut up for a while.

So I've looked at the math behind 3 betting pre-flop in this spot.

There is $79 in the pot when its my turn to act.
The standard raise amount would be 3x the initial raise + 1 initial bet for each caller. So $45 (15 * 3) + $60 (15 * 4) equals $105. When I do 3-bet OOP with a hand like this, I tend to want to make a raise a bit bigger than normal. Partly to exploit, partly to set a "position tax". So I'm thinking its gotta be about $120 to pick up the pot and seriously discourage callers. Something like $75 is way to small and encourages V1 to call with his whole range, and that in turn will pull in almost everyone else in. Not what we want to happen with AQo

So the questions is, what range does V1 raise with UTG? And how much of that will he fold to a 3-bet, what he will call with, and what will he 4-bet with.

I've gone ahead and put in TT+, ATs+, KJs+, QJs+, AJo+, KQo
This makes sense to me based on the KQo hand that we played. I think he would overvalue a hand like KJs, as rookie players tend to do, and there is the Royal Flush Jackpot which encourages them even more.

So that's 79 combos of hands that V1 can have. Out of that range, I don't think he is folding the suited broadway hands, and is only folding AQo AJo and KQo
So he's only folding 28 combos out of 79.... ie only folding 35% of the time

He probably only 4-bets with AA and KK. But he might also call with those hands to trap, meaning we would lose a lot of money on a board like this, as we can't check fold.

But lets assume he does 4-bet AA, and KK all the time.
11% we lose the $117 straight away.... 9 combos / 79 combos.

54% of the time we are going to be in a big pot OOP against a villain who has over 200bbs. No thanks. Our equity against a calling range of AK, QQ-TT, ATs+, KJs+, QJs+ is 46%. And that's assuming he opened UTG and then calls a 4-bet with a hand like QJs... which is possible but not 100% certain. We will lose a lot more money if we hit and Ace, and he has AK or AA etc....

If you assume his range is tighter than I have, then that only makes my point stronger, as he will be folding less, and calling us with a stronger range.

Flops like this are infinitely easier to play if we 3! Pre.

For those that are saying that we are happy taking this down pre. Are you also happy being called in 1 spot? Or is the intent of your 3! Only to get the pot right now?

If it's the latter, why not save our 3! Bluffs for less premium hands, like A4s or something like that. To me if we are 3! This hand it's for value and I would feel we are probably ahead of most calling ranges if we get called. So to me sure taking down the pot right now is good, but I'm also ok getting called in one (maybe 2) spots here too as I feel we are typically going to be good against the capped ranges people will just flat our 3! With.

Exactly,+1. We dont need a hand as good as AQ, if our primary goal is to blastoff to $120 and simply take it down pre.

Pre-flop I think flatting and 3! both have their merits depending on table/dynamic. In this instance the next course of action is to check/evaluate.

AP hero checked.
Villain bet $50
Everyone folded around back to me.
Your action?

Call.

Flat. It's got to slow him down a little unless he has AA/KK. The board is so dry he can't think you are on a draw, so he must think you have something fairly strong.

If you raise, you'd have to fold to a re-raise. Would you raise a set here? Will he fold AA/KK?

More info about his playing style would help.

A pre flop 3b has tremendous fold equity vs. pps, potentially JJ- given the hand history, as well as strong equity hands like broadway scs. At $600, a 3b to say $115 does not offer set-mining odds, much less for over cards and scs. It also folds a potential chop (12 combos).

AQ makes for a better 3b hand than say A5s because it blocks premium hands like QQ/AQ/KQs.

Post flop play is an important factor, so calling is fine. However, the dead $ is too tempting, imo.

As played, call the $50 on this board texture.

By that logic should we not 3bet AA because it’s too strong a hand to waste squeezing from the blinds? If I’m 3bet an UTG open I want raw equity and blockers in which case AQ > A4s. The goal isn’t necessarily to take it down - you should be indifferent. But having the equity to fall back on is important when you do get called. The “playability” of A4s is overrated when one caller at $120 will create a $300 pot on the flop with $480 stack behind.

I agree this was my point. 3! Here is done for value not as a bluff. Yeah sure it's probably "thin value" which is why we are folding if someone ships over us. But if you are simply 3! Here in hopes everyone folds and you scoop doing it with A4 and flatting AQ are probably better. I don't condone polarizing your 3! Here, but if you are simply 3! AQ in hopes of folds that's crazy. This hand is too good to turn into a bluff (which is what you are doing).

Don't get me wrong if I 3! AQ here and it folds around I'm happy. That just isn't my intent when I 3! Here.