This has been bugging me.

Live game, $2/5 (Maryland Live!), and I have a bit over 200bbs.

I wake up with QJo in LP. UTG, a player I've sat with before - balanced range and aggressive, who sat down recently for the max (120bb) - opens for $20.

Loose passive weak player in MP calls, so I decide to over call here only because of the other caller and see the flop if I can, but be prepared to get away quickly. To my left are 2 loose passives, 1 OMC who's cards are face up when played, and one competent player who's the only one that concerns me. One loose passive calls behind.

And that's all that really is relevant to the question which is - is my calling range too wide here? It's only 4bb, and I believe UTG's range goes from "cushing me" down to "flipping" (mid pairs), so if it folded to me I would fold but with the one passive and promise of at least one more, but also the possible threat of a 3 bet, I'm not sure if my range is still too wide to go ahead and make a single call here...

everyones stack sizes are the critical info you're missing here, but assuming they are all fairly deep, then it's fine IME. you should be trying to get into pots - more pots you play more monies you win, simple really! only thing that should deter this course of thinking is the possibility of getting squeezed, and that's not a real concern unless you know it's a concern. UTG may be ahead of you but once it's 4-5 way with a couple of fish, his bad position will matter a lot more than his good cards. how many fish are in the blinds? if you're last to act post that would be ideal.

The blinds had the OMC and the capable player, the two other loose passives were in CO and BTN.

that's ok - at least you're not going to get put to tough postflop decisions vs ppl IP vs you

but yea, just look ahead to postflop situations you're gonna get into. if you pair up and UTG cbets into 5 people you have an awesome decision ahead of you, but against everyone your hand plays pretty well and your decisions will be relatively straightforward

That was my thinking. I'm never committing suicide by top pair here (learned that lesson the hard way too often) but I can see calling 1, maybe even 2 streets here depending on the play.

I was thinking with one caller already in, if I do hit the board hard then the implied outs are definitely there.

you have to be willing to bet for value yourself too. if you envision a situation where you pair up and it's checked to you and you don't think your hand is strong enough to bet then you shouldn't call. also, if you don't think you're going to get the opportunity to bet very often, you shouldn't call. I mean, outside of UTG, who you don't want to be facing a bet from, who's more likely to be betting top pair than you?

Sure but that's going to be determined by the action too. When I say "suicide by top pair" I don't mean not betting at all, I mean that I'll be willing to get away from it when faced with something really strong.

I think the other players have to be pretty terrible for you to have a clearly +EV call here. Now, they probably are pretty terrible, but you should expect a lot of variance in this spot. QJo doesn't really play very well against multiple players (note: I have a particular bias against offsuit Broadways; I ****ing hate them basically), and it will be quite rare for you to win a big pot (there probably aren't many spots where you can win big without a straight), so you're gonna be folding a lot post-flop. All those 4bb calls will add up.
I think you'd be better off with hands like 97s or 86s, tbh. QJo is a classic "trouble hand" that doesn't do very well as a call pre, and even when it flops best (e.g. top pair), it's pretty vulnerable to suckouts, especially multiway when someone always has a flush draw, or bottom pair and an overcard.

I of all people look to keep a 'balanced' range and Art has valid points above. It does come down to stacks, opponents, how active you have been, your image and the ability to steal and/or get paid off while also having the ability to get away.

I think about the 3 'neighborhoods' of the deck (A-5, 6-T and T-A) with some overlap of course. Why would you want to enter a pot when everyone is 'crowded' into the same neighborhood? This is actually some PLO thinking in NL but if 'all' the good cards are held in opponents hole cards then what can come out on the Flop that will help you? Not much ...

For QJ specifically, the more in the hand the less likely I am to play it. GL

They are and I do.
The 4bb calls do add up, without doubt, and if the opponent or I am shorter, I'm folding it without hesitation, but isn't one of the aspects of deeper stack poker being willing to play wider ranges on implied outs? I'm remembering this from Harrington on Cash Games...

No argument. Like I said - I'm never getting married to top pair with this, but, and maybe I'm thinking about this wrong, QJ is also a hand capable of sucking out as well as being sucked, don't you think?

