3-handed. 4/8 $1 ante.

3h brings in
I open 8s 7h 7d
6d 2-bets, 3h calls, I call.

XX | 6d 3s
XX | 3h Kh
8s 7h 7d Qs

We check to 63 who bets, 3h Kh calls and it's to me.

Discussed this with a long term winner who said it's a trivial fold because of visibility issues from 5th and on. And add to the fact that he often has a big pair in the hole.

But the way I was thinking was the pot's pretty big, and seems to me it's a trivial call, no? If he does have a big pair in the hole my visibility is better, and unless the board runs out miserably (like 6354) I'm still ok to call down a fair amount, I think? Plus villain can still brick 5th while I improve.

Getting 8.5 to 1 we need only 11.7% to breakeven here and against a range of queens+, rolled up, and two wheel cards for the leading villain.

ProPokerTools Stud Hi/Lo Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
8s 7h 7d Qs	30.97%	96,770	265,260	17	11,855	21
$W $W, QQ, KK, AA, 66	6d 3s	43.86%	149,001	183,275	412	275,446
$L $L 3h Kh	25.17%	76,580	151,040	421	94,489	1,791

Even tightening the range to KK/AA/66 still puts us at

And even if it wasn't 2 bets on 3rd we'd still be needing only 18%, being given 5.5 to 1 once 63 bets and 3K calls, correct?

How much, if any of this, am I getting wrong?

Thanks

I think you can peel here -- I figure your worst case equity is (66)63 and (Ah2h)3hKh for villains, twodimes has that as 10.4% equity for you, so technically worse than your breakeven point but you'll see whether you improve and I think you have slight implied odds on future streets as a result.

Implied position is awful since almost all of 63's low draws will have a straight draw and he can bet with impunity on any low street, you can basically never drive the action. He might have a big pair in the hole but then your backdoor low has some value, otherwise it doesn't. Peeling one is fine, maybe they both brick and sometimes you get HU vs a pair of 3s, which would be great, but your hand loses a lot of its sparkle if the 63 catches good or if the pot stays 3-ways, and if you routinely call these spots down against complete looking boards you'll get crushed.

As an aside, you can simplify your range for villain to $L$L, TT-KK / 6d because that includes all relevant low draws, pairs TT-AA, split Sixes with a low card and rolled Sixes. Here's a graph of that range and it shows that 70 percent of the time you'll have less than breakeven (33%) equity on the next street, which is precisely what a bad implied position looks like. If you knock out the bricked low on the next street, you'll still be below 50% equity HU something like 60 percent of the time.

I usually peal one here because I like to play hands. That said, you should fold liberally on 5th. It is entirely possible that these guys are wider than you think 3 handed.

Some great replies, thank you, guys. Actually really helps me address a couple things I was unsure about.

Electrical: One question I have about the unroll: to confirm you're taking the midpoint of the 30/40% vertical equity which starts at 30 then capturing the percent from 30 to 100 to get that "70%", correct?

This seems like a really useful tool and I probably need to be using it more often to smooth out some points in my game.

nine: how liberally are you folding? I imagine if we make two pair on 5th we're going to be pretty entrenched in the hand. So technically yeah that makes sense to me but I pretty much imagine we're only looking to make 2p+ here anyway.

It depends what they catch. If low catches a four and other guy gets a king, I may fold.

Nice post, electrical. Could we do better trying to get hu right here on 4th with a raise rather than waiting for 3K to catch badly? Seems like a better situation and the pot is sizable right now but it could be too infrequently successful.
I may try my hand at some EV calcs later but obv it'll depend heavily on assumptions and if I'm just silly for thinking it please let me know.

Not a silly notion per se, but if we raise the 63 can jam regardless what the third man does, so raising means we'll usually be putting in three bets, and if the bricked low takes the heat then you just owned yourself.

I think this hand is precarious enough that peel/fold is a likely conclusion, but there will be rare binks of trips or where the other two hands both brick so peeling makes sense, but there's a looming dread to this spot.

I don't like the complete-call on third. Your hand begs to be heads up. I'd consider a 3-bet, hoping for a 4-bet and a fold from the 3. I also like to fold if the 3 calls 4 bets, but that's just mind games, and is technically wrong.

The Three is never folding once he's cold-called the first two bets. Like literal never.

I think this is pretty much how I've long seen these types of situations, and probably have always avoided historically. But for whatever reason I got more involved and what you said before about routinely calling down in these spots and getting crushed is accurate of my experiences.

Like basically even improving to 2p, we're trying to fade bad cards for villain on 5th, 6th, and the river. And that's not even counting if the 3rd villain stays in the hand, right? Feels like this is a super fundamental thing, but yeah good for me to re-align myself here.