I'm in MP in a 2/5 game (100 BBs) and pick up 66. UTG OR 3BB's and I call, as does the Btn and both blinds. Flop is 667
It's checked to me - should I check or bet my quads on this wet-looking flop?

I would bet. To me the biggest question is sizing. I would probably bet 35. I want to get called by draws.

I fold pre, bet flop

I might bet depending on my table image and how often players will defend with over-cards on this board. But in general, you should be checking most of the time. Let some draws or over-cards hit if you want to play a big pot. If you bet here, you will mostly win a small pot as no one can have a strong hand to play back at you. Yes you may get some action from flush draws and straight draws. Issue is most good players will not want to start building a big pot early on a draw when they could be drawing dead to a made full house. At present the only hand you are really going to get action from is 77 or 78 or maybe an over-pair. Most poker books will say you need to be checking this hand almost 100% of the time. If it checks around, someone may try to steal or bet when they hit an ace on the turn. Only if you are seen as one who likes to bet into people with your draws or two over-cards and you know they will look you up when you do bet can you make a bet here and it needs to be a small bet.

In general, this hand is much better played slow and then jam the river. This hand will definitely help you balance out some of your river bluffs when you are chasing a draw and miss. Remember pots get bigger on later streets so a river bet will usually make more than a flop bet. Also if you just check call, it looks like you are drawing and many players will bet their top pair or over-pair on the turn to try and charge you for the draw. Let them be the aggressor. You need to play passive here. This will also help prevent your opponents from playing too aggressive against your future draws as they will remember how you slow played this hand against them.

You want to show this hand down on the river. The worse outcome you could have is to make a small bet on the flop and everyone folds to you and hand is over, on to next hand.

If you do bet and get called, you should definitely check the turn. If they check the turn behind you, you will need to make a very small value bet in most cases and hope they think you are weak and they hit a hand to re-raise you.

Also, remember many people will call a turn or river bet knowing they will not have to face a bet on every street. Usually this goes flop bet and call then check the turn because if you bet turn and they call, they still have to fear a large river bet. By checking the turn and betting the river they know their call will end the hand, so they can call with much weaker hands that would not have called a turn bet.

So I would mostly check unless you know specifically at this particular table you will get called by multiple players and may even get raised by a bluff.

I don't agree with the above advice at all. I think the name of the game with LLSNL is making big hands and looking to paly for stacks. Checking the flop or betting the flop and then checking the turn goes against that.

So the pot has 15BB less the rake, and stacks are 100 BB. SPR is about 7. Hard to play for stacks without taking the betting lead here.

Even though betting looks strong, I think you should bet about 8-9BB. Flush and straight draws aren't going to fold, along with overpairs to the first bet. If you bet 9BB and get a caller, the pot becomes about 32BB, your SPR now becomes less than 3, so it becomes pretty easy to get it all in the next two streets, especially if the draws come in.

If you bet and everyone folds, then you were not likely to get anymore money.

Wrong wrong wrong !!!

Yes if you have a very loose and aggressive table that like to fight over every flop, then you can try betting here, but mostly it should be the pre-flop raiser who continues betting. If you lead out or re-raise, most good thinking players will start to worry you at least have one six or an over-pair to the unpaired board card - in this case the 7.

I often do lead or raise when I flop a set, but that is totally different. When you flop a set, it is much more disguised. Your bet can represent many holdings especially if you size it correctly. Likewise, there are many other hands that can give you action including draws, top pair hands and over-pairs. Sets are also more vulnerable as they will loose to the flush draw and straight, so they have to bet bigger on a scary flop.

How often have you seen a flop come with a pair and two players get it all in on the flop or turn? I have seen it many times. It is rare for an over-pair or draw to get it all in here. With most flopped pairs it ends up being two players both have trips (in this case 6x) and it becomes a game of who has the bigger kicker vs who hit their kicker to make a boat. However, when you hold quads, no one else can have trips to play against you - except for 77 in this specific example.