Very good thread OP, i was wondering the same thing. In live poker a lot/majority of pots go multi-way it's not uncommon for that too happen esp at a loose passiveish table.

I think i play super straightforward/no FPS in multi-way pots ESP if there are fish in the pot. Some things i've noticed...

-Like if i have TPTK and we are 4-way with 2 villain's being sort of fishy and the other villain being a "reg" i'm just going to bet out for value idc about having a x-calling range or what not right?

-No one really floats MW when facing a bet with complete air if there are 3 other+ villain's in the pot, i think when someone cold calls a bet when there are 2 other villain's left to act in the same spot it looks really strong and they get to the turn + river with a stronger range then vs. HU

Not everyone is positionally aware or even notice this tho

To some degree QJo will suffer from reverse implied outs too though.
Obviously it can, but being offsuit limits that substantially. With QJo, I think most of your equity comes on the flop, and then you kind of have to "survive" against draws and redraws. I've lost count of how many times I've flopped top two, but lost to a straight or a backdoor flush, or got freerolled by the same hand but with a redraw (e.g. top pair vs TP+BDFD, or straight vs straight+FD). When you're offsuit, you rarely want to build a big pot, but it's so hard to control the pot-size when it's multiway.

Btw, I think a lot of players over-estimate just how much equity offsuit Broadways have against "typical" ranges. I don't know just how wide/wild your opponents are, but - multiway - you're probably going to get to showdown fairly often. If you have 3 villains playing a 22% range of "playable hands" (22+, A2s+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, T9s, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo) then you've only got 20% equity with QJo, so it's going to be quite rare for you to have the best hand at showdown if a lot of money goes in. The hand becomes a lot more profitable if your opponents routinely play dominated junk like Q7o or J8o and can't get away from one pair or a 2nd-best straight/two pairs/trips. If they really are that bad, then experiment and see how you get on. I don't play live, but online I fast-fold QJo the moment anyone enters the pot. But like I said, I'm overly biased against offsuit Broadway trouble hands. I'm much happier with suited connectors.

in a live game, sometimes u just gotta not sweat the small stuff. you can call and then try to prove that you made a good call. it's not really a live specific concept, but different way of thinking compared to how most online players think, and it's just as good an approach to learning

The reason I posted this question in the first place is at the time I posted it, I'd made two such calls (TJ, QJ) in position multi-way and made quite a lot from them when I flopped two pair and the oop opponents both committed suicide with top/overpair. In one situation, when I flop top two, PFR c-bets more than the pot, and I did a tiny raise, just a hair over min, at which point PFR jammed all in and I called. Second time, same day, different villain, he bet 2/3 the pot, and I flatted, and turn brought a draw loaded card at which point villain shoves, and again I called. In both cases, the pf raisers had around 100-120bb

In both cases, I was good and felted them both, but at the same time it was nagging me that I might have just experienced some extremely positive variance rather than having made good plays.

But it's very difficult to overlook the potential of calling 4bb and making 100+

If pfr overbets pot just call, whereas it's better to raise the 2/3 pot bet on a drawy board, and you should be more careful when the draw completes.

if you're having doubts about whether you're the beneficiary of positive variance maybe it's better for you to not call with speculative hands. I never said calling in such situations is more correct - it's just that I don't decline opportunities to play where I feel comfortable, but a large part of that is that I feel supremely confident when the competition won't put me in situations that's conducive to me making mistakes. It's not about the 4bb to make 100. Reverse implied odds are real if you make it real.

I will read more about neg implied odds

Good stuff here ... There is one question I always ask myself when making marginal plays ...

"Will I get paid off here?"

Your question is very similar to how we may (or may not) play the SB/BB facing similar spots. It always looks attractive from a direct (and maybe implied) odds standpoint but is it a good long term play for us and our game?

1) Will I get paid off
2) Do I have the post-Flop game against this table (stealing/pots before showdown)
3) Am I sharing cards with the rest of the table
4) Do I have the self control to hit the brakes on most Flops ... even TPMK
5) Are there any short stacks that will suck me into a lot of boards

I already indicated that I'm doing a better job of 'not' playing those holdings 'all' the time, but I certainly haven't ruled them out. GL

I certainly like to think that I am judiciously choosing when to play such cards and when to let them go. In each case where I played them and got paid in a big way, I was against an early position raiser that I knew from history was aggressive and would fire hard at the flop and turn regardless (yes they had a history of c-betting into 5-6 way pots with nothing) and I had at least one caller before me increasing the overall pot size.

