Quote:
Originally Posted by AKQJ10
Clearly the flop bet is the most controversial decision here (in the sense that preflop has a clear consensus). Let's summarize the case for and against.
Pro- Value. You have a reasonable shot to win at showdown with top pair, and there are draws that may call you.
- Equity denial. It would be undesirable to let 44, 75, a gutshot, a backdoor flush, etc draw for free.
- You would likely call one street if you check back. (Debatable)
- Most of this lineup is unlikely to multi-street barrel you off the best hand.
- If any of the first three players XR you can confidently fold the hand. Passive players aren't often pulling shenanigans in a 3-5 way pot.
- The PFR is unlikely to XR in this spot. We'll come back to this point ofc.
The case for checking through:
- It's also moderately likely someone has a better ace with a kicker that will play at showdown.
- Your bet may not thin this field very much, leaving a weak hand in a multiway pot.
- Your read on CO suggests a possibility of Fancy Play Syndrome (FPS), in which case he may take seemingly irrational lines. Against such an oppt with a marginal hand, removing one postflop street can't ever be too bad.
Given the info you have at the decision point, imo it's a clear bet. (I might bet slightly more than HP, enough to make gunshots consider folding, but I'm not good at sizing.)
Given what actually happened we'll have to update priors once this hand is over. Either V thinks we're likely to bet here, much wider than we actually should be betting, or... like I said, FPS. Either way that makes checking much more viable. I still think you should bet next time but it's close.
This XR by CO after most of the field checked to him is really odd; doing this with a player in the middle strongly suggests he's seeking value with a monster. I have a hard time imagining anyone playing a strong, sub-monster hand like AQ or AK this way (and the ace of diamonds on the board makes Axdd impossible). His check would be borderline atrocious with 99, for example, but it wouldn't shock me. "I'll let them make something second best if it checks thru," followed by "Oh look, two of them are on the hook and seem to have something! Now I'll spring my trap." Many $1-3 players think of trapping almost for its own sake.
So I won't go too wild updating priors until I see him show down a semi bluff here.
Among other things incorrect about multiway pots in this post......equity denial is the biggest one. That's just not something we do in multiway pots that are 4+.
The only time we want to think about equity denial is when we also have a lot of nut *potential* (not "advantage"). We can bet more frequently in multiway pots and if we blow our opponent's off their equity and win without seeing more cards....that's a big win.
But standard equity denial to protect top pair just isn't a thing in these situations like it is HU.
You keep asking how theory and/or GTO is applicable to small stakes......and you keep getting the answers laid out in front of you. This is yet another way.
Last edited by Yogurt Daddy; 05-31-2023 at 03:25 AM.