If you want to try and play for stacks, you can make an over-sized bet on the flop, which will look like you are trying to steal. But will AKo give you much action with a large overbet? Will a draw want to call when they are not getting the correct pot odds to draw. Most players will only make this mistake once or twice before they learn not to put a large percentage of their money into a draw which could be drawing dead. Who is to say you don't already have 67 in this situation? Since no one else can have a six, there is little chance for anyone to look you up.

On the other hand, what if someone has 44 or 55 and they hit a 4 or 5 on the turn or 9T hits a T on the turn. Once you check the flop, now there are only two streets of action and players will feel more comfortable trying to stab at a pot that no one seems to want. If someone bets you could even put in a min raise. This looks like a feeble attempt to re-steal the pot from someone else who was trying to steal. In this case, the semi-bluff draw will usually call but weaker hands will not.

If several players call a small turn bet and then you get a bet and a call on the river, especially if the river brings in a flush or straight, then you can put in a big river bet which polarizes your hand making it look like you have a boat or nothing. If someone makes a strong hand like another boat, they will certainly pay you off. Lets say someone has 78 and another 7 comes on the river. They will likely re-raise all in thinking they just caught up against a hand like A6.

On most reasonable tables, you stand to make much more money slow playing a monster like this. You can generally give up the notion of playing for stacks in this situation. Be glad to extract an extra 3 or 4 bets with a hand like this when the turn and river are blanks. But if you slow play it, every once in a while a card that looks to be a blank will have hit one or two players hard - such as a T making one player Tens full and another player a straight. If you are going to have any chance of playing for stacks, it will be on the river against multiple players. You do not want to narrow the field early by betting the flop. Keep them all in and give them all a chance to hit something they feel can beat A6.

Again, there are some exceptions to this generalization. If you are at a really loose and wild table then you may be able to bet here. But it all depends on your table image. If you are seen as being a good solid player, people will not call a large bet but they may try to re-steal from you if they have a draw and you bet small. But on these sorts of loose aggressive tables, you can safely sit back and call while letting others take the betting lead. Never take the betting away from aggressive players. Always play weak against aggressive players when you have the nuts. And, if the table is playing tight and gets checked around, there was not likely to be much money made by betting either. A 2/3rds pot size bet on the turn is likely all you can hope for.

That's a really long post and I disagree with almost everything you said, but I'll touch on a few points.

1) The PFR already checked, we're not betting into the PFR

2) I would never advocate overbetting this flop

3) Slow playing monsters is almost never the way to make the most money at LLSNL

I'd bet joke small $10

Again you are wrong, wrong, wrong.

Most good players extract the most money by making thin value bets and keeping their opponents guessing and by making good bets with strong drawing hands. Trying to play for stacks by showing too much aggression on this flop is a huge mistake. It is no different then shoving all in with AA pre-flop when you are 500 BB deep.

I am not saying you cannot bet the flop. I have repeatedly said it depends on the table and my table image. Good players extract extra value by exploiting their opponents leaks. If they will all call too much on this board, then by all means bet. I agree you should keep the bet very small, 1/4th pot. That makes it look like you are trying to steal or get good pot odds with a drawing hand. But only another drawing hand is likely to call that bet and if they miss, they will likely fold to another bet. But if you check it back, they may try to turn their missed draw into a bluff on the turn or river.

Again, if you think the table is tight and it will check through if you check, then making a small bet is not wrong. If you get a couple callers, you could end up playing for stacks on the river. But if it is a loose aggressive table and you check, there is a good chance that the late position player will try to steal after everyone checks and then the PFR will defend with his pair or two over-cards. But you cold calling in middle position pre-flop cries out as a middle pair or suited connectors. Thinking opponents will look at the pot size and their stack and decide not to call a flop bet with draws when they realize they could get pot committed or understand they cannot get proper implied odds when they do hit. I mean how much value do they expect to extract with a flush on the river with a paired board. Not many one pair hands will call their value bet on the river.

Looks like there's some serious disagreement on this one Personally I agree with Jonathan Little who says that you should rarely slowplay, and then only on the driest of flops. Since the table was playing pretty loose, calling or raising with even the tiniest piece of the board, I decided that a small (25% pot) bet was better than a check. I figured to get called by any seven, flush draws, straight draws and gutters. Also probably any two overcards or even an underpair for that amount. And if one of the blinds was planning a check-raise I didn't want to disappoint him. I've also got a better chance of stacking someone playing three betting rounds rather than two. Since everybody folded to the small bet I assume none of those hands were out there, so I guess in that case a check probably wouldn't have profited too much either.

