PokerMaster, $0.25/$0.50 Pot Limit Omaha Cash, 5 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

Hero (SB): $46.06 (92.1 bb)
BB: $76.68 (153.4 bb)
MP: $129.12 (258.2 bb)
CO: $54.27 (108.5 bb)
BTN: $13.58 (27.2 bb)

Preflop: Hero is SB with 8d Ad Kc Td
MP folds, CO calls $0.50, BTN raises to $2.25, Hero calls $2, BB folds, CO calls $1.75

Flop: ($7.25) Tc 7s Ts (3 players)
Hero checks, CO checks, BTN bets $4.57, Hero raises to $20.56


Is this hand strong enough to call pre in the SB? I presume it's not strong enough to three bet, with the tri suit and imperfect connectivity. I think I probably do call too much pre in SB when we should be taking flops here at a very low %. How does the presence of the loose limper impact things? I don't have a ton of hands on either, but the limper is playing 60% vpip over 70 hands. The PFR has stats of 49/11 but only over 36 hands so I don't want to attach too much significance to them.


On the flop should we lead? Note also the irregular stack sizes.

I think 3! is probably better, but don't have a strong opinion vs. Call, especially if we want to keep limper in.

As played, no spades in hand, no backdoor flush draw, no blockers to straight draw prefer leading the flop, since there is a lot if value to be had and could easily check around.

Using Vision sb vrs btn (cant reflect limps as solvers never do that) at 50bb your hand is nearly always 3b (so would assume it would do more so at 27bb), and nearly always flats at 100bb. Your assumptions regarding the tendencies and range of the limper would have to play a large role in assuming which action you should take I would assume. Against CO rfi your always folding at 100bb with 3 of a suit.

I cant model sb vrs btn post flop in a single raise pot with Vision either so I looked at bb vrs btn and bb vrs utg. Vrs btn there is a 22% donk freq on TT7 and 19% vrs utg. I think we can assume from this that the closer the ranges are the higher the donk freq on this type of board and I would assume that the sb flat matches up pretty well vrs btn open and you have some donks here.

Post flop 29% donk vrs utg and 26% vrs btn at 50bb, and it goes down to 15% and 12% for 100bb. In all cases when I load hand class trips it mixes donks with trips in at about 1/3 and prefers to have have straight and flush draws in addition to trips to donk.

Given all of the above seems like checking unless you have the straight and flush draws in addition to trip would be a reasonable approach and a decent way to mix.

I did not realize hand was triple-suited when i posted earlier; that makes 3! much less attractive.

GreatBigRed is vision checking this hand 3-way or are those heads-up frequencies?

postflop vision is strictly heads up

So if we look at poker juice's FI15 (for a tight iso range from a passive player), our hand AKT8 tri suit, and then a 10-55% range for the limper, the tight raiser has 37% equity, we have 31.81%, and the limper has 30.9%. Whereas if we have a hand like JT98 ds we steal a lot more equity from the limper with a breakdown of

38.5
33.8
27.67

That is inaccurate, squeeze spots are featured for pre flop. Post flop however Vision does not have anything for multi way.

It can be a challenge to equate the multi way pots however because of limps since those do not exist in GTO land.

Well you can see that Vision is checking more vrs the looser btn ranges because Tx is featured more heavily in the btn than utg range. By extension a third player will have even more Tx so since sb now has a severe disadvantage in overpairs and even less Tx so the donk bet frequency would go even further down if it exists at all. I imagine it would but may be one of those things where we humans would implement it so poorly we would be better off checking range.

Vision does not have multi way post flop. Only multi way squeeze and vrs squeeze pre flop.

preflop i'd say fold>3b>call. we do not really want to invite BB too with a call and play multiway vs 3 oop with a trip suited hand. with AA, AKK blockers and a supershort BTN i'd rather 3b even because maybe we get some folds and lower the SPR oop with a raise

on flop i think c/c or c/r is both fine since btn is just so short and would go with any piece here. i dont like leads because we dont rep that board too much and if we get calls and there is spade or straight turn we kind of open faced checking to fold too many rivers.

So did a poor job reading this yesterday, did not realize btn was so short.

Against his stack our hand clearly prefers raise or fold, and tight fold seems slightly better. Once we do call, xr is preferred against short stack who will get it in lighter.

I'd 3b.

I wouldn't 3 bet because the hand is tri-suited and in my experience the limper will call and the button will call as well, which makes a number of flop textures awkward.

I would want slightly more connectivity to 3b, akt9ss, ajt9, anything to smoothe out my equity distribution.

I wouldn't mind leading here smaller because our range has alot of overpairs, so there is value to extract. With it being so dry I can see it checking through a lot. We are blocking some of the straight draws. Some overpairs will peel.

Tri-suited doesn't really make us want to 3bet less. If anything, our flush component is less necessary in a HU pot than a MW pot. We also don't mind 3b/folding as much with tri-suit.

In general we hate flatting SB, when there's a limper, although most don't run sims with limpers, it stands to reason that we want to 3b more and not less with hands that want to iso.

If you feel that your hand is not strong enough to 3b, you should just fold.



Against a standard btn range, 3b and flat EV are relatively similar (-1084 vs -841), but with the added incentive of isolating, and also generally wanting a higher 3b% in these games, I think a 3bet is justified.



I will point out however, vs co range, which could also be a reasonable estimation of btn's iso range, we lose quite a lot by 3betting. In this scenario, we fold sb, but EV is similar, and I wouldn't hate flatting. Again due to dynamics of a softer game, I also wouldn't hate a 3b as an explo to widen ranges, but clearly there's a great EV difference if we're against a CO frequency.

That said, the issue with going MW is still present, so I believe that will vastly reduce our calling EV, so the real answer is to just fold.

Also, this is 200 rake, so at 50 rake, I think flatting just goes entirely out of the picture, so it's just a clear muck if you don't think the iso is light enough.