I'd like some of you better players to tell me what you would do along the way, but more importantly, why you do it. Here is a typical situation from my 1/3 live games. Assume $300 effective stacks.

Hero has 99 in MP, it folds to Hero and Hero opens to $15 (standard open in this game). Folds to Button who calls, blinds both fold.

We have buttons calling range as pairs up to TT and any two broadway cards other than AK which he re-raises with, plus suited connectors 67+

Flop is J 7 3 rainbow.

We are out of position and the aggressor preflop so my normal line would be to bet out here a little more than half pot or $20. Good/bad?

Villain calls which narrows his range a bit for us, but AJ, KJ, QJ and all sets are in play. Villain is tight enough postflop to fold TT here with the Jack on board.

Assume the turn is a blank. This is where I likely give up as he probably isn't calling the flop without a J in his hand.

My question is, if you agree with the preflop open, what good did it do? We narrowed villain's range but that range is still wide enough to contain any broadway cards and we are going to see an overcard a large percentage of the time to our 9's.

Why should we just not limp and setmine? My thought process (and I'm willing to accept I am wrong) is I can't bet again and when I check any non-9 turn Villain is going to bet and I have to fold. Wouldn't I save the $12 preflop if I'm just going to setmine most of the time anyway? Wouldn't I want more limpers to maybe catch a piece and pay me off when I hit my set?

If raising preflop is correct, why (or why not)?
Was betting the flop correct? Why or why not?

You created a theoretical example where not a single worse hand calls your flop bet and exactly one better hand folds. Then you ask the question if betting the flop was a good idea. Let me ask you a question: what are your reasons for betting on any street in general?

You ask the same question about preflop. I would like to modify the example. This time, you have AA, flop comes J73 rainbow again and you bet $20. This time, villain calls only with sets and two pairs and folds the weakest two pair (73). Do you see the similarities between those two hands? How does that impact your preflop decision?

If we're set-mining why does it matter if it costs $15 to see a flop or $3? The result is the same, we see the flop, and bet sizes from here on out are the same function of the pot. We also don't know where the calls are coming from. Sometime this raise buys us the button and we play heads up vs. the blinds.

Betting the flop is situational. We should probably betting the flop to protect our equity against his broadway hands. That flop isn't incredibly scary for 99 but it's far from a gimme. If he calls, and the board is wet, you have to range him. Are there more draws or made hands in his range? If it's more made hands, then just check fold. If it's a drawy board, it's probably best to just bet again.

Thank you. That's fair and understood. Is it not reasonable to bet to avoid AQ/AT/KQ/KT/QT from getting a free turn and/or river to beat us when a flop bet likely takes down the pot right there?

Put another way, in the same scenario as above only we both check the flop to see a K on the turn, we again check only to fold to the V's bet on the turn. If the question was lamenting him hitting the K on the turn the feedback would likely be to C-bet the flop, no?

By limping you allow the blinds to win, while not having to pay for it. You're basically freerolling yourself. Also when a hand is profitable, getting a bigger pot means more profit. It's that simple. If it isn't profitable then don't play it and if it is profitable then raise it instead of limp to get a bigger pot.

By the way don't cbet automatically because you raised preflop, especially out of position and especially if you have no clue what to do on the turn.

I think that if you bet that flop it should be for value vs the weaker pairs and draws.

I think that if you check that flop it should be to get to showdown as cheap as possible unimproved. If the price gets too steep I might fold.

That’s correct in general, but on this board there are no real draws and we even block the T9/98 gutshots. OP also specifically assumes that villain doesn’t call a single worse hand, so there’s no value to get.

But we don’t know what happens if hero checks the flop. Which hands does villain bet with, what’s the value/bluff ratio?

In the theoretical example of villain never bluffing and never calling with worse, hero can bet 1BB on the flop to get him to fold his equity.

Well here's where I have the first problem. You're basically saying this is "your line" in this situation, and I think that's already the wrong way to look at it. You should be doing different things here given the same situation repeating. Check sometimes, bet sometimes, with some predetermined frequency but determined more or less randomly (perhaps influenced by some micro things such as tells or recent game history).

I think we can assume that "never calling with worse" implies standard bet sizes

I guess I really didn't want the thought process to go THAT far. I was more interested in learning why raise a hand like 99 when it's over 50% that an overcard hits the flop and we are likely relegated to check/fold at that point.


That isn't to say you aren't correct, it's just not where I was going with the question.

Long story short, the reason I feel like I'm a bad player is every session I sit down I am a long shot to win any money at all, for a number of reasons. Among those is not because I stack off in stupid spots, I just slowly bleed out during the hours I play and end up -$200 without really getting into many hands at all, it seems.

If I raise a spot like that 7-8 times a night only to fold the flop I'm roughly -$80 or so right there. I'm trying to figure out the ups versus downs of raising that spot going forward.

I accept I may not see that value in raising there but it may still be correct to do so. I'd like to know why.

It may help to know that virtually 100% of pro players would raise in this spot, so clearly preflop isn't the issue. Hopefully that at least points you in the right direction.

Hint: you don't know what the players behind you are going to do. Getting called by the button is one of the worst things that can happen. So clearly if the button is a good player and is going to call you almost all the time, then you either need to up your postflop game or don't raise the hand to begin with. Normally, it's less likely than that the button will call.

But that’s exactly the problem, 100%. Why would we ever use a “standard” betsize if that clearly doesn’t maximize our EV?

In the example here, we should either bet the highest amount that villain calls his unpaired overcards with or the lowest amount that he folds his equity. Not something potentially in the middle, just because that is our standard bet size.

I limp in weak live games but 99 is simply too good to limp/setmine with, especially from MP. Just go ahead and raise. You do not have to spike a set every time to win. You can call a street with an overcard on the board, you can check down and win if there's little aggression, you can get an overpair yourself. 99 is not 22, there is a large objective difference in the hand strengths.

I'm probably the weakest player among all that are going to comment on this but I feel that I can contribute something non the less so here goes.
When you say that you often find yourself losing 200 without knowing what happened it is a strong indicator that your whole approach to the game is wrong, and, this is highlighted by your question.
You probably lose in this way because you're way to passive.

You're probably calling way too much and hoping to make hands.
When, in any given session, we're card dead, this approach only slowly bleeds your stack. Then, leaving you wondering what happened.

Same mistaken thought process is behind your question.
Sure, if others open up in front, it's perfectly ok, in my opinion, to just call with pocket 9's.
If you're first to act, why would you limp, set mine with that hand, in an unraised pot?

By raising and getting the blinds to fold with only one caller, you only have to win 50% of the time to show a long term profit.

At a live 1/3 game, quite a few more seasoned players will call with any two cards on the button AND similarly auto-call any flop c-bet.

With 99 on a J high board, I'm gonna bet the flop, bet the turn on a blank, and unless the river is really ugly or the river bet really high, I'm gonna x/c the river.

There are several hands that call your c-bet on the flop with worse too btw like 88, 66, 55 and 44. You're in a situation where you're either ahead or behind w/o much chance of telling.

But when you shut down on the turn you invite a bluff on the turn or river.