Perfect example of why you should have checked. I have read over 25 poker books and watched many of Johnathan Little's podcasts. I think you will find he and I actually agree on this. You are taking what he has said about sets and you are extrapolating them to this situation, which is totally different. I have already explained why in my other lengthy comments.

Reasons to check

Not likely anyone will have much to call or raise with on the flop

If you bet the flop and turn, it will definitely be representing at least three of a kind and you will no longer be able to extract value from other players with weak one pair hands.

You want to give the other players a chance to hit a strong hand from which you will be able to extract even more value. For that to happen, they have to be able to draw cheap - in this case, at least one free card.

You do not want to narrow the field on the flop. Let them all have a free card. That makes it 4 times as likely someone will make a hand that can call a small value bet on each subsequent street. If you bet the flop and only one person calls, then they miss the turn, they will fold to any turn bet. If you check the flop and four players see the turn, more likely one is to call your turn bet. Keeping the pot multi-way helps the pot grow exponentially when you make a small bet and get 4 calls. Then the pot may get large enough that a couple players will take an interest in it and want to fight over it with their one-pair hands.

Again by checking one street, it makes others feel they can call one bet to see if they improve. They do not have to fear a bet on all three streets. It also makes them feel more confident that their top pair or over-pair may be good.

If it is a loose aggressive table, you do not have to bet, someone else will bet when you check. So no need to expose the strength of your hand when you will accomplish the same goal by checking. For example, a check raise is definitely not in our playbook on this flop. So your only two options are to either bet or check call.

On an overly tight table, you have a must check with this hand as you will likely not get any action when you bet.

Never take the offensive lead against a normally aggressive player who may think your passive play is a sign of weakness or a draw. These sorts of players will on occasion fire a three barrel bluff into you. Why would you ever want to remove this from their list of options?

Final point. Go back and read one of my first comments. You want to show this hand down and make at least one or two bets off this hand. For all the times you will call pre-flop with small pocket pairs only to fold when two or three over-cards hit the flop, it is a crying shame to get no action when you finally do hit your hand. I said before how terrible it will be if you bet and everyone folds and on to the next hand we go, no one ever seeing what a monster you flopped. Just what I predicted would happen.

But great hand for discussion. Obviously many players made the same mistake you did - and I used to make this mistake myself until I started reading books and really analyzing my play. Many think the big hands play themselves and are not worthy of much discussion, but that is not true. You want to maximize value out of all your hands. Had another player backed into a back door flush, you might have been able to extract value from them by checking the flop and the turn. If someone has a hand which they feel is worthy of calling a bet on the flop, they will usually bet out on the turn if it checks around on the flop. So not much harm in letting it check around.

Also, as I said before, if it gets checked around twice, odds are very high that there was no money to be won by betting the flop or the turn. Most good players will recognize that when no one shows interest on either of the first two streets, it is a great time to steal the pot on the river. Often the first to bet will win the pot. So, had you checked both the flop and the turn, odds are quite high that you would have gotten at least one player to bet out on the river or call your river bet.

I myself have been in the small blind with a small suited ace against 4 players and flop came KQ9 turn was a 4 and river was a 7, completing a flush. It checked around on the flop and turn. I considered betting out on the river but decided any middle pair would surely call me. I checked and it checked all the way around. The button turned over 22 to win the pot.

You are so wrong about no money to be made by checking since no one called the small flop bet. I have personally seen flop come AAA and it checked around to the river where it went bet call raise call call call. One person turned over QQ another turned over KK, a third turned over 99 and the one who raised last turned over AJ. How many of them would have called a flop bet?

It’s a lot better to bet if there was a higher card IMO. Like if it was a J, someone can easily engage in calldown mode where not a lot of cards will discourage them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually they all might have, especially KK and QQ which are the second and third nuts.

