We agree on the check calling part. There is no obligation to be aggressive however. This is a super wet board Multiway with seven high and a relatively low equity draw that has reverse implied odds. Successfully playing this hand aggressively relies on fold equity and I’m not sure we have a lot. It’s OK to fight another day as well.

These reasons are why I have tightened up a little with the gappers preflop. I would open 75s on the button, or maybe overlimp. I dont like iso that much when you put it to 7-8bb and get 3-4 callers to the flop most of the time.

theres no doubt this is a profitable hand in this spot for a very good postflop player. so it might be profitable for you.

i dont think many folks on this forum are good enough to make it profitable though. i doubt i am. i think you have to have an excellent sense on when/how/whom to bluff and on what street because i dont think makes enough strong hands by itself.

[QUOTE=Man of Means;57996168]1/3 game, 8-handed. Hero has 7 5 in CO. Stack $300. Image probably tag as I am, but not getting respect on raises. People don't come here to fold.

btn is younger player, has cold called my $15 raise 3 times, from ep and later. Shown up with ATo and KJo on 2 of those. Stack $300.
The player in BB is a sad sack, has about $80 left. EP limper seems ok/not too loose, stack $200. MP limper I don't recall

Anyway otth: EP and mp limp, hero limps, btn raises to $11. Both blinds, limpers all call. 6 to the flop.

I had up some good advice, but seriously why should I help anyone lol. I will say this, you wound up with an implied odds hand against the short stacked BB. Does that sound like a good outcome?
Anyway you are in a dream game, if you can not profit here then just retire from poker, you are a total fish.

This is NOT profitable at all unless they are folding too much, and he said they do not.

Playing the weakest parts of the top 25% of your playable range in the CO isn't profitable against a bunch of mouth breathers that just limped to you at 1/3? LoL, ok sure!

I do agree with the previous point that experience level matters, but you're going to have a real hard time learning how to play these spots if you just keep doing what you're doing and always fold playable hands like this in the CO.

I don't get why you're so confident, we make it 10 we get 5 calls including BB who would have a pot behind otf. We make it 15-20 and still get 3-4 calls, probably including shorty who's 'defending his blind'.

We take a flop with 7 hi, dominated hand, solid 15-20% equity, we have an opponent who's more or less forced to stack off with any piece of the board and have an SPR of 3-5 against the rest of the table. These limp/calling-any-playable-hand 1/3 guys aren't exactly known for laying down stuff like top pair at this SPR. I salute those who make this winning while paying obscene 1/3 rake. I'm playing professionally for years now and I don't think I could win at this spot unless 1 or 2 of the limpcallers are particularly bad. At 250bb+ and without BB being so short I could get behind isoing, but this is just spew unless you happened to be the best to ever do it at 1/3.

Just because someone is supposed to be worse at poker doesn't make a spot automatically winning. You have to find the right exploit to take advantage. You can't tag them as mouthbreathers or whatever and straight take their money. Here opponents' main mistake is putting in to much money passively with mediocre hands. Creating a small SPR mw spot while having a pretty but low equity hand is the exact opposite of the right exploit. At 100bb you just need to make better hands and pile in the chips. It's not fun and doesn't make you feel very smart, but it's what it is. Deepstacked you should pressure their disproportionate amount of bluffcatchers, but here they just won't fold enough.

Thanks for discussion, all. In this spot, with a btn who has repeatedly coldcalled my raises and a field that likes to see flops, I'm not convinced a raise is the way to come in. I do think limping could be ok, but it's borderline for sure. If you play this, stealing some pots is probably necessary to make it profitable.

As it turned out I was lucky this time. Button folded after maybe 45 seconds of thought. The BB folded pretty quickly thereafter.
It's possible that I bluffed with the best hand but I think btn had some kind of pair, didn't like the ace, and hadn't seen me bet this amount without a good hand. And maybe the short stack being in the hand helped make my case.

Raise or fold pre. I would make 30 my default open size and tighten my range a bit in this game. It will increase variance a bit but also create a dynamic where u get paid a lot when you hit.

This is where being considered TAG comes into play. Well done.

i think most people playing 1/3 should spend most of their time mastering how to play TPTK, overpairs, and sets. thats where the money is made at this stake and where plenty of players, including myself, still make errors (just look at the number of posts on this forum asking about what to do with overpairs). im talking like playing 10% VPIP, playing AQ-AK, suited broadways, and pairs only. yes, boring AF.

honestly at 1/3 if you just always ditched suited connectors below like JT entirely i doubt it would make any difference to almost all players' games and would probably add to WR's for most.

then maybe at 2/5 where stacks are deeper add in more sc's.

I don't necessarily disagree with this.

But as likely the biggest nit on the forum (heck, I'm even folding most suited broadways and small pairs in EP), I still have zero issue attempting to sneak into a pot for cheap on the Button/CO with a wide range (4 limps to me on the Button and I've got 74o, yup, let's see a flop).

