I have faced this scenario multiple times recently. I'm in the blinds, raise several limpers, hit the flop, then-

Here's yesterday's example.

$2/3 $200 eff. stacks. 8- Handed.


Villain 1 MP fish, plays too many hands, pushes draws with no fold equity, calls flop bets with middle pair in multi-way pots, just.....bad.
Villain 2 Button splashes around, min-raises a lot PF in LP
Hero SB 61 YO white guy, viewed probably as TAG
Villain 3 BB middle aged Asian fellow, only played a few orbits, seemed like a typical loose-passive player.


UTG limps, V1 limps, V2 min raises to $6, Hero makes it $25 with Ah Qh, V1 cold-calls, V2 calls, UTG folds, V2 folds.

3 see the flop. Pot ~$84.

Qc Jc 4s

Hero leads $45; V3 calls; V1 shoves. (V1 covers; Hero and V3 both have ~$125 left, pot is now ~$300).

Hero is not overly worried about V1's shove. Much of his range are draws. Should I be worried about V3? Or this a trivial call, given pot odds?

There’s no hand history here.

But at low stakes if you hit TPGK you should usually cbet, even from OOP, and fold to a raise (absent reads). Bet/fold is the way to go in loose-passive games.

I edited it.

Idk what position V3 is, but, given the short stack depth and the fact this is a 3bet pot, this is an easy all-in.

I think V3 is BB and cold called preflop. Fist limper calls, other limper folds, initial raiser folds.

On the flop we’re not thrilled but with 35% of our stack already in the middle and only ~20% equity needed if V3 calls all-in there’s not much here to do other than call and hope for the best.

On the flop we’re not thrilled but with 35% of our stack already in the middle and only ~20% equity needed if V3 calls all-in there’s not much here to do other than call and hope for the best.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you. I believe this is the correct way to think about it, but in the heat of the moment, I did not do the math.

I did call, V3 came along too with a strangely played KK. V1 had AT lol.
The board ran out dramatically- QJ4K4 ( V1 celebrates the turn, V3 celebrates the river.)

Easy call. 3 way pot and you're good a lot of the time. You're betting $125 to win $425. You don't have to be right that much of the time. There are hands to which you lose obviously, probably 44, but plenty that you beat such as KQ, club draws, etc.

The real issue here is the stack sizes. I'd find a game where people are more at 100BB stacks.

I like sitting on this $200 stack as we can simply wait for premiums in a loose game and easily raise a big percentage of our stack that makes loose calls from our opponents unprofitable. So I like our 3bet preflop.

SPR is ~2 and we have TPTK on a drawy board. We're easily comfortably committed for stacks. Due to the drawy nature of the board and the fact that no one ever folds a draw on the flop, I would just PSB the flop to setup a turn shove. I don't like our smaller bet as it gives too good of odds for people to chase draws in spots where we won't be able to fold when that draw hits.

And trivial call when committed to this action.

Preflop setup a very easy commitment spot postflop; don't overthink things here.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Playing at << 100bb stacks is far more easier than playing at larger stack sizes, at least for those who may suck at deepstack. If OP is a crusher at deepstack, then obviously he should do that. Reading between the lines, I doubt OP is a crusher at deepstack (and that's not a slight at OP, as there is no shame in finding your own comfort zone stack-wise).

Gclueless66bbstackingnoobG

GG do you usually consider tptk committed at spr 4 or less or is there a more specific number (assuming no straight, flush, pair etc)?

Pretty much, and especially at this stack depth $-wise (i.e. $200 can fly in pretty easily in a 1/3 NL game, whereas not the same thing at $1000 with the same SPR).

I mean, you can argue slightly smaller SPRs versus slightly bigger SPRs versus certain opponents. But anything around ~4 we should have been strapping on our commitment boots from the offset, imo.

GcluelesscommitmentnoobG