Hi Guys,

Recently I was playing a $1 / $2 NLHE game at a card room in Oregon and the following hand occurred. I am curious to get your thoughts regarding the questions posed at the end:

Hero ($300) in the cutoff with AhTc, UTG+1 ($200) limps, UTG+2 ($300) limps, Hijack limps ($200), I raise to $15, Button ($400 and covers) calls, Small Blind raises all-in for $65, folded back to Hero.

Note on Play: Obviously we do not love this spot as ATo is not that strong and we are facing a call and a raise. I raised in position because most players were relatively weak and limping many hands and I want to be raising more than just premium hands against because (1) if only raising AA-QQ and AK, it becomes easy to play against so one could say this raise is for balance and (2) I believe that if one or some of the limpers call, I can outplay and make better decisions post-flop.

I have to call $50 to win $153 (BB's $2 blind, 3 limps = $6, my dead $15 open, BU's $15 flat, SB's $65 jam plus the $50 that constitutes my call = $153) Calling $50 to win $153 is about 3:1 pot odds. My understanding is that I then need 25% equity against SB's range to make the call profitable. Even against KK, ATo has about 29% equity. Against AK, ATo has 24% equity so it seems like we have enough equity against SB's range to make the call.

Is the above calculation of pot odds and understanding of comparing pot odds against equity correct?

Is it correct to say that if I have 25% equity against SB's entire range, then calling the all-in is a break even play?

When calculating pot odds, when trying to determine the size of the pot, is it correct to include the amount of your call because that will be the size of the pot you win if you win the hand?

In order to determine the amount of equity your hand needs to have against villain's range, once you determine the pot odds, is it correct to then add 1 to the ratio and divide 1 by the outcome? (Ex: 3:1 odds, you would add 1 to 3 to get 4 and 1 divided by 4 = 25%, thus your hand should have 25% equity against villain's entire range for the call to be breakeven)?

Lastly, and importantly, how do you think BU's flat works into the equation? Button has a capped range because he did not 3bet preflop, so he probably does not have the strongest hands like AA-QQ. However, even in a capped range, there are many combos that area ahead (and some even dominating) ATo. My thought was that this makes calling the all-in less attractive because if Button decides to come along, there can be many dicey side pot situations as I have a $300 stack and Button covers me.

I will post the the action I took and the result later if people are interested. Thank you for your review.

Kind of, the math is right but you should be calculating you equity against villains entire range not just one or two hands in that range.

If it's heads up yeah, but it's not. You forgot to look at how often btn calls or back shoves. If I'm btn and you call you've just capped your range, and if I feel the short stack is shoving light I might back shove something like TT, or AJ because I know you can't call after capping your range.

This is similar to a hand I posted yesterday: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...-43-a-1739447/

Raise all-in.

There is $153 in the pot and you have $285 left.

The button is probably calling light because of the pot odds from all the limpers. There is a very good chance he will fold.

I would have to have a very good read on the button that he is a certain type of player to not raise all-in here. But against an unknown, I'm jamming every time.