Friday, ~12am, hero is in first must move from main table. Game is slightly loose PF, lots of multi way pots.

V1 - Non-reg middle aged white male, playing tight/fit-fold, havent seen him open many hands. Just sat down ~3 orbits ago so not a ton of information. (~500)

V2 - Mid 20s reg. Some history, have seen him play lots of draws very aggressively. Tends to get it in bad but maximizes fold equity in marginal spots. Just sat down ~1 orbit ago, so any reads are from previous sessions. (600)

Hero - Got stuck early on at previous tables but have rebuilt a small stack. Slight winning image, but V1 and V2 are so new to the table not sure that it means much. (covers)

Pre

folds to V1 who opens to 20 (fairly standard for the table, typically getting 2-5 callers)
V2 calls
hero calls with 33
two calls behind

Flop (100) K3Q
V1 leads for 65
V2 tank Calls
Hero raises to 225
fold, fold, V1 folds, V2 ships for 315 more.

I don't think V2 is calling the opening bet with sets/2 pair here with so many behind to act, so his range is primarily draws. I was hoping to stack V1 here when he has TPTK/TPGK type hands, but I am happy to get it in with V2.

Not terribly worried about KK/QQ from one of the later players to act because there was no 3-bet pre. Had someone besides V1/V2 come over the top I am maybe contemplating a fold.

Based on the math (315 into 930) this is a fairly trivial call, right? I should never be folding this unless V2 flips over his KK/QQ before I am able to act.

Theory Check

Is there any merit to playing this differently? Possibly smooth calling flop and giving myself a chance to get away from the hand when another heart or connecting straight card hits? Conversely, when the turn misses and I am then able to get stacks in the bulk of the money would be going in when I have better odds.

If I just call and we see the turn with 3-5 players we're afraid of 20 cards (any ten, jack, ace, or heart) but we keep everyone's range slightly wider and the pot (295-425) will be large enough for other players to stack off with hands in the lower ends of their respective ranges. We would basically be flipping a coin going into the turn, but getting great immediate odds and possibly implied odds if at least one of our villians is willing to stack off incorrectly on blank turns.

If hero calls and one player behind calls the odds on the flop call would be 5.5:1 for hero, with a little over half of the deck being good on the turn. We can then stack off on blank turns and slow down on connecting turns, possibly getting correct odds to draw at a full house/quads.

Thoughts?

They're calling $160 to win $455 when you raise flop so you do price out draws. Raise flop always. I'd raise a bit smaller because we actually want to keep draws in and we can easily fold if a heart comes and we aren't getting odds. Plus Kx is drawing dead. A raise to $185 is good. Doesn't make sense to slow play this flop

WP. In this era of play, people raise with TP and draws often. Your range didn't narrow much by raising. As for V2, this is going to be FD most of the time. Easy call. Cooler if he has a larger set. The money was going in whether you called or raised.

everything in this hand is good ,

"Is there any merit to playing this differently? Possibly smooth calling flop and giving myself a chance to get away from the hand when another heart or connecting straight card hits? Conversely, when the turn misses and I am then able to get stacks in the bulk of the money would be going in when I have better odds."

absolutely not , this would be terrible

There are two ways to play poker:
#1) Playing with the goal of winning and avoiding losing

or

#2) Playing in the manner that will give you the highest Expected Value over the longrun

There is no way to do both, it's either one or the other.

Your thoughts regarding the Theory Check are all #1. A lot of "can I get away..." and "if we do this, then on the turn we are really ahead and then we can shove with better odds..."

that sort of play and thought process works against your winrate. It makes you fairly easy to read and play against while simultaneously losing you a lot of value.

If we want to be +EV players our thought processes need to be all about the equity and range of lessor hands we can "get" to call.

In this case, the reason why we raise flop is because we have MONSTER EQUITY vs all other hands including flush draws and simultaneously a large range of hands can call us if we raise this flop thinking we are the ones of a flush draw.

So we can get called by AK, AA, KQ, and even a stubborn KJ and KT that soul reads us for a FD as well as a bazillion different combos of SDs and/or FDs.

That is why we raise this flop, it has absolutely nothing to do with winning or losing but everything to do with having monster equity and a situation in which a ton of hands we are ahead of (and flat out crush) can make the mistake of calling and stacking off.

