99 shallow stack preflop action

Something's off on our reads. The shorty isn't really the problem here. The "reg-ish" V in the LJ that opened, got two callers, and then just called your 3!, is. Seems like the easiest 4! in the world vs 2 IP opponents---one a shorty who is either jamming or folding to the 3!---so why didn't they? Either they're not a reg or...what exactly?

My guess is LJ overcalled with something massive, expecting shorty to jam, which reopens the betting, and now you are likely deader than chivalry. I'm legit folding Queens here, and maybe Kings.

As to your broader question, I like the 3! here, think it's sized well. Might go a smidge bigger---do we want the shorty shove to reopen the betting or not? If not, then make it 165+. 3 opponents is going to give me pause about getting too wide here. Probably doing this with...88+, ATs+, AQo+, KQs. 84 combos, or 7%. Add some wheel Aces if desired. Or subtract, if 7% seems too much vs 3 opponents.

Edit: Not shoving anything as the 3!, and with my thoughts on what LJ is trying to do, not shoving as a 5! Overcalling shorty, expecting LJ to rip it as a 5! Doing that with KK+.

As far as merely calling the open, doing that with 22-77, A2s-A9s, vs 3 opponents. Nut making bingo for 3 more bb, and IO ranging from 14-1 to 40-1. Yes, OOP. We x everything on the flop, and only proceed with either a made set or a nut flush draw.

When you commit more than 1/3 of your stack, you don't a range snap call with any2

But that's not the case here, is it? I thought, since it was unstated, that H had more than any of the Vs. If we're worried about LJ, they have 500, H has 3! 1/4 of LJ's stack, not 1/3. I think H can fold---though they need a really good reason---to this action.

Edit, to clarify, I'm not worried about the shove for 300. We may or may not be ahead of that. I am worried that we're not ahead of a potentially trapping LJ.

I’m not picking up anything that LJ is calling as a trap. It’s pre flop; I would assume any premium here would 4bet or shove to avoid going multiway with two potential callers behind.

I’d shove here personally with stacks this short and two villains that have shown some weakness pre.

Curious to understand why this reads like a trap to others

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well he was identified as a reg and he called a 3B for 20% of his stack. That should be a pretty good hand, although not necessarily nutted. Maybe a JJ-TT, AQs type of hand that doesn't want to fold and doesn't really want to get all in pre. Or an occasional AA trap. That's the way I see it anyway. Why would he want to go multiway with KK, QQ, or AK?

I like the squeeze pre and would be very tempted to shove. The LJ should be folding most of his range and CO theoretically shouldn't have many traps.

The reg opened, then only called the 3! with 2 additional IP still to act. One of them so short, they'll likely shove vs call. Their shove will however, be large enough to reopen the betting. Doc, etc, here has mentioned in other threads using that tactic.

So reg just calls the 3!, shorty 4! shoves, already making a larger pot than if reg had 4! and everyone folded. If reg is thinking their call will induce a shove from shorty, and perhaps an iso-shove on top of that from H, and this seems likely, what parts of Reg V's range want that? KK+, I think.

Yeesh.

Forget the actual sequence of events and who did what, when, and with how much. We 3B from the BB with 99 and someone 4B jammed 2.5x on us. In a vacuum, this is a pretty easy fold, with PP's up to JJ.

CO and LJ actions are both unusual. I'm not sure which one concerns me more. I could see a scenario in which LJ thought he could call, the others would fold, and he'd be HU and IP. This is kind of a weird way to play big PP's. He might be chewing on his own guts right now, for making a somewhat loose call.

I dunno, man. It would suck to flat call, have the LJ come along, and have to fold if he bets into a dry side pot. Feels like a re-jam or fold spot, and I'm not sure which is better. Not loving the idea of playing 99 for 60BB's much less 100BB's.

Well, he's definitely trapping, but not all the time. Maybe 25-50% of the time, and the rest is just AQ+ or JJ type hands that are going to fold.

I think pushing JJ+, AK is a solid option here. 99+ and AQ+ would be a bit looser, unless I have notes on the opponent or my image is really tight?

Wow, I'd not think of LJ as a reg after that. I have no idea why they didn't just 4! with two players to act. Shorty, is w/e. Actually thought shorty was more likely to have AQ/AK, and therefore, let's see 5. Good fold though, despite their actual cards.

Been said a lot here before, but I have to stop thinking that other players play hands in the way that I'd play them, or tbf, the way I've seen them played before.

Weird hand.

Not sure what the correct action is when it first gets to us in the BB, with 99, at these stack depths. Seems like we're deep enough to flat call the $20 and set-mine.

99 may be strong enough to 3B, and maybe we benefit from not going four ways to the flop, but we hate getting 4B at this depth. We don't love any of our choices here.

We could have better hands to re-jam, and more playable hands to call. Folding seems correct, but I'd be regretting the 3B, regardless of the showdown.

Yeah, that's the problem with these shallow stacks. One guy raises 4x