the game is crazy. UTG is an African American (50's) that is fairly loose and will call very light preflop hoping to hit something on the flop.
UTG+3 is very action and raises preflop about 1-4 times per orbit for the past 4 hours. White (55 to 65). UTG +3 continue bets on the flop about 85% of the time and will fire a 2nd barrell about 50% of the time.

UTG has about $1500 behind
UTG +3 has about $3K behind
I have about $2K behind

UTG opens to $15. UTG+3 3-bets to $75. Everyone folds to me on button and I have QT


UTG will not 4-bet here, but he most definitely will call.

Hero?

You didn’t say anything about V2’s 3bet tendencies or how he responds to 4bets.

Calling is easily the worst choice so it’s 4! or fold for me.

Are you considering a flat-call here, or a 4-bet?

I don’t think it is ever correct to cold-call a 3-bet (well—maybe if you have Aces and have a very good reason to believe a trap will work), so I’m dismissing that right away.

So, a 4-bet bluff with QTs?

I assume this is because you think UTG3 is just iso-ing the weak UTG player? It seems reasonable. And you have a suited hand and position. Having A5s would of course be the preferred candidate for a 4-bet bluffing hand, but you go to war with the hand you have, not the hand you want.

I would fold this every time, but I don’t think a 4-bet can be a huge mistake. It has nice qualities.

When you 4bet bluff you want to have some fold equity, so if you think UTG won't fold (and in that case neither will the other guy) then it's probably not a great idea. Other than that, everything davomalvolio said, I wouldn't do it myself but wouldn't fault you for having heart

How often has the UTG+3 player 3bet, if at all?

UTG never 4bets with aces?

I fold here unless he's doing this blindly or with ATC then I would isolate (depending on knowing how he responds when played back at. Some slags fold with their tail between their legs knowing they're up against a monster but others wanna have a **** measuring contest and re-raise with 94o just so they can table it when we fold).

otb itll do it even at equilibrium as we get to 200bb on gtow (6m 500z rake for reference) and ive seen solved monker ranges where it coldcalls at 100bb and it gets more appealing the deeper we get (re cold calling 3bets). i think 4b / fold just ends up being an easy simplification compared to cold calling like 1% of hands. also exploitatively, you want to play pots with these 2. like idk. imagine facing this action with 99. 4betting seems not very good, and i think folding is pretty big error given villain descriptions.

its not clear to me though that qtss is the right hand to do it with (likely dominated by both of their ranges), but if theyre both really bad / the reason the game is going i can see merit to it and it might be the best option. im talking about cold calling, i think 4betting isnt really great w our particular hand - i just dont think we have a ton of fold equity, and again just dominated too much to be a hand you want to play in a very low spr situation.

Thanks Everyone.

Actual results - I folded pre. (i was never ever thinking of 4!). There is no fold equity here imo. In general, UTG would just call about 95% of the time, so yeah - he would 4! aces here. UTG +3 3 bets about one every 1.5 orbits, so he is light as well (that's why the game is good).

flop is open-ended straight flush draw. continuation bet on flop.

Turn gives me the straight flush. UTG bets on turn and UTG+3 folds, but this was a huge pot, and I felt sick for folding pre.

In a vacuum, this is a clear fold, but my question is, with this kind of game condition and two V's playing crazy, is this a 3bet call here?

any subsequent thoughts with the above information?

Don't rabbit hunt.

You already said in the OP that both players were loose. So if you're asking whether you should have got involved in the hand given you would have made a straight flush, well...yes, yes of course you should, if that's what you want to hear.

It's still a good fold.

i would start treating your poker BR like monopoly money, rendering $ wins and losses irrelevant - i.e. dont use your poker money to buy anything and dont change your spending habits based on poker results. in hands youre not involved in try to envision what you would do strategically if you were in the hand, and get information about your opponents' tendencies. and always remember that you arent psychic, you cant predict what cards come out, and its impossible to know exactly what your opponents' holdings are, just their ranges.

We have to lose battles to win wars. Results don't matter.

Winning battles is how you win wars. One or two battles in the Civil War like Antietem go the wrong way when there were opportunities for it to happen and our whole nation would be different. Results matter.

*GRUNCH*

Fold. We cannot cold-four-bet with a hand this weak, and flatting thee-bets is a fish move. Why is this even a question?

Okay, now I've read the thread, and I understand why OP is asking.

OP, it is natural to feel regret when one makes an easy-peasy correct fold and then seeing the runout make one's folded hand the nuts. Allowing that regret -- or, worse, allowing anticipation of such regret -- to influence ones decisions in-game or analysis post-game is a huge mental game leak. Find some way to plug that leak in yourself.

You can lose battles (hands) but still win the war (you're growing bankroll in the long run).

Results of individual hands don't matter as long as it was played correctly. The mindset of a good player shouldn't be at all concerned about "I would of won if I called" or "I would have saved money if I folded" as long as they're making what they determined to be the best play based on the information at hand. Those things (such as the result of this hand) need to be taken with less than a grain of salt.

This is really up to your level of tolerance of risk. He could have most anything. You're ahead of a lot of it but you might spend a lot of money finding out he hit. Are you good at playing players like this? Are you willing to call down both his big value bets and bluffs? Do you have a stack to buy in several times/

Call - Lower risk
Raise - Higher risk at SPR is lower

A lot of things can be correct in theory but not correct in the real world. And stating something is correct is almost entirely subjective. So all in all I disagree. 9/10x the result of the hand in low stakes tells you more about what is really going on than the theory of what you thought was going on.

Not that we need to agree, as neither of our opinions can be proven to be correct and differing opinions are where a lot of the best ideas and discussions come from.