When we are monster we should never be thinking in terms of "how can I play this safe so I can get away if things go south?"

No. When we are monster our only thoughts should be how we can get as much money into the pot as soon as possible so we can get even more money into the pot on the next streets... There may be the rare occasion where we will actually meet the above objective by check calling or betting weak to induce a spazz raise. But those will be special cases and even in those special cases the goal is the same-- to pump money into the pot!!!

So divorce yourself from all that #1 thinking about being safe and leaving yourself an out to "get away". If you want to crush the game, you need to think in terms of equity and ranges and manipulating both to your advantage

GL

Thanks DGI, I appreciate the thorough response.
I understand what you are saying, and this was the mentality I had when I made the play that I did. It makes even more sense when you think about being deep stacked and wanting to maximize value.

On the turn where half of the deck hurts us and half of the deck essentially doesn't change the hand, if we stack off on the turn when we have better equity we would be forcing our opponents to make a larger mistake. If it calls around and the pot is larger I believe they will be even more likely to make this mistake. It is not necessarily me wanting to avoid losing hands as much as it is wanting to get the most money in when my equity is highest.

Essentially I envision the hand playing out in one of four or so ways, 2 from either turn scenario. Obviously the true number of outcomes is much more complicated than this, but for arguments sake I feel 4 categories covers a large enough spread of possibilities

Flop (100) K3Q
V1 leads for 65
V2 tank Calls
Hero calls
fold, call

Turn (360) 7
V1 may lead, may check
V2 will most likely lead out if checked to
Hero leads for ~200 or shoves if bet into

With only 1 card to come any draws that are continuing the hand or shoving for fold equity will be putting the same money into the pot with worse odds to win the hand. I believe that many Vs will also be more willing to get money in with lower ends of their ranges because they think they "have to call, there's so much in the middle", more so than they would earlier on in the hand.

Essentially the hand either ends with me taking down the pot without more action, or Vs putting in the same money with worse odds.

Conversely

Flop (100) K3Q
V1 leads for 65
V2 tank Calls
Hero calls
fold, call

Turn (360) J
V1 may lead, may check
V2 will most likely lead out if checked to

Hero now has a simple math decision, if we are getting odds to draw to our FH/quads call it down otherwise fold. If we are getting correct odds, with stacks being what they are, all of the money will most likely go in on the river when we hit anyway. If we miss, we made a series of decisions which were correct based on immediate pot odds. This line also has the potential benefit of extracting more value by having multiple villains stack off by the river when we fill up. Granted, this specific outcome only contributes to a small number of potential outcomes (5-10% at best) but it could be the difference between a $1500 pot and a $2500 one.

your thinking is not good. you read dgi's post and then let it go right by without absorbing it and now you are still rebuking his post with more incorrect thinking. we do not c/c when we are way ahead, just so we can peel a safe turn and get the money in when we are MORE ahead.. this makes no sense. If you flop the nut flush with A2hh , on 3h 7h 9h, and you have multiple people raising and re-raising, do you only call so that we can fold if the board pairs? No, you have the absolute best hand possible, you get all the money in. If you lose , this is variance, you played the hand perfectly. That is part of the game. Get used to it. You could argue flatting this flop but it is not 'to see a safe turn', it would be to allow people to continue betting, to keep bluffs in, to not blow other people out of the pot, etc.


Also calling this flop and then c/f , or c/c a heart turn only if we are getting odds to boat is a huge, huge mistake. Villain is not only going to have a flushdraw here always, and I am not sure why you are auto assuming that he does. This is really novice level 1 thinking. Flushdraws are only part of his range. He could have two pair, one pair, gutshot, straight draw, flush draw, total air, etc....

+1,000

Let's say we c/c flop because we want to peel that safe turn.

Lets say a 7 hits on the turn and V has AK, what do you think V is going to do? He is going to jam like strawberry jam.

When he jams you are going to think "Man, he has a flush, therefore I'm glad I didn't raise that flop and left myself an out to "get away..."

and you lose that money...

I can't tell you how many times I've been in this spot with a set only to get all the money in on the flop/turn and then see a heart hit on the river and I think I've lost only to discover at showdown that my hand was still good.

