You have JJ and three players have put money in the pot on a king-high board. Why exactly are you calling?

u seem to be confused. we are saying if u flat, u keep him in the pot and allow him to keep bluffing. that's why u don't reraise someone off a bluff

I didnt have time for some precise calculation during playing that hand; however, I just guess the chance that king will appear in 6 cards (they are holding) of 47 cards (52 total minus 5 I see) with 3 kings left (1 of 4 kings is on board) is something about 40 % (6 * 3 / 44,5).
Of course the real chance is higher because hands with king are played far more often than random hands, however my pot odds were 1:5 – good enough for the chance that none of them has king OR jack will come.

Aha!
You mean that the chance that he will keep bluffing when just called is much higher than he will keep bluffing on reraise. Right?

if u reraise he will likely fold.

1. fold flop. i don't know what you're thinking when there's a bet and 2 callers

2. this is tricky. reads help a lot here. because it's a BvB battle his range is pretty wide and he can feasibly have most pairs OTF and be continuing OTT with TP/pair+/Ax. due to this, I feel like if u start barreling u are committed to emptying the clip, but u *should* be able to fold out top pair with 3 barrels. the problem is if u hit your flush Ax and Kx makes up a part of his range so u have to be careful. also, because he's IP he could be calling down with a made flush.

3. jam river. otherwise fine. OTT u have to think about raising just because of his bet size (normal bet size easy call), but he's really short stacked so calling is fine

I'm sorry UDF. Im surprised you are still shackled to this thought process.

You are correct in what you mentioned what I've bolded. But why did you stop there. Is that all the information you have at this point. There preflop play? Why did you not extend that analysis to what youve seen them do. The post flop calls. Once you factor that in, the chances of at least one of them holding a K is nothing but 100% ( slight exaggeration of course, to make a point. But it's not far off).
The chances of hitting a set on the turn is about 4%. You don't have even the implied odds to make a 1:5 call here.

Am I wrong?

Thanks; I understand and agree.
Just at the JJ hand you all see it very clear that I should fold it, for me there is a question because my pot odds were so good. But I see it more and more that you (all) are right.


No, you are not, its just a bit hard for me to process this.
I mean.... I see it more and more as you all are pointing on it, just in that moment I was confused because I am not used to play with 3 villains postflop and I didnt think of it so much, so the only think I could do in that moment was that simple counting of probability if the hands would be random. I knew even back then that its not so much good way how to make a decision but it was for me like "the best what I have" in that moment.

If you want to chase a 2-outer, you need pot odds of 20:1 or so.
And it should be very clear that you need to bink a 2-outer. People don't randomly bet into 4-way pots with total air. At worst, the first villain has a draw, but mostly he has top pair+. With two callers, you're likely to see Kx, a flush draw and a set or something. You might even be drawing almost dead vs top set.
If it were heads up it would be standard to call one street with JJ on Kxx. Not multiway though.

pot odds are only relevant if you're considering calling to hit a 2 outter in which case 5:1 is nowhere near enough - u need about double that (taking into account you're probably going to be faced with another bet on the turn). also, you can't overestimate your implied odds because villain won't willingly go broke in a multiway pot with a marginal hand. if you hit your J you probably can't get villain to call your raise

also your reasoning of having 5:1 odds that none of them have a K is purely asinine. approximately by the time the 2nd person enters the pot the odds that one of them has at least a K is near certainty

FWIW, the AQ hand is fine. KQ double-barreling the FD is OK too. Quads hand is good too, but you could/should shove the riv.

I wouldn't necessarily play each hand exactly the same way, but there are no major mistakes with those.

The main thing to take from this latest round of advice is "Don't call with underpairs in multiway pots". Multiway, you usually need a hand that has outs to the nuts. In that respect, 87 is far better than JJ on K65 when you have 3 villains.

I see it now, thank you.


Well, he was shortstacked, so it was irrelevant; if I would shove, he can call just what he has.

Even if there are just 3 players involved (me + two villains)?

After a lot of working and no time, I finally had some time for poker!
I am sending some interesting (losing or those which I think I didnt handle) hands, I hope you will tell me your oppinions as always before xD



Thought process: Nothing special, I didnt bet the flop because I expected somebody else to do that in multiway pot (and I would reraise).



Note: Now I think I shouldnt have C-BET. It was more hand for checking.



Thought process: I played it like this because villain was very aggressive and had very high 3bet stat in my HUD.