True to some degree but I would still slow play in a multi-way pot. Any bet on a paired board into 4 opponents shows considerable strength or utter stupidity. Those maniacs who will try and steal on paired boards will go broke when you trap them with your slow play.

This changes completely if we are heads up going into the flop. Depending on how the pre-flop betting went, usually the one who bet last is saying I have a better pair or two higher cards than you do. So a small pair is more likely to hit the other players range. Whereas a high pair is more likely to hit the range of whoever bet last. In this case, you generally do want to play it hard and fast as the strength of your hand is well disguised.

Depending on if you limp called verses 3-bet then called a 4-bet, your opponent will mostly put you on an over-pair or high cards like AK. In heads up, your initial flop bet will look like a continuation bet or possibly AK especially of hearts or any good over-pair. This is a totally different scenario from playing the same hand in a multi-way pot.

I think this is another area where good strategy players like Johnathan Little are misunderstood. Just because he says to play quads heads up strong and fast does not mean we can extrapolate that same advice to multi-way pots. Whenever you are reading advice you need to be sure it is specific to the situation.

Even in heads up play, how you should play will depend greatly on how deep you both are and how much strength your opponent showed pre-flop and how much strength you showed pre-flop. What would your opponent expect you to do if you had AA or KK? Would KK play more defensively because they were worried we had AA? If you were the last aggressor and your opponent just called, he may still not want to play for stacks with hands like JJ because he fears you have AA or KK.

This is where poker really gets fun. Often we can exploit even solid players in situations like this. If you make a big 2 x pot bet on the flop, will he call with JJ thinking you have AK and are trying to steal or will he think you have AA. Does your opponent think you would over-bet with AA for value or bet smaller to keep in smaller paired holdings like JJ. Will he look at your stack sizes and realize you are trying to play for stacks when you are really deep? If your opponent will fold JJ to an oversized bet, then you obviously need to bet less, but that also means you can bluff him off JJ when you do have AK on a small paired board. Sometimes it is better to lead out with that large bet on the flop with hands like KK where you block AK and you can be fairly confident that your opponent will only call if he has AA rather than betting small and getting called on multiple streets.

Back to prior post's comment re what if there was a larger cad on the flop such as a Jack. Even then, there are not many hands that can play strong against four opponents on the flop. Lets say flop is J66. AJ will certainly call one or two small bets heads up, but how deep will they go against 4 other opponents who could easily have a 6 or an over-pair. And what about hands like TJ or QJ who also have to fear AJ and KJ.

Now, if flop is J66 and everyone checks the flop then the turn is another face card or better yet, another Jack, then players who pick up a better two pair or improve to open ended straight draw or make a set or trips will certainly call a bet or two. If turn is a T, JT no longer fears AJ or QJ but still cannot call a big bet because they still have to fear QQ or A6 and 67. Mostly these hands bet not because they picked up value but because no one bet the flop, so they are less worried about anyone having a six. So, even a flop like J66 needs to be slow played in a multi-way pot. Matter of fact, it likely needs to be slow played more since there are no straight draws to call a bet on the flop. If you bet the flop on J66, you can only have 5 holdings, a Jx, 6x, flush draw, over-pair, or two over-cards. Most of those holdings should be glad to check the flop and see a free turn card. So if you do bet the flop, are you likely to just have two over-cards? Why would you want to bet with TJ and risk a check raise when you could check behind and get a free card to hit a second jack or a ten?

If turn card was a three or an ace, I would probably check the turn as well. The ace will scare people with a jack or a pocket pair but they also know they can represent an ace by betting and also anyone with an ace may decide to bet if not on the turn, then on the river. I would mostly bet small on the turn if a card came between J and 6 that will not scare a J from calling.

As to Hitchens97's comment re my scenario involving AAA flop. I think you got more action on the river than you could have hoped for with a flop bet. Will QQ or 99 call on this flop if it goes bet call or bet raise in front of them? Most definitely not. Even KK has to fear further betting on the turn and river. AJ would not have made any more by betting this flop. Perhaps they would have gotten one more bet out of KK on the river if they checked back the turn, but likely would have lost two bets from the QQ and 99 who bet or called on the river.

