wait, I just saw another message. You say there wasn't a straddle, but your OP led me to believe you had called a button straddle from the BB and then 3! I think forum protocol is to mention the straddle only if someone has actually straddled. If I'm still confused, please set me straight.

If there was no straddle, you didn't call a button straddle and then reraise when it came back to you, so you didn't necessarily rep a hand like KK+ with your squeeze. That makes a 5! an even more iffy proposition.

I really respect your game, but I disagree here. I know theoretically we want to be 3 betting a polar range from BB, but obviously the action pre is so far off from correct theory. I would just go linear here; I can't imagine 3 betting KQo.

I could be off-base, I don’t know. Just feels like the potential to cooler someone is higher multi-way with a suited KQ and I’d rather squeeze/flat the off-suits at a mixed frequency depending on the situation. That’s just me though.
I think squeezing often runs you into hands that dominate you here so I’d rather use KQ as a bluff than a value squeeze.

^Pretty sure it's been solved that 3betting suited hands >>> the offsuit version.

Suited hands outperform offsuit ones significantly, more than their flush equity even, since we can semibluff more often and have better equity realisation. This should be equally the case in both 2bet and 3bet pots, but since we are typically up against a stronger range following a 3bet, we should favor the hands that do better.

Btw, flatting the initial open pre is a major leak. The PFR is effectively opening from the HJ, there is a bunch of 'dead' money/weak ranges in there, and stacksizes are pretty much perfect to put max pressure on the PFR. A 3bet with KQs is soooooo much more profitable than a call.

This is probably true and just a mistake that I’m making in multi-way spots.
Another reason I was saying this is because it’s live 1/2 and I expect that people won’t be playing wider ranges like they should in a 5-handed game. I see hands as strong as AK getting flatted behind often even in 2/5 live games and this is part of my logic in turning off suits into a bluff hand the odd time multi-way and playing the suited variety as a flat more often because a dominated suit combo will be involved more often. Obviously I need to look at this spot more.

Viral beat me to it. While I do agree about hands like AK getting flatted, I also see this hands folding to a squeeze or playing horribly post flop. I wouldn't really let that influence my decision. Also, I put UTG/HJ on a much tighter range than GTO HJ, and I still think it's a slam dunk squeeze.

Viral, I agree with everything you said, and I'm surprised that you're the only one in the thread that agrees with me. I feel bad, because OP thinks he did something wrong because more people said to flat than squeeze . I ran this spot through a few of my mentors and they all said squeeze as well.

Wrote it in my notes within 5 minutes after this hand( and since a few days have passed forgot that the button straddle was on oops). Action starts UTG in this format and UTG did only open to 3x (not the 7.5x I had mentioned earlier) which is pretty standard like it would be compared to a 2/5 game

Thank you, Sounds as 50/50 between squeeze/ call as it could get

Dolk Polk's website sent out a email on the squeeze play today. Against a HJ raise and a button call, he recommends a squeeze with KQs and because you are OOP, a little larger than a pot size raise. I think that doesn't change much 5 handed with a raiser and 3 callers, but the raise needs to be even larger, which is what you did. I still like your squeeze attempt.

some issues to consider

you keep referring to V's position as HJ thou technically true the average $1-2 player sees it as what it is UTG and a player labeled as a TAG would tighten his range from UTG.

so if it was a button raise then sure a 3-bet squeeze is ok

however before doing so one must take into account
(what is their play if 4-bet)
( what is the flop play if called in 1-2 spots and we whiff the flop?)

flatting the pre and proceeding multiway works if you can read hands & play well post flop.

3-betting and then calling a 4-bet co-mitting 33% of our stack when OOP against a labeled TAG doesn't seem smart as even if we spike a K or Q we are going to get stacked quite a few times while scooping the min when we do out flop V and are ahead

I think we are mostly in agreement, it's just to squeeze or not.

I think out of all the options, calling the 4! has to be the worst. You make some valid arguments against the 3! squeeze and against some players, I would definitely squeeze and some I would definitely not. It really depends on just how tight the opener really is. I wouldn't decide based on a generic 1/2 player, but on my specific read of that player. And I wouldn't squeeze here if my table image is at all loose or spewy.

Why not call the 4!? You're OOP, no longer the aggressor, and you're not sure if a flopped K or Q helps or dominates you. You're obligated to check almost every flop and call almost any sort of c-bet. If you are going to bluff the flop with a c/r, why not go ahead and 5! pre? Without a miracle flop, you're at a serious disadvantage the whole way. So after the UTG/HJ does 4!, either 5! or fold. Unless I had a read that V was a tricky player, I would fold.

A leak I've been trying to plug in my game is calling too often. But given that, I can't fold KQs pre for $15 vs a $60 pot. I won't fold pre, won't call a 4!, so my options pre are call or squeeze. If I squeeze, I must have the plan to fold or 5! if faced with the 4! decision. I also have to plan to c-bet any board that would c-bet with AA.

I think they'll play slightly wider than a FR UTG range, but not too far off, and definitely way more narrow than a GTO HJ opening range...I accounted for this, and he's going to fold ~84% of his perceived opening range. With all of the dead money I just can't flat. I'm as confident as Viral that squeezing is superior.

I’m agreeing that this is better as a squeeze as well now.
Gotta fold to the 4! though. I think calling the 4! is a big leak.
Thanks for setting me straight Viral/67o.

Good work guys, some nice analysis in here.

So to eleborate a little bit- how wide are we squeezing here? Like if KQs is a slam dunk 3 bet, how about KJ? QJ? How do we land as close to the optimal squeezingfrequenzy as possible?

I have a hard time thinking KJ or QJ would be a good squeeze here. Suited or not.

I really don't know, and it's tough because you can't really solve for this with the given pre flop action. I would personally be squeezing a range of 99+, AQo+, KJs+, and ATs+; I feel like, if anything, that's too narrow with all of the dead money.