Thought process: I raised preflop with JJ and I consider it as a mistake which I realized just after I did it (even before he reraised me). Howerver, in given situation I saw the best solution in calling. Then Q on flop was dangerous so I fold. I know that this hand way played quite ******ed, mainly I played bad preflop.



Thought process: Due to his preflop play I guessed his flop range to gutshot draw, top pair or maybe even overpair, so I tried to get from him as much as possible.

33 just bet 3 streets. As played, call turn to keep the other guy in. River seems fine, possible bet a little smaller.

88 call turn

QQ if +1 is a reg, flat pre, as played is possibly fine depending on stats/reads.

JJ 3b is standard, never flat here. Flatting the 4b and jamming are both fine, as played not folding flop.

TT is fine.

Based on your comments you need to work on your hand reading.

I pretty much agree with TDA with regard to the optimal lines. The thought processes still seem fishy. Not only do you need to get better at ranging villains, you also need to work out the best way to maximise EV against those ranges.

Thank you, I see that my thought processes are still fishy, I am trying to improve; however, its hard xD

33 hand OK, I understand.

88 hand; why to call turn?? In fact I dont think it was even good to C-BET. But call turn with just one pair?

QQ hand OK.

JJ hand; why to 3bet with JJ? Btw, what about TT preflop?

TT hand OK.

33 you took a very classic fish line, check flop minraise turn. that just screams strength

I wouldnt play it like that with only one villain.... but in multiway I think its much more likely that somebody catches and starts to raise.
(Well, I have lost that hand anyway.... but its not so much important.)

I think folding the turn is fine, particularly at 5NL, as villain often has a better pocket pair, if not a king. You're rarely getting floated by a nitring 5NL player with total air. I'd sometimes check-call the flop, but mostly bet for protection to get a villain off any two overcards. With TT I'd definitely check-call, as it's a bit less vulnerable than 88. With 99, it's really close.

When you 3-bet with jacks OOP, it's for multiple reasons. The raise has a value component (it can get called by a lot of worse hands) and a protection element (you should be happy to pick up dead money while folding out hands that have equity against you). Seizing the initiative also puts you in prime position to win the pot on the flop, where you could c-bet for value/protection again. Just calling pre isn't terrible (it's still profitable), but it misses some potential EV, as you're relegating your hand to more of a set-mine or weak bluff-catcher.
Just imagine villain has KT or 98s. If you 3-bet pre, you take down the pot and villain never wins with king high/9-high, or gets the chance to suck out.
If you call pre and the flop comes Axx Kxx or Qxx, villain c-bets and you often end up folding the best hand, or allowing villain to suck out cheaply. Note: If you were in position, calling is more standard, as you can control the pot size in position. When you're OOP, 3-betting is standard, partly to counteract the positional disadvantage.
That's more of a reason to bet, isn't it? Think about it. You have a strong hand multiway, where you're more likely to get action.
If you bet the flop, a villain with trip queens raises, and you get stacks in with a boat versus a hand with 3 outs. Easy game. Bad things can happen when you slowplay m-way, like a villain binking a 2-outer for a better boat.

I see, thank you.

I got terribly bad luck today, I could barely win a hand (if I got something, villain had slightly better, mostly I didnt even get anything, so I folded).... it maybe influenced my decisions but I am aware of anything like that.



Thought process: According to HUD the villain was calling station, so I supposed him to have some draw and wanted him to bet as much as possible.



Thought process: I was thinking about betting turn but I didnt because I was a bit afraid of being reraised.



Thought process: I bet turn because I wanted to get some money from draws.



Thought process: According to the HUD villain is almost never calling flop, so I supposed he has something (thats why I didnt raise on the turn but called river because I couldnt fold JJ on such a board).

JTs "Thought process: According to HUD the villain was calling station, so I supposed him to have some draw and wanted him to bet as much as possible."

He raised the turn. When do calling stations raise the turn with a draw?
FWIW, I'm going broke with top two, but if he's a calling station he's literally never bluffing there. He has two pairs or better.

KQs "Thought process: I was thinking about betting turn but I didnt because I was a bit afraid of being reraised."

Fair enough, as the board paired, but often when you also have a flush draw to go with your top pair, you shouldn't generally mind getting raised, as you have enough equity to call. If you were offsuit, then pot-controlling makes a lot more sense, as you just want to get to showdown, or induce villain to bluff the river.

AQ "Thought process: I bet turn because I wanted to get some money from draws."
I'd often 3-bet pre (for the same reasons I recommended 3-betting JJ in an earlier post). As played, why are you donk betting? Why are you calling the turn raise? Turn raises mean "I can beat TPTK".

