Calling and hating life.

Congrats on sitting at an awesome table. K5 soooooted $65. GAMBOOOL!!!

Your pf rise is way too small. Now, on this flop with so much action I would say you have a SET between those three opponents against you. In the best scenario you may have a very small miracle edge against them all. And even in this best scenario you will have to dodge a lot of "outs" of all those dudes if you are not already crushed as I said above by a set.
So, I will fold in this situation. You guys have got to learn to fold hands.

The fact that one of the fish had K5 (very hard for me to believe you, but still ... lol..lol) and called preflop is not a solid reason to analyze this situation. Most of times you'll be against one set between the three of then and you lose all your stack. Overall the long run in those situations you lose money when on the flop three players go all-in and you only got an overpair.

This post has replaced math and sound reason with emotional "probabilities."

Problem has basically been solved already. Truth is its close enough that it doesn't make much difference either way. Only thing you can really do wrong is fold face up and reveal your lady parts to the table.

^ that's full nonsense for live cash games.
the correct answer in this situation is what I've said:
..., if you call you not just lose some money but lose the entire stack on two upside down naked ladies

More mindless commentary with no actual work to back it up.

ha, ha, ha ...lol..
yes, mindless is playing AA only against 3 all-ins. that is mindless to the highest degree of incompetency.

Do some actual work and get back to me. Others have tried. You have not.

Bombing 2+2 with apocalyptic nonsense rhetoric Biblical tragedy

preflop sizing is bad, you have a loose gambly player opening and someone flatting minimum should be 85-100 here all day.

You can just admit to being lazy then.

You still haven't used math to justify why calling is bad here - others have shown that calling is good, would be nice to see an alternative. Of course, you don't have an alternative, because you're using emotions and fear to guide your decisions. I expect you to ridicule me for this post, with no math or logic to back it up, wanna prove me wrong?

Now, most players at 2-5 NL will payoff with AA KK, as they are not good enough to fold that often. That's why 1/2, 2/5 and even 5/10 are very very profitable games here in Vegas. Most players have no clue how to handle AA, KK, QQ and especially the AK. And again, that's why we the locals can live for free in Vegas plus add money to the bankroll.

Come to Vegas and look for Cash, George, Stalin or The Duke from Downtown , ... etc and talk to them. See how the business gets done. All of them will run circles around most of the 2+2ers

Still waiting.

I think MamaRolex is trying to claim bayesian probability for exploitativey folding here. I don't see a problem with that approach, however ignoring the math behind the decision seems lazy and typical of a donkey mentality that doesn't believe their game needs improvement. You should always be able to do the math in these situations at least post mortem to examine if your read based decision was correct, to claim "it doesn't matter what the math says I know I'm always behind when 3 players shove any board and I hold XX" is likely a reason most nitty regs never walk away with monster stacks.

They are comfortable with low variance play to protect a steady income and bankroll and are comfortable giving up big edges. I don't necessarily think there's anything wrong with that either if that's your clear strategy.

+1. Would like to see some justification for why this is a fold. SPR is a thing, you know. If we weren't 75 BB's deep I can see folding. But folding here in this spot is just dumb.

I'm perfectly willing to entertain MamaRolex's idea. I decided to run the numbers, because I know he's not going to bother.

We need to call 300 to win 1135, so we need 20.9% equity.

First, I constructed value-heavy ranges for villains to see if we can call as a default. Turns out the answer is no, even if SB can cold-call KK and shove flop. I gave SB 88 but not 55, though it's possible he calls a 3bet with 55 to setmine (incorrectly).

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

5,269,320 trials (Exhaustive)

board: Q85

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
AA	12.85%	677,214	0
KK,QQ,88	28.35%	1,494,090	0
QQ,88,55,AQ	35.88%	1,881,972	17,064
88,55,AQ	22.92%	1,198,980	17,064

We have a "gambly player" read for MP1, so I added KQ and a bunch of fds / combo draws. This brings us up to 17.5%.

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

board: Q85

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
AA	17.48%	104,890	0
KK,QQ,88	32.54%	195,214	0
QQ,88,55,AQ,KQ,AcJc,AcTc,KcQc-7c6c	25.65%	153,239	1,360
88,55,AQ	24.33%	145,297	1,360

Now for MP2. They should know the pot is getting too big to fold for any decent piece. Let's add the same flush draws we gave to MP1.

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

board: Q85

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
AA	17.19%	103,143	0
KK,QQ,88	31.03%	186,196	0
QQ,88,55,AQ,KQ,AcJc,AcTc,KcQc-7c6c	23.69%	141,678	936
88,55,AQ,AcJc,AcTc,KcQc-7c6c	28.09%	168,047	936

This actually decreases our equity. Damn. If we add KQ to MP2's range we get a couple percentage points back, but I'm skeptical that people will call TP2K vs a shove / call.

