I appear to have missed this when I was a beginner, as there appears to be common knowledge amongst the posters here that when we have hands like top pair or an OP in low SPR spots that we are pot committed and need to be stacking off. Does this always apply? What's the number we should be using? SPR of 5 or below, or lower/higher?

I'm going to run through some scenarios. Note: these are completely made up on the spot, and did not actually happen.

Scenario One:
2/5, 9 handed, $500 effective. Hero has a TAG image.

OTTH

Loose player straddles BTN $10, hero raises $50 A A and only BTN calls.

Flop ($107): 7 5 3. With an SPR of 4.21 are we just committed here, even though this is not the board we were looking for? Does being committed in this spot mean that we are actively looking to get the money I'm, or that we're x-c down as long as no or 4 card straight comes?

Scenario Two:
2/5, 9 handed, $500 effective. Hero has a TAG image.

OTTH

Hero opens Q Q $25 UTG, and loose passive calls LJ, LAG calls BTN, and tight passive calls BB.

Flop ($102):. 9 8 7. BB checks. Gross. This might be the single worst flop possible, but with an SPR of 4.66 are we just pot committed? Same question as before - are we looking to x-c down as long as no or 4 card straight comes? Or are we looking to crai/bet ourselves?

Scenario Three:
2/5, 9 handed, $500 effective. Hero has a TAG image.

OTTH

LAG opens BTN $20, hero 3 bets SB J T $80 and only villain calls.

Flop ($165): T 6 2. Hero? With an SPR of 2.55 are we just looking to gii with top pair here? I assume we're c betting and either looking to do another small turn bet and gii otr, or shove turn?




I appreciate your responses in advance. I think this workout will do a lot of good for me, because I was never formally taught the SPR rules.

SPR comes from Professional No-Limit Holdem: Volume One, if you want to read up on it in more detail. However, SPR is not Ed Miller's permission to turn off your brain, and it really only applies against Vs who could actually have hands in their range other than what their bet indicates (i.e. noobs who spew or decent players who mix up their play), but it's a great way to make sure you are thinking about commitment and what implied odds you are getting and/or offering to your Vs.

Be aware that Miller's commitment rules of thumb are assuming Heads-Up pots on the flop. Commitment goes way down (though IO issues remain) in multiway pots and/or on later streets.

As for the scenarios, we're likely committed in hand one if the money goes in OTF because we want to c-bet for value and there are definitely semi-bluffs he can have if he raises.

Hand two, forget SPR. It's three way, with two very different Vs. I'm checking back, and looking to fold if the LP bets and likely also often if the LAG does, if he's good enough to know not to bluff this board multi-way with an LP in the hand.

Hand three, we're also not going crazy. SPR commitment rules of thumb assume TPTK+. Also, the board is drier than a towel in the Sahara desert, so no semi-bluffs are really possible. We might end up getting it in, depending on how LAGGY this guy really is, but it's not my goal. With SDV on a dry board, if I'm betting here, it's more to avoid having to show down that I have JTs in my 3-bet range than it is for value or equity denial.

Hand 1 is a pile it in.

Hand 2 is, like Garick said, completely different. SPR is indeed used solely in a HU spot (and only OTF, btw, after the flop there are other considerations which far outweigh SPR).

Hand 3 is also different. Given the description of the V, I would prefer a check/call it down type of line, if he truly is a classic LAG. This hand is fine for that line. Also (and Garick kinda alludes to this) I'm not in love with the 3 bet pre, unless we needed it to isolate. Against a classic LAG, I much prefer to let them do the betting, although I am not opposed to a river raise even if worse cannot call, just to avoid showing down.

Thanks for the feedback. So essentially what it seems like is that when we have SPR of 5 or below in a HU pot vs someone that isn't exclusively showing aggression with the nuts, that we're pot committed?

So in hand one does having a low SPR allow us to bet, or is this just a hand in general we're betting? Running it through Flopzilla, the flop is terrible for villain's range, yet I always see people here advocating for x'ing monotone boards.

I hate checking monotone boards, as another heart kills your hand or your action.

Having a low SPR allows us to bet/GII, whereas if we had a high SPR we might be b/f and/or taking at least one street off for pot control.

Hand one is not a stack off hand. The low monotone board nuts up villain's continuing range, as the presence of low cards means he has all the high card flushes while also having a good chunk of sets. What villain calls pre varies from villain to villain, but since it's such a big raise, one would guess that a lot of the offsuit hands that would be drawing would fold pre. Moreover, if you bet big on that flop, you would probably fold a lot of the mid pairs you may actually get some value from.

So I would bet small and be ready to throw my hand away against any significant action.

Hand 3 I would not be pot committed, but I would bet small again, not so much for much for value as much for protection. If you get raised, it's probably a fold, because i don't think villain would have many bluffs and there isn't anything you really beat from his value range.

All in SPR may provide a good rule of thumb but it's not an excuse to stop thinking and not put people on ranges.

H1
No you are not committed. For me a commitment point would be like an SPR of 3 or less.
I am check calling flop evaluating turn and river. Really villain dependent too and the runouts whether I call down or not. I don’t see much value in betting to “protect” my hand in this spot.

H2
This hand I might actually lead $35 just to clear out equity. This is a scary board for everyone. This multiway people are going to play super honest.
But I don’t feel committed at all here.

H3
This hand is the only one I would feel committed. I’m looking to bet like $60 on the flop and shove turns.

Kinda funny that neither of the last 2 responses would GII on hand one and would both bet hand 3. I suspect that has something to do with both Garick and I playing in the midwest right now. In these games, both 1 and 3 are GII hands, although most LAGs are so aggro that hand 3 takes care of itself. At least for me (I won't speak for Garick), the LAGs I play with are so aggro that you simply must have a check/call it down range to avoid getting run over.

Am I committed when I see these flops?

1) Absolutely not
2) Absolutely not
3) Almost certainly Yes.

H1/H2 - no, X/C mode, possibly X/F depending on runout and opponent.

H3 - I'd bet the flop >1/2 pot. Still need protection from random broadway overs. Unless the opponent is on the tight passive, I'd elim QQ+ with the pre-flop flat.