Even if someone is going to argue this is a mistake, it is (a) at worst a very small one and (b) probably made up for in meta game due to at least helping the illusion that we are participating in some pots.

GcluelesslooseygooseynoobG

First of all, I just want to throw out that I find it absolutely ridiculous that anyone would be scared to play this hand because of a sad sack big blind sitting with $80 in front of him. Most players sitting with $80 in front of them are fun players or degenerate gamblers who are well on their way to going home with nothing, or they are a busto player with a small bankroll. Either way, I'm very happy to get in hands with them until eventually they leave with nothing. If the big blind was the raiser, then there are implied odds considerations to be made, but in this hand we'd be the raiser and unless he is a super rare unicorn of a player that knows how to utilize his short stack in a somewhat optimal fashion then he's not a concern whatsoever.

Who cares if we get 4 calls? We can get 8 calls for all I care. You do realize the more multiway it goes the less times we need to win the pot postflop right? Surely you are accustomed to playing extremely multiway pots if you've been playing live poker professionally for years. Navigating multiway pots is somewhat unique to live poker, but certainly very critical.

It's not just skill that is an advantage in our favor. We will also have advantages in initiative and most likely position (at worse will have 2nd best position). So we have all that in our favor and if the other players are playing a wide range of hands then hand strength of a low suited gapper is hardly even a weakness.

And let's not pretend that your average 1/3 player's only weak spot is that they can't fold. These players have more leaks than a truck stop condom. They call when they shouldn't. They fold when they shouldn't. They bet when they shouldn't. They play their hands too face up. They bet into 3 people for 3 streets with an underpair (example from a pot I won last session)...you name it, and they'll do it. Sure, if you have some ridiculous rake then that is a clear consideration to play tighter but in your average live low stakes games where winrates are astronomical (relative to online) then this is a very clear spot to play (for the record I play in no rake games, but have played in countless normal raked games over the years as well) .

Would I rather have AQ sooted in the CO? Of course, but I have 75 sooted in the CO instead so my only consideration is whether or not 75 sooted is a profitable play here and in my estimation it most clearly is.

I'd also just mention that even the "resident nit" of the forums GG (whose results are quite respectable) posted that he would play this hand (of course not as a raise given his limp-centric strategy), and if I was a player that normally would not play this hand, I would spend some time diving in to really figure out where the disconnect is.

Once again I'd be on board if the table were sitting on 500+, here he has more than 1/4 of our stack, not a negligible amount, even if 80$ is basically worthless irl. It's not rocket science to take advantage of being a shorty, he just needs to shove Ax and pairs to murder 75s, which degenerate/tilted shortstackers usually are capable of. He could be a guy with a 100 spare bucks in his pocket just there to play bingo for a few hours, then he's not that much of a consideration ofc, but more often then not they are there to gii and run it up or rebuy. In a bigger game I like getting it in with whatever and make him reload a normal stack or leave, but here 80 bucks is a decent players' EV for the day not pocket change.

Anyway my main point is that at this SPR the average fish just can't make big enough mistakes when we hit big to make up for the times we don't. And profitable bluffing spots are quite rare, because more often than not someone flops tp+ and not fold for two 2/3 bets, which is reasonable in this spot.

Now that I think about it I don't understand why you are advocating for raising instead of overlimping. Raising and lowering SPR (because they clearly won't fold pre based on the OP) counteracts the main factors that are supposed to make you win, postflop edge and position. At 2-5 SPR their trash hands and nonsense plays you described are way less losing than deeper and position loses value significantly. You get initiative in return, but it isn't that valuable in 4+way pot, especially when villains donking is somewhat expected, so I don't get how this is a good tradeoff. Or do you plan on barrelling into the field frequently?

About the so called nit, he's advocating for overlimping 74o OTB in the same post, which is like 80% VPIP at the very least. That's not how nits work and I'd snapmuck that, so I may be the forum nit.

It seems we have a completely different philosophical outlook on poker. I find position and initiative to be extremely valuable and we generally gain both by raising preflop. I'd overlimp the CO with other parts of my range, including hands far less playable than 75hh.

I don't even understand your point about initiative not being valuable in multiway pots. When I raise preflop players tend to check to me a high percentage of the time. And if players want to donk out to see where they are at we can raise, fold, or float as is appropriate based on the villain, the board, and our history with that villain (plus consider how their donking or lack there of could be turning their hand face up for us). And what do you think happens when the flop comes like 996 and nobody has anything or it comes Ace high and nobody has an ace? These spots greatly favor the preflop raiser with 7 high.

Also, I'm not sure what live low stakes games you are playing where shorties are often 3betting all in with Ax. Per my previous post most of these guys are just fun players wanting to see flops, degenerates who are trying to flop lucky, or players that are close to busto and can't afford to just be shipping it in. The vast majority of low stakes players have neither the knowledge, the bankroll, nor any inclination to play a short stack anywhere close to optimal. As has been stated multiple times in this thread, these are pots that often go multiway to the flop, they aren't shipping it left and right like they're in the late stages of an online SNG.