JJ "Thought process: According to the HUD villain is almost never calling flop, so I supposed he has something (thats why I didnt raise on the turn but called river because I couldnt fold JJ on such a board)."

This isn't too bad, although the river is probably a fold, but you need to get to the next level. Not just "I supposed he has something", but actually assign a range. If he never calls the flop, could it be because he's the archetypal nitty set-miner that only hits a set 12% of the time? Which hands is calling the flop with? Which of them are betting the river? How many of them are beating you?
This is probably too advanced/tricky for a beginner, but I pretty much check every made hand in my range OOP on that 764 flop, mostly to check-call down. With everything from JJ+ you are way ahead or way behind, praying villain has TT-99 or air, and not a set, two pairs or a straight/draw. To put it another way, when you c-bet and get called, villain's range has a ton of equity (you can be drawing nearly dead), and if he raises the c-bet, you just want to throw up, especially if you have aces or kings. Since that flop misses most of your range, and completely smashes villain's, you shouldn't be c-betting it at a high frequency. Overpairs are barely more than bluff-catchers in situations like that. Fortunately, you benefited from villain's slowplay this time and only lost two bets. If he flopped a set, he should pot the turn and river for value, as your hand is virtually face up as an overpair, or air.

Thanks a lot.
I understand quite everything except of the preflop 3-betting concept in general.

It is not so much about this particular comment, its also about another comments in the past.... it seems like I am much less 3-betting than I should be.

However, I am doing it because of the experience with villains cards after 3-bet preflop. They are usually doing it with AA, KK, QQ, AKs.... mostly. Just in very little cases they do it even with something else.

Yes, you might tell me that they see in HUD that I am 3-betting only that range above but its not completely true. A lot of them cant have those informations (if I see quite nothing or few hands in my HUD, I suppose they dont see anything as well).... and still, even in such situations, they are 3-betting mostly with nuts.
Cant it be some difference between Zoom habits and other table habits? I absolutely trust you that where you play, you have different experiences, but can I apply them on Zoom? I dont think so.... but maybe I am wrong for some reason and I should 3-bet even if they 3-bet mostly with nuts.

A lot of people have the feeling that every time they get 4-bet (especially at zoom), the villain has QQ+/AK. This feeling isn't far wrong. When stacks go in pre-flop, that is the range you're usually up against. (Indeed, for full ring nits, a 3-bet reps that range, and a 4-bet is reserved for KK+). What a lot of beginners don't seem to notice is how often villain folds to the 3-bet, or merely calls it, because he doesn't have a hand that's in the top 2.6%.

If you 3-bet with AQ, or JJ (generally only when OOP), you don't do it because you want to get all in against kings. You do it because you want to get called by KJ or T9s or AJ, or because you'll fold out those hands (or worse ones) and pick up the dead money uncontested.
You can happily 3-bet AQ or JJ vs a steal from late position, because the opponent will fold maybe 50% of the time, call with worse 40% of the time, and 4-bet with better 10% of the time.
To put it another way, you 3-bet AQ in the BB vs CO because you have the best hand about 90% of the time. If you get 4-bet, just fold. That's the 1 in 10 time that you run into a monster. The other nine times out of ten, you're building a pot with a positive expectation. Often you're picking up 4.5bb without even seeing a flop.
Another way to look at is in the same way as you probably think about c-bets. For some reason, people are happy to c-bet 70% of the time because "I probably have the best hand, I'd like to pick up the pot right now, villain isn't likely to have a monster, and I've still got a chance to suck out if I'm behind", but they are reluctant to 3-bet pre-flop when the very same reasons for betting exist.
I struggled with this for ages. To this day, I have a lower 3-bet percentage than most regs. I'm risk averse in big pots. But every time I analysed the regs in my games, who were the ones with the biggest winrates? The ones who 3-bet the most (without being total maniacs).

you bet because you can get called by worse. sure trips got there but theres 2 flush draws now and whatever worse pairs that called the flop doesn't have more reason to fold on that turn. if you get raised, cross the bridge when you get there.

sure you don't want to be raised. but that doesn't mean you should be afraid of being raised. you should be afraid of being raised if you don't want to be raised and you think you're going to be raised. you have no reason to think you're going to be raised. you're only going to be raised if he turned trips right? so what's there to be afraid of?

also, as played why didn't you bet the river? it's like you don't like money or something...

also, raise, not reraise