You've got to think in terms of equity. I know you say you are but you are not. Whenever we have majority equity we want as much money into the pot as soon as possible.

Yes, I realize what you are saying, you're trying to get it all in WHEN you have the most equity. But if you follow that model in your play, you lose value. Pure and simple. You lose value from lessor hands that can/will incorrectly range you and call you on the flop but those same hands will CORRECTLY range you on the turn and fold.

Think about that.

not to mention that that sort of playing turns your hand face up vs thinking players and you become pretty easy to play against.

food for thought...

Well played.

My thoughts on the theory aspect:

As DGI said, if there are different lines that result in different EVs, you want to take whatever line will maximize EV regardless of risk. This is why we play with proper bankroll.

That being said, there is definitely merit to your idea of taking a lower risk line on the correct occasion. In games where we play against either unbalanced and exploitable players, or players that just want to gambooooool, there will be times where two different lines will ALWAYS end up with the same result and the EV calcs will actually show you that the lower risk line is the best line to take. For instance, if you have enough history on a player to know that they have a flush draw, and you know that this player will:

A: check behind with his draw on the flop
B: call a pot size all in on the flop OR on the turn with a draw

the lower risk line and highest EV line will be to check flop, jam safe turns.

The preceding was a very simple example, but the idea can definitely be expanded in to other spots.

In that same vein though, wont there be a larger range of lesser hands that will incorrectly stack off on the turn by virtue of the pot being larger? I'm talking about a multi-way pot here where V1 has stayed in the hand and one or more of the players left to act behind me would also continue post flop.

When I presented the situation where the J hit on the turn I should not have made it out to be such a clear cut call/fold scenario, that wasn't my intention. If V2 is willing to stack off with Ax type hand on the turn, and made flushes are only part of his range, then we can comfortably call off with even worse pot odds, right?

Grunch: Obviously you should never fold on a board like this (2 high cards, connected, flush draw out there), but I think you should raise the flop a bit bigger on flops like this. In a raised pot, on a board like this, people are going to have something else going along with the flush draw (hands like T9hh, AThh, J9hh, AJhh, QThh, AQhh, QJhh).. Probably raise to 270-290 (maybe 300? pot is 230 before we put any money in, so if we make it 290, people are getting a bit better than 2 to 1 on their money).

This is a good point.

Sometimes and against the right villains, we can absolutely take the safer line because it will result in a higher EV.

I had a hand that illustrates this point perfectly. 2/5nl eff stacks $900 V covers. I have 87 in the BB, UTG limps, MP limps, V (nit) blasts the pot for $45, I call because I know if I hit I stack her, everyone else folds heads up.

Flop($90) 8 7 3
I chk she bets $100, I call

Turn(290) 4
I chk, she bets $200, I call

River(690) 2
I shove all-in, she SNAP calls
V shows AA
I win with two pair

In this case, there was no need for me to inflate the pot early because I knew she would stack off with her AA/KK. But if I get counterfieted on the turn or river I can just fold.

So yeah, there are times when the safe line is the most +EV line just as there are some times where if we show weakness we can get even more money in later. It's just that this hand isn't one of them

I can't think of any way different I would play this hand. I generally toss slow-playing out the window when two people have put money in the pot in front of me. Your raise size is good because it denies them the proper odds to draw against you, but doesn't chase away all the 1-pair hands you want to keep in.

Results for those who are curious, though it isn't particularly relevant to the conversation at this point.

Hero calls
V tables A9

Turn (1245) - [K3Q] J

River - [K3QJ]10

Hero vomits

Standard.

the other problem with your idea of waiting for a safe turn card is that you can't assume that villains will stack off with the same range on flop and turn. Many will happily get it in w 12 outs on the flop but when you shove the turn they say "nice bet" and (correctly) fold.

What about scare cards? This board is super wet, aren't we going to lose our action on like half the deck? If we know she will get it in OTF and rarely has a draw that we might like to fade and then GII on the turn, wouldn't it be best to raise the flop before the Js shows up?

That's a good point. If the turn is the 9 and river is the 10, it's hard to imagine getting her stack.

Good raise OTF.

Raise and getting it in on the flop here at these stack depths is about as standard as it gets, well played OP