Even KK is likely to fold on the flop if it goes Bet call call in front of him. What does KK hope to beat that can cold call third to act on this board? What can KK hope to improve to to win? Even if turn and river are KK, he is still beat by AJ.

And remember, on the river it went raise call call call. So AJ got 6 bets out of these weak players. He would never have gotten six bets on the flop. So he would have to be pretty confident the KK would call a double bet on turn or river to make up for the two or three bets that would have folded to his flop bet.

Of course position is key. If AJ is first to act he has to check the flop. If AJ is last to act, he could likely make a small bet which looks like an attempt to steal. But even then will the first or second position players want to call knowing they could get squeezed with a check raise by the middle player who might bluff after they show weakness by check calling. Often not.

This example really illustrates the importance of position in multi-way pots. Those in the middle cannot hope to conceal the strength of their good hands and they cannot get show-down value out of their weak made hands. This is a whole other discussion. But if the first position player bets big and the second position player cold calls, he likely has the nuts and late position players should generally fold. If one of the late position players ends up having the nuts, they should raise to value bet the middle position player. I am not explaining this well here. Will save this discussion for another day.

I am not slow-playing this. We need to get some money in the pot, and a bet from almost last-to-act looks so fishy here that they are calling with a lot of hands. This is one spot where I might bet small, but not too small -- maybe a little under half pot or half pot.

Edit: If they are not calling a little something now, they aren't betting/calling later.

You clearly have not been following any of the previous discussion. The person who posted this did bet 25% of pot and everyone folded. Great hand. Wait six months to flop quads again and bet on this flop a second time and you will continue to be a loosing player who calls pre-flop with 66 only to fold when flop comes AJ7 over and over again, just to win the pot once or twice per year when you flop quads on 667 board and bet into 4 other players and get no callers.

I grunched it. Not going to be results-oriented. Still betting.

I've bet and then been shoved into twice with quads, to I'll stick to my plan.

So you are results oriented. Because it has worked for you twice in the past, you will continue to do it. That is like the player who shoves all in pre-flop with KJ against QQ and hits his K to win. He thinks he made a good play and his win just reinforces his bad play. Do not be that player.

I have already said in certain situations with loose players, you can sometimes make a bet here. But over the long haul, if you play this hand out 100 times, you will consistently make more by checking the flop. If you are at a loose table where someone is willing to shove all in on this flop with their bluff or a simple over-pair, they are likely to bet on the turn and shove the river. Those players will get it all in whether you initiate the betting or not.

The key is how do you extract more value from more thinking opponents and not just the fish. To be a really successful player, you need to learn how to exploit all the players at the table and not just the really bad ones. Otherwise you will take the money from the fish and then the piranha will take the fish's money from you.

What if all of the Vs in this hand were actually fish? What if they were all loose (and according to OP they were)? What if one had 77? What if one had a straight flush draw or AA or AhXh? What if???

If only I could make quads 100 times soon to find out! I've made them a few times, and twice I've been shoved on. You're the one who wrote that it's hard to make quads I'll be results oriented to my own games; you be results oriented to OP's.

Betting here is absolutely fine. LLSNL villains call too much OTF. We want to play for stacks. We are multiway. The board is wet, if we had TT on TT2 rainbow that's different. Sometimes they have nothing and will fold, oh well that's poker.

I'm Loose 33 you say you have studied a lot of Little's stuff. I've taken a ton of notes from his Quizzes, videos and books etc. Here are a couple regarding slowplaying and quads:

"You should only slowplay when there's very little chance of being outdrawn, i.e. on a very dry board."

"With quads it’s usually best to make small bets (35-40% of pot) on all streets." (Not sure if that was from a multiway situation.)

He's also always saying that people slowplay too much and should always be striving to get stacks in with their monsters. Another constant refrain is to always bet on wet boards with strong hands.

You also seem to be seizing on the fact that everyone folded when I bet as proof that betting here was a mistake. One hand doesn't prove anything.

Thinking about it now and after finding the JL notes I actually prefer a LARGER bet of the size that JL recommends, as a 25% bet could potentially look suspiciously small.

I think WereBeer has made an excellent summary of the situation.