Top set this is a call, your getting the correct odds, and you know your behind. I would probably fold middle and bottom set though.

Because that'll be in the pot. That's how equity is calculated. For example, 3:1 pot odds require 25% equity. That's because we take that 1, add it to the 3, and get the ratio that way. Because our 1 becomes part of the total winnings.

Picture betting someone on a coin-flip. If you both put in $1, you eventually break even... correct? When you make the bet, your odds are 1:1 as you are calling the other person's $1, or a pot of $1. So we take our 1, add it to the other 1 to get 2. 1/2 = .5 = 50%, which is why we break even.

We're playing against ranges. Playing around with the numerator & denominator for different cases can be an illuminating exercise, but software like Equilab can incorporate all this and give an answer in a matter of seconds. (And it confirms that our equity is more than 20.5%, no matter what reasonable ranges we give Villains.)

If both people have straights, then it's a very thin call.

If someone has a straight (and with this action I think it's a fair assumption at least one of the has a straight), and the other guy is sucking up some of our outs with two pair / set / or even a pair + draw, then my guess is it's a fold (too lazy to do the math, but as soon as you start decreasing our outs we're quickly not getting the odds).

So unless we're banking on having the best hand some of the time (I'm not, is that too nitty?), then we're teetering between a very marginal call (against two straights) and a trivial fold (against a straight and someone sucking up our outs).

ETA: Having said all that, I doubt it's a huge mistake either way, especially when you consider we *might* have chopping outs some of the time / might actually be ahead some of the time.

Gwhichmakesthisafold,imoG

I reckon we have the best hand something like 1 or 2 percent of the time.

First, don't post results in your OP. it makes it hard to know how good of analysis you're really getting. for example, I would expect QJ to be one of V2's most likely holdings after his small flop cbet but you'll never know if I figured that out by being clever or by reading the OP.

I think the question of the turn call/fold has been sufficiently answered.

flop raise absolutely has to be bigger. I would say $125 minimum and this is a spot where I would consider overbetting pot:
1. your primary read on both players is that they like to chase draws. this board is extremely draw heavy. exploit!
2. V2 went huge PF and then bet lolsmall on the flop. This really weights him toward draws (QJ, AXs); I think it also looks a lot like a middle pair (66-JJ, though JJ may bet bigger). My observation is that these extremely small flop bets are often draws or bets to induce on boards like this (on dry boards I read them differently). Either way, this is a situation that calls for a big raise.
3. There are a lot of hands that are going to be calling almost regardless of price. I don't see either of these Vs folding 2p, trips, QQ+, OESD, FD, or pair+draw. given that you have a limp-call and a large PF opener, this is a board that should hit at least one of them hard (and if they both whiffed, you're going to have a hard time winning a big pot anyway, bc you can't let that tiny flop bet get through without a raise).
4. there are a ton of bad turn cards for you.

given that in the hand you got basically snap called by both V's and that your read was they were both pretty loose and chasey, seems like there should have been enough info that you could raise big here.

I would say $150-75 is best

It's next to impossible that any of these Vs flopped a lower set/two pair, decided to slowplay flop and then go hallelujah on an 8 turn. Same if they hit two pair or set on the turn. This is always a straight, and nothing but a straight. As we can see from results.

V2 actually had an open ender OTF (QJo) so can't fault his call much, and V1 probably had one of our outs along with his J, shrinking our equity to call the turn.

Even though we have ~20% equity to boat up and ~20% pot odds to call turn, this is pretty much break-even, and doesn't seem too appealing an edge vs these droolers who would give us far better edges to take in the future.

The only thing that could change things in this hand is if we made the flop raise $150+ and manipulate our pot odds OTT. It would then be a profitable call imo. (^concur, paradroid12)

14% against nemesis hands QJcc/(99/77) but roughly breakeven against ranges as others have mapped out. Without deep stacks, these types of spots are usually going to fall with a few points of 0ev one way or another, but its always worth revisiting previous sizing choices to see if your ramge's total EV would have benefited from a different one.

I actually quoted the wrong post. You are correct you can't change your outs based on assuming someone has some of them. Some may be dirty but you can't subtract outs just because somebody might be holding them.

"outs" only exist in theory (ie you may count a card as an out but it was folded PF but you can't possibly ever know that). one should absolutely be considering whether all of her outs are "live" during the hand, and there are situations (including this one) where it is obvious that some outs should be discounted.

Rake sucks

With that heavy action on the flop, I don't see why we're expecting to see lots of 9x and 7x.

I'm expecting to see many flush draws and overpairs from my opponents here, and it's just a matter of whether they had those hands containing Jx (or maybe 6x) which the turn action indicates that at least one of them probably does.

Shouldn't need to consult snowie to make this call. Snowie.... lol.