I apologize in advance for the length of this post .

I misplayed a hand yesterday and it got me thinking, because this type of hand is not uncommon. And as a player willing to play for stacks, I think it's important to know this type of spot inside and out.

By the way, any corrections on my logic or the math are very welcome! I'm still new at this and prone to making mistakes.

To summarize: PokerStars 16NL full-ring, weak field. UTG opens to 2bb, UTG+1 and UTG+2 call. Hero is in HJ with 56. I like squeezing with this hand but the EP players were passive and likely to call so I overcalled. Weak reg on the BTN squeezes. UTG+1 calls, and I call. Flop comes 3xT9. UTG+1 leads with $2.60. Pot is now $11.00, I have $14 behind (BTN and UTG+1 have me covered).

I called, concerned about what the squeezer would do. He folded, turn was a brick, UTG+1 bet $6, I shoved, he tanked before calling. River was a brick and he showed 8x8x.

When I did the EV calculation afterward, I realized I should have shoved on the flop. The flush draw gets there 35% of the time, but there are some reverse implied odds. Even if I give myself only 31% equity, on the flop shoving is +EV without accounting for fold equity: .31 x 36 - .69 x 14 = 11.16 - 9.66 = 1.5. However, on the turn the shove is -EV (let's say 16% equity): .16 x 36 - .84 x 11.40 = 5.76 - 9.576 = -3.816. Fold equity won't make up for this deficit with so little behind.

Harks back to what I learned (and subsequently forgot) in the book The Mathematics of Poker that good draws want to get all the money in on the flop. My concern about the original squeezer was irrelevant because the flush would beat most of his range. In fact, I should have recognized he was welcome to come along!

This got me thinking: what to do if I had the made hand in this spot? Let's say I was the squeezer from the blinds with an overpair and I'm acting first. Seems checking is best in most situations on the flop, since we don't want to get shoved on. Perhaps we bet if we have AxA. Even the button squeezer should probably check behind and bet on the turn. If we check and one opponent ends up all-in and the other folds, we have to consider folding and use MDF if we think V is capable of bluffing here. If both opponents end up all-in, we fold.

(Note: HU we can probably bet either way since it would be -EV for most draws to shove on the flop.)

Also, does it make sense to lead out into the squeezer with the flush draw? We want to induce a shove, but if the squeezer just calls he is in turn exploiting us, so it's risky. And with the SPR so low, the move might appear completely transparent. Also, if we do have a lead range in these spots, do we need to balance it?

A set, however, has a redraw and therefore equity against the flush if it hits. If we flop middle set as the caller, we probably want to x/c and shove on non- turns. If we flop top set, we have enough equity to bet on the flop since we are unconcerned about the shove. Does this make sense?

I know this post is long, but I just wanted to bring up a related case in 3bet pots multiway: flopping a set (to a lesser extent, 2 pair) on a monotone board without the A showing. There are a lot of nuances here, especially out of position. Is this just one of those situations where if someone has the A, all the money is going in the middle regardless?

Thanks in advance.

If the squeezer has position on you (I think he was on the button in this spot), I think you're better off folding pre, because it will be hard to realize your equity OOP. If you're going with the hand, you should probably jam on the flop, but it's a high variance spot, where you probably only break even in the long run. When UTG leads into 2 players in a squeezed pot, he's likely to be very strong (e.g. with a set, a small overpair, or a draw to the nuts) so you won't have much fold equity. It's also possible that you are dominated by a better FD.

A lot of people have the idea that suited connectors play well multiway. It's not really true. You're actually better off being heads up, because then you have more success with bluffs, you have more clean outs, and you're less likely to get over-flushed. These factors mean you're generally better off 3-betting or folding pre if you can't close the action with a call.

Thanks, Arty. So you are saying that in general we shouldn't flat with SCs in a squeezed pot if we are OOP. I've been experimenting with 4betting players like the BTN squeezer who have wide 3betting ranges and then fold often postflop, but I usually don't include SCs in this range. Not to mention the flatter.

Here's a hand I just played on PartyPoker 10NL full-ring. Kind of similar except probably very different given your input lol. Not to mention the paired board. Was my play correct in your opinion?

The main V (SB) is a whale but in this case happened to have a hand. I am in the BB. Effective stacks are $15.43 (not including the CO who folded on the flop).

Hero (BB) is dealt AQ. CO limps, SB raises to .55, I call.
Flop (1.57 after rake): T44. V bets the pot, I raise to $6, CO folds, V goes all in, I call.

I did the EV calculation as follows. I gave V a range and divided it into hands that would call the flop raise and hands that would shove. Given how he played, I put the chance of his folding at any point to be zero (oversimplification perhaps). 44% of his hands would shove. Then, using Equilab I looked at the Scenario Analyzer and looked at the turn cards that increased my equity: 32% of the deck increased my equity to an average of about 87%.

So:

EV(raise + shove) = .44 * (.414 * 31.41 - .586 * 14.88) = .44 * (13 - 8.71) = 1.88
EV(raise + call + V bets and I fold) = .56 * .68 * -6 = -2.28
EV(raise + call + V bets or c/c turn) = .56 * .32 * (.87 * 31.41 - .13 * 9.38) = .56 * .32 * (27.32 - 1.22) = 4.67

EV(raise) = EV(raise + call) + EV(raise + shove) = 1.88 + 4.67 - 2.28 = 4.27

Basically, yes, unless the squeeze is very small and you get a great price.

The AQs is quite different because AQs is a much stronger hand than 65s, and it should usually be a 3-bet in that spot. I haven't looked at your description of the hand in detail or done the maths, but I don't really see the point in raising the flop.

Thanks, Arty.

Preflop I have done almost no work on SB vs BB spots. Even so, I would normally 3bet in this spot but I was hesitant because of the iso sizing. I didn't want to create such a large pot on the flop with someone who I felt created many high-variance situations where stacks would be at risk. And I wanted the limper to come along and not shut him out of the pot. Faulty logic?

I raised the flop figuring he would shove, and I knew I was a favorite against TP or JJ, which he would stick it in with. TBH, I would have raised in that spot vs most villains, trying to get money in the pot before a diamond (scare card) possibly comes and barreling a bricked turn. You prefer flatting? If so, I assume we give up on a bricked turn facing a 1/2 or more bet (maybe not against this V though since we have some IO in my opinion).

Thanks again.