Another few examples of HHs that fit under the same mold, that I never got around to asking. I'm not sure if I'm botching these spots or not. FWIW, I'm c betting all of these heads up, and I'm fairly certain that's "correct." I'm also running on the assumption that we would never c bet top pair>pp>second pair four ways+.

Example One: 2/5, 9 handed, $700 effective with both villains. Hero has a TAG image. Both villains are your standard LLSNL loose passive fish.

OTTH

Villain 1 limps UTG, hero raises J J $25 +2, villain 2 calls CO, and villain 1 calls.

Flop ($82): Q 7 3. Villain 1 checks. Hero?



Example Two:2/5, 9 handed, $600 effective with LJ, $300 effective with SB. Hero has a TAG image. LJ is your standard LLSNL loose passive fish, SB is a tight passive old man but very far from OMC (i.e. I've seen him limo-call hand AJo, 87s, and KQo - **** an OMC would never do.)

OTTH

LJ open limps, nit overlimps CO, hero raises T T OTB, SB calls, and LJ calls.

Flop ($100): K 9 7. X to hero. Hero?




Example Three: 2/5, 9 handed, $700 effective with +2, $400 effective with BTN. Hero has a TAG image. +2 is super loose passive. BTN is tight passive.

OTTH

Hero opens J J $25 UTG, and only +2 and BTN call.

Flop ($82): Q 8 7. Hero?



Example Four: 2/5, 9 handed, $600 effective with both villains. HJ is a LAG fish, BTN is a decent tight reg. Hero has a TAG image, with emphasis on aggressive (session is only two hours in, and this is the fourth time hero has 3 bet pre flop, and hero is yet to x a flop after being the aggressor pre; both villains know hero is on the tighter side from the past though.)

OTTH

Loose passive limps +1, HJ raises $20, BTN calls, hero raises J J$110 and both villains call.

Flop ($342): Q 5 2. Hero?

I'd be more inclined to cbet in examples #3 (wet board) and #4 (3bet pot).
Also, a Q overcard isn't the same thing as a K overcard.

Hand 1: Bet around 1/3 of the time. This isn't exactly a c-bet or a value bet. You have 2 opponents but it's pretty easy for you to have the best hand anyways. You opened in EP and there are fewer QX calling hands then AX or KX.

Hand 2: Bet around 1 time in 3. You hand isn't as strong and it's more likely your beat but there are more worse hands that can call a bet and you have position on both opponents.

Hand 3: Against 2 passive opponents I'm willing to bet this 1 time in 4 or so. Much less betting against more dangerous opponents who might float flop or raise with their good hands.

Hand 4: SPR pushes this towards a check/give up situation. With SPR < 2 any bet is risking pot commitment and second pair is not good enough for that in general. The LAG fish really hurts you here, with your recent aggressive image he may spazz out and shove with worse.

I appreciate the responses so far. so I assume when y'all are checking, you're checking to x-c flop, and then x-f unimproved/non pairing top pair turns? Going from there if we x-c flop, turn goes x-x, and then river is insignificant, it's probably best to just bet-fold small because we can get value from worse, and a raise is almost never a bluff?

Regarding river, it could be b/f or x/c (or even x/f based on sizing and player profile). It depends if he will more often call with worse or bluff when check to (or sometimes value bet with worse).

I think bet-folding is superior, just because the population doesn't really bet thinly, and river raises are almost never a bluff

Really depends a lot on who is betting. If a passive player decides to bet the flop I'm considering folding then, particularly if the other player called. If the player is more aggressive I'm going to call at least once.

By the turn there are too many variables too get very specific. If it's still multiway then check/fold is generally fine. If the turn card is a bad card probably just check/fold but if the turn card is a brick you can't just give up against an aggressive opponent. This pattern is too obvious and there are not enough strong hands to balance your weak ones. You have to call down sometimes against bluffy villains and occasionally against any aggressive one.

If it checks around on the turn it mostly matters how many people are in the hand on the river. If it's heads up then I generally like the small bet on reasonably safe run outs. If it's multiway then check/evaluate with an eye towards folding. Somebody often has TPWK in this situation.

Hand 1 is a good hand for calling down vs an aggressive opponent. There are a lot of worse middle pairs he can be betting.

Hand 2 really depends on who is betting and how many people are in the hand.

Hand 3 you just have to see how it goes. Too many possible situations on the turn depending on who is in the hand and what the turn card is. Against the two opponents you describe, if they are still betting turn you can give up.

Hand 4: SPR is so low here you have to decide if your calling down or not when the first bet goes in. Either you believe them or you don't.

I'm c-betting hand 1 as I'm most likely still best

check eval hand 2

c-bet hand 3 as most likely good here and want to charge draws

checking hand 4

E1 is a check imo

"we are usually ahead" is not reason enough to bet.. because to value bet we need enough equity against the CONTINUING range, and our hand doesn't benefit much from equity denial (I'd rather bet 99 here than JJ)... we are also OOP and multiway, if we were to bet this flop both Vs can reasonably have top pair, and our equity against top pair is dreadful

A better line is to X. If CO bets and limper folds, we can call. If CO checks, we can bet when checked to on blank turns (i.e. the majority of turns of Q73r), as our opponents will have far fewer Qx