Table has shown a lot of passivity so far, particularly so for the villains involved in the hand who have similar playing styles; loose passive.
Pre:
V1 (UTG+2, $450) 50s male, a bit of a weak player and very passive. Bet sizing usually equals hand strength.
Hero (MP, $500) 20s male, playing tight.
V2 (SB, $400) 20s male, bad player, limp calling pre and folding most hands post, plays bad in pots where he is the pfr with small sized barrels with 2nd/3rd pair OOP.
V3 (BB, $500) 30s male, passive. Similar to V1.
V1 raises to 25, Hero calls with pocket fives, random V calls, V2 and V3 call.
Flop:
$125
J 2 Jr
Checks around
Turn:
$125
J 2 J 3r
V1 bets 35
Hero calls, fold, V2 and V3 call.
River:
$265
J 2 J 3 Q
V1 checks
Hero bets $130
I don't expect these players to read hands at all and take too much notice at bet sizes etc. Hard for them to have a J or Q by the river so my intention with this bet is to fold out middle pairs that beat my pocket fives.
If it was just 1 opponent or even 2 if they both checked to you on river I would say this was OK. I think with 3 opponents somebody will call with a better hand too often for this to be profitable. Occasionally you will get called by worse, but villains that will call with worse are going to turn up with better even more often.
I think this is a trivial fold on the turn. Calling pre was set mining, you didn't hit and now your OOP in a multiway pot with a low pair. There just isn't a reason to stick around.
If you want to turn your hand into a bluff (and given the player descriptions, you should IMO), you need to blast the river. $130 isn't going to cut it. It would have to be closer to $200 or more in order to get 88-TT type hands to fold.
I just don't think you have the fold equity here to justify a bluff. A few reasons:
1. the amount of players. Bluffing 3 people out on the river just doesn't happen to often, and, even if it is possible, I don't think you're bet size was enough to get there. One might just say "**** it" and call.
2. even if you manage to bluff out the better hands that could conceivably fold (mid pairs) there are still at least three people to act after you bet, and someone could be slow playing trip jacks or a full house. Even if they aren't the most trappy players in the world, this does happen sometimes, so I think its worth considering. If they're even mildly attentive, they'll notice that the board probably didn't connect with anyone besides them. So they'd be waiting for a more favorable situation to bet, or for someone else to start the action. Every monster on this board matches the pre flop and post flop action. I wouldn't discount it so quickly.
3. What hand are you trying to represent here? To me, the "call, check, call, raise half the pot" line just isn't very convincing. It looks like a steal, and I think mid pairs would be encouraged to stay a good deal of the time.
So...
You bet 130 into a 265 pot. You need someone to call less than 33% of the time to show a profit. If we're conservative and take, say, 11% away from your fold equity for each of the reasons above, you've all ready lost that 33%.
I'd fold the turn. If you wanted to make a bluff on this board, you would need to take the lead in betting after the flop and go from there.
If you want to turn your hand into a bluff (and given the player descriptions, you should IMO), you need to blast the river. $130 isn't going to cut it. It would have to be closer to $200 or more in order to get 88-TT type hands to fold.
I disagree. He is repping a Q. As his V's are described, they are not calling.
I don't think I like it. Your relative position to try a bluff here is terrible.
Here's what I mean. If V1 had bet and only you had called, you could conceivably represent slowplayed Jx or a medium pocket pair bigger than V1's (since you think you're bluffing, you must be trying to bluff V1 off a pocket pair bigger than yours).
The problem is V3 overcalled after you called the turn. He could very easily have the Jx that you are trying to represent. The board on the turn is very dry and he could easily have slowplayed twice, especially with your read that he is passive. Of course, he could also have had a hand like 54 or even some kind of gutshot, and would fold to your bet. (Though in this hand, with you having 55, you block some of those 54 combos.)
So, with 2 players in the hand, for your bluff to work, you have to hope that:
1) V3 has air on the river and will fold a hand worse than yours, AND
2) V1 has a pocket pair that he is willing to lay down on the river.
If V3 has any kind of hand, he's probably going to call the river bet and you're screwed.
Also, if V1 doesn't have a medium pocket pair, you should be checking, since your own pocket pair beats the ace high hands that V1 can have, and V3 will either snap you off with a good hand or he'll show a hand you can beat.
So both of those conditions need to hold, or else checking is better than betting. Up to you to decide how often both of these are true at the same time, but I'd probably be checking back expecting V3 to show a hand he was never going to fold.
EDIT: Sorry--didn't see V2 and V3 both called. I read that V2 folded the turn the first time I read the OP. With 2 overcalls, I'd be very concerned that a jack is out there somewhere. I'm much less inclined to try a bluff now than I would have been before, which already wasn't much.