Each time I made the call prepared to fold to a squeeze but deeming the chance of a bluff squeeze unlikely (even the decent player was missing places where he should have squeezed with nothing).

There were other times in both sessions where I had similar cards but didn't face the right situation.

So - I *THINK* I'm going into these hands with the right mindset and balance of risk tolerance vs. risk avoidance... but for me it's these moments when I make big hits that I want to check myself on, because I've gotten cocky before...

So you are actually playing poker, not just cards, and you feel good when you pull in a big pot? Welcome to the club ...

There's nothing wrong with getting up and filling your own drink a couple of hands after wining a big one. Go into the bathroom and smile at the mirror .. and then go back to the table knowing that the target on your chips is even bigger now than it was before and play like it. GL

sounds like someone I wouldn't want to go postflop against

does this make it better for you to call? the more people in the pot the more straightforward you have to play and if you're looking to exploit aggression more players would limit your options wouldn't it? and you know the chain of callers in every hand that you consider to be fish? do you know what is their reasoning for calling?

seems like good advice for you to fold marginal hands...

I am not trying to be argumentative - I'm making a counter point but I really AM listening here, so please if it's wrong, correct me.

-----

You're thinking of the wrong aggressive. I don't mean smart aggressive, the kind you can bluff out in later streets.

I mean manically aggressive determined to take the pot down without regard to texture aggressive. The kind of player who will jam top and over pairs, so that if you're deep stacked you really do have the kind of I.O. to make the call good if you really spike the board. I'm never suiciding here with just a pair, but if I hit the board really hard (2 pair or better) then I really do have a chance at felting (as happened twice...)

And yes, I do recognize that making 2 pair+ OTF + is pretty slim odds - something like 20:1 I believe - but with table stakes of 120bb the math seems ok to me, and so yes I'm thinking the extra caller in that case does make the call more likely to make the odds needed.

So - what am I missing?

I guess first question is what did you have? Actually you know what, that's not very important because with your reasoning, you'd make the call with any 2, right? You didn't decide to play your hand because it's strong, and you're trying to realise its equity, you're playing it because you might hit 2 pair and stack your opponent.

This is a rudimentary plan, but it doesn't take much thought to execute. But your assumption that you're going to win 120bb every time you hit 2 pair? You said he's aggressive, but has he literally put all his money into the pot every hand he plays? If not you're not getting 120bb implied odds. If your odds of flopping the kind of hand you're after is 20:1, you have to win 80bb every hand, and that's a lot. And you have to assume that every time you don't you're going to lose, because you assume he's uber-aggressive and will never not bet, right?

And you're also assuming that he never has redraws, and all the other people in the hand never you beat? These are unrealistic assumptions, and I give enough credit for people acting on their reads but I have played a lot of poker and have faced many different types of players but I do not make assumptions like these because they are not realistic.

Also, you say you're not suiciding with 1 pair. Why not? You said he bets everything always regardless - why would you not call off with 1 pair?

So the funny thing is that you're choosing a plan that only works if you're 100% accurate at predicting what villain is going to do for the whole rest of the hand, and even when you're right you're not choosing the most optimum plan

More of a balance. I recognize that my hand is not strong, but it also has tolerable equity vs. his raising range.

Fair points, save the last. For both players, they're not entering every pot, but they're not adjusting their ranges for position either.

I may have given that impression, agreed.

so PFR has a tight preflop range but we're still rolling with the assumption that he's never folding postflop? still very easy stack off with top pair. put it into equilab if you don't believe me.

unless his preflop range is like 6% or something, but then his stacking off is justified because his range is so overpair dense. and suppose your plan is still to try to flop 2 pair to stack overpairs. overpairs are like 3:1 against 2 pair - not exactly what you're hoping for when mining

my point is why do you care what your equity vs his raising range is? your plan, as you described goes like this:

1. you flop 2pair+, you win
2. all other situations you lose

why does your equity matter if you don't have a plan to realise it?