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

board: Q85

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
AA	19.70%	118,174	0
KK,QQ,88	34.73%	208,355	0
QQ,88,55,AQ,KQ,AcJc,AcTc,KcQc-7c6c	25.30%	151,049	1,525
88,55,AQ,KQ,AcJc,AcTc,KcQc-7c6c	20.28%	120,897	1,525

If gambly MP1 is capable of calling with 76 for a bare open ender, we're pushed into the call zone. That should show us how close this is.

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

board: Q85

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
AA	20.95%	125,717	0
KK,QQ,88	33.41%	200,435	0
QQ,88,55,AQ,KQ,AcJc,AcTc,KcQc-7c6c,76	26.26%	156,385	2,351
88,55,AQ,KQ,AcJc,AcTc,KcQc-7c6c	19.38%	115,112	2,351

Factors to consider: if SB never flats with KK and only shoves QQ and 88, we have a clear fold. If SB can bluff with a straight draw or FDs, it becomes an easy call.

Anyway, some food for thought. Would love to see people tweak these sims with different assumptions.

I'm surprised so many people hate the size of the 3-bet. I could see going a little bigger, but I generally like 3-betting smaller in position (assuming this is a standard 3-bet size player makes with their whole range).

I would think about the flop decision by assigning the player who went all-in first a range. Then I would assign ranges for the other players, assuming the first caller's range is likely tighter, and the second caller's range is tighter yet.

In game I likely fold in this spot, unless I put the other players on very loose ranges. I would think it was too likely that someone had a set, although reading the thread it seems a call is likely correct.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

I think those ranges are far too conservative. SB showed up with K5cc so obviously his range is very wide; if V and MP players have been at this table for any length of time, SB's range and spewy tendencies are probably not unknown to MP1 and MP2, further widening their own ranges. Add to that V raised too small to begin with, and there are a ton of hands that all three players are going to show up with here.

You also have the Qc on the board and in V's range.

I agree with you - I was trying to construct a worse-case scenario for us. Even with these conservative ranges, it's close, so any extra hands you add only make it more +EV.

Re: the Qc - you're correct, but the sim will take this into consideration

It's all about stack size. You want to make these players feel committed to the pot when you have a dominating hand. Clearly this was not an issue in this particular hand; but you ideally also want to get heads up against one player, or maybe two at most. Going 4 ways to the flop with a pair, even in position, is not great, but I think stack size here again dictates that we get all-in with it.

It's also absolutely crucial to our calculations to know if H has the Ac or not.

If you play every day for about 5-6 hours per day (180hours/month) you don't need to scoop big pots with an over-pair when 3 dudes are all-in on a dry flop. You also don't need to walk with monster stacks. Playing 180 hour/mo it gives you aprox 2,000 bb/mo. Now, that's a very nice income even playing 1-2 game ($4,000/mo or $10,000/mo for the 2-5 NL) Oh, My God! . . $20,000/mo in the 5-10NL and this is just picking-up the fallen fruit from under the tree, so to speak. The easy way ...,

I have a suspicion that most people that argue on calling with AA against 3 opponents all-in on the flop play NL only occasionally. They are not hard core grinders. I understand that when players come to casino one or twice a week they want to extract the most from their AA because they still think that hand is good vs. 3 all-in on a dry flop. There is no math that gives any juice to my AA vs. 3 all-in on the flop. Dray flop ... ! ..lol...lol..., What can I say? You guys have to know when to fold AA. More power to you guys.

Ah yes, the I'm a grinder and you aren't so I'm right and you're wrong line.

If I had more time I'd count up the logical fallacies you've committed, but alas, I've got to run to go play poker. If you had more time, you'd maybe do some math and show the work.


I have a suspicion that you actually don't know how.

I think that the most common mistake within each and every poker player is that “They CALL when they should FOLD”. I believe this flaw overshadows all other errors by a wide margin. Never has a player told me that he won a majority of the tough calls he made. If you could replay the last 2 years and for every instance where 3 villains move all-in on a dry flop and you have an overpair and you were undecided as to whether to call or fold (yet called), would you be money ahead if you folded each and every time? So far everyone that I have questioned regarding this subject has admitted that they would be money ahead if they could go back in time and fold each and every one of them. But the most weak players will search deep for any reason whatsoever to call, they almost always will especially with AA and that’s a very BIG expensive mistake.

Yet there is a lot of truth here. Good post.

I admit that I'm unable to get the math to come out to anything but significantly -EV to slightly +EV. Even if we give our opponents using ranges with a lot of top pair, no redraw, and no ace kicker hands - more combos because we block the **** out of AQ, it's only slightly in the black. It is much, much closer than I expected it to be and I recommend everyone play around with their favorite poker sim and see if you can construct a reasonable range for everyone that you're crushing. Unless you play in wild and crazy underground games in places with no legal gambling within a 3 hour drive (amazing games if you can find them), this seems like a fold.