Of course theoretically if stack depths are deeper our edge increases, but that doesn't mean that this hand isn't profitable at shallower stack depths. Ignoring rake for pure simplicity, if we have advantages in position, initiative,and skill, and are a wash in hand range then that's very clearly +EV. It seems to be your contention that this spot is -EV because even though we have advantages in all those fundamental areas, we are at a slight equity disadvantage due to hand strength. Personally, you can keep your slight hand strength advantage and I'll take position, initiative, and skill all day everyday.

Of course you are also contending that rake is a significant factor but that hasn't been my experience as the rare live unicorn that specializes in short stack LAG play (disclaimer: maybe I'm on a 12 year heater).

Not saying what you should do in your game but consider this line of thought:
74o otb is a weak hand with the best position. You have developed poker Spidey sense, for instance that nervous feeling that something is going to go wrong when you raise JJ in early position. Limping 74o otb you should feel pretty untouchable because worst case: someone in the blinds raises big and you fold for a couple bucks.
Tommy Angelo, who is noted for advising us to fold the small blind with all sorts of playable stuff has an essay called "waiting for straighters" that's worth a read.

The times I've felt regret and been punished for playing a connector is when I get bored/cocky and like raise 87s from early. The button makes any hand significantly more playable. Cutoff..that's a question, which is why I posted.

This is my take as well regarding raising versus limping speculative hands versus the world, at least with a lot of ~shortish stacks at the table.

On the Button against a bunch of limps, I'm playing just shy of 50% of hands. Pretty much any one/two gapper except for perhaps the real baby ones. Any pair. Any broadway. Any Axs. Kxs is dependent on who is already in. I'm most definitely a position nit and playing extremely tight in EP, but on the Button (and sometimes CO) in an unraised pot I'm attempting to get in the mix with any playable hand. To be honest, at most tables this likely only turns into an extra few hands per session, so it's not like it is this overwhelming difference.

Gcluelesspokermullet(allbusinessupfront,butpartyin theback)noobG

Ofc position and initiative are our bread and butter, I don't know how you concluded that I think otherwise. In my games I pretty much only enter pots aggressively, although I usually play tougher lineups than the average 1/3. I only argued that this hand is not good enough to raise and when that is the case I usually muck. On a table soft enough overlimping would be fine, we should be sitting at the table to figure it out, I can't judge it by the OP.

I also didn't say that initiative has no value in mw pots, I stated you gain less from it at this SPR than what you lose precisely from lowering the SPR. About these examples, what if they actually have something? You bet into the field to find out. You will have +EV bluff spots, but unless they are straight up monkeys there won't be many spots where you can pick up a pot riskfree.

About the shorty, I just played a 1/2ish game yesterday while being on the waiting list where a shortstack (he was 100bb deep but the game overall played quite deep with huge open sizes so it was a very similar situation) shoved 77 over an open, my 3b and a coldcall. There are the types ofc who just want to play fit or fold and they are easily spotted, but even then you have SPR=1 and they might fit.

We actually have quite similar perspective imo, you just estimate our edge higher, therefore the treshold of playable hands lower than I do. In this particular case we have no means to find out who's right. I tend to underestimate it on purpose, it's a philosophy of mine that I give respect to opponents until they prove to be bad players. Pride is a very dangerous thing in poker. I think it's way better to leave a few BBs of EV on the table missing out on these marginal spots that might be profitable than getting into the habit of making huge exploits solely based on that we're supposed to be the best players on the table. That often results in major punts.

That's very far from the worst case scenario. What really is a nightmare is flopping somewhat big and getting raised. It just rarely goes well with garbage like this. Flop trips and get raised? Flop a straight on mono flop and get raised? Flop bottom two and get raised? Even making a boat and having a villain wanting to stack off is not necessarily a pleasant situation. There are close to zero comfortable spots even OTB with trash. You have to be a poker god compared to the opponents to make these hands winning, and about that I stated my take in the post above.

While I agree with most of this post, I think you are undervaluing that having an overly aggressive image creates a certain meta and dynamic in a live game where you get paid later on with nutted holdings. While this hand is on the bottom of the raising range and is often dominated, I find that we often win from barrel ability and it’s ok to at times to waste money with it when getting called.

There’s for sure a fine line between it being a punt and it creating a better table dynamic. I would say fold if we have a bad image and raise if we are running well and also if we haven’t shown down many bad holdings/bluffs. It’s certainly NOT good to overlimp with it.

This is also certainly true. We have to be comfortable and able to play post with it. But we are in position and we have an easier time deciding to let go when we face great aggression. It’s ok to respect opponents when we have seen them play well but playing with reasonable confidence is important because it creates conviction in our actions and boosts overall mindset. We now have better ability to execute strategy at a macro level because we believe we will succeed. Sometimes we will fail because we will be dominated or outplayed, but that’s part of learning. We recalibrate our aggression and make adjustments to opening ranges in order to meet skill requirements etc.