I opened to 4x cause everyone on the table was a fish.
Sb is a 33/23 with a 11% 3bet after 540 hands.

With how much money is in the pot already, should this be a shove or call?

Aggrofish or passive fish? If the latter, jamming is unlikely to be good. Squeezes by weak fish are normally very strong. 11% 3-bet by this guy might mean that jamming is fine or even good. I default to calling though.

everyone was passive other than SB! 500 hands didnt seem so little to assume he could be squeezing wider here, and by calling I often end up playing a 3-5way pot which deludes my equity, so i thought that jamming might be better, but I'm not sure...
thanks for the response!

feels like an overplay, squeezing ranges are way tighter than 3betting ranges

I don't like jamming at all. I'm calling here. If the other players come along fear not just remember the power of the fold button. You will have to fold more often post flop, but sometimes you'll double or even triple up when you hit a set. If no over cards come you probably will be able to get it in and win the pot.

Really?

well yeah, how is that surpising? bloating the pot mw with weak hands aint way to go (esp. OOP like in this hand)

just because there is more dead money doesnt mean we should go wamboozled with the squeezes imo

In some games my squeeze range is looser than my 3-bet range, it's not bad if people keep folding and you pick up the dead money. The squeeze play was originally articulated as cool because you could do it with any two. This still sometimes holds true.

So I would say that your statement is true sometimes and not other times.

11% 3 bet would make me want to 4 bet for value.

this is a bit of a 2008 statement where ppl werent very sticky vs 3bets but also rarely 4b bluff

Nowadays you 100% cannot get away with squeezing 'any two'...

Yeah but you can still get away with squeezing with a range wider than 'way tighter than 3-bet ranges'.

have you done any sort of analysis? If i look at my 100z database, the best winning regs are 3betting a lot more than squeezing and there is probably a good reason why...

the fact that you are considering that this sb squeeze vs an mp open and co + btn cold call is weaker than a sb 3b vs mp open sounds ludicrous to me...

I didn't, just asking about the general statement you made.

I think in theory, squeezing ranges in the blinds are a little bit wider than standard 3-bet ranges vs a single opponent. In reality (especially in the micros), squeezing ranges are narrower/stronger.
There are loads of people with a squeezing percentage of less than 3%. :/

Good news for us then.

When faced with a squeeze, the original RFI has pretty good pod odds, given the fact that he can count on the coldcaller/coldcallers to come along often given their own good pot odds after RFI flats. As such, foldequity should be lower in squeezed pots, therefor squeezeranges should be more linear/valueheavy than normal 3betpots, where foldequity is higher.

at least thats my 2cents regarding this!

I really should have considered this. This makes it so hard for EV(shoving)>EV(calling)
thanks!

If the RFI player flats the squeeze, the other players really shouldn't be overcalling very often. They capped their ranges by pressing CALL the first time, and now there are two players repping even stronger ranges. Since you often need to make the nuts to win multiway, very few hands are strong enough to call twice. (It's often just JJ-99/AQs/AJs, or even tighter).

Sure, but they get a decent price,if there is only one coldcaller, he often has position multiway and they are closing the action. with it beeing multiway, a set, 2pair, flush etc seems likely to get paid of. Facing the Squeese and flat, they get a better price now than when faced with the RFI, while closing the action. It's a bit hard for me to think that pocketpairs and suited broadways do terrible here.

You certainly could be right, it's a bit hard to way all those factors against each other for me....

I'm not going to lie, I sometimes squeeze looser than my normal 3-bets. Especially if there are multiple callers. If I can get through the first guy then the rest usually fold as well. If not, it usually creates a chain reaction of calls which postflop becomes pretty straight forward.

Something I have struggled with is what to do when you are the IP caller who capped their range and the first guy calls the squeeze. If I'm holding QJs or 66, should I be mucking those? Arty, it seems you are advocating a fold. Let's say the first guy folds. Then do those hands become calls?

Poker doesn't really work like this (MDF pre-flop is stupid imo), but most of the burden on "defending" vs the squeeze falls on the original raiser, so you don't 'have to' call very often when he folds.
You should only call with the hands that do well enough vs the squeezer, given the fact that he knows you capped your range by calling initially. Hands like QJs and 66 probably aren't good enough. Indeed, (according to Snowie) they are often 3-bets or folds vs the initial raise, partly because they don't do well if someone overcalls or squeezes. Snowie hardly ever goes CALL-CALL pre-flop. It usually has JJ/TT/99 or AQs when it does so, because those hands ARE good enough vs the squeezer. QJs or 66 apparently aren't going to win enough to break even, given the lower SPR, the "strong" range of the squeezer, and the "I am capped" range of the caller. That's the theory anyway. In the micros, the set-miners can't fold 77, and they somehow always seem to flop top set on 7xx when I have KK in a squeezed pot and I think I'm about to win a stack from JJ/TT. :/

A lot of people have a 100% 3bet range from the SB.

He needs 39% pot odds to call our jam.

We risk 60$ to win 76$ so we need 78% folds to profit without equity.
Say he folds 50% and calls with TT+/AK we have 43% equity against his range. Add the $ from his folds and I would say you probably won't lose money on the play.

I do assume sb has a reason to squeeze light (dead money in the pot or iso vs one of the overcallers)

Otherwise his range has you beat as he's barely folding and you're too far behind in equity

problem with overcalling is not only that you're capped, your range is so weak vs initial caller & squeezer you'll get it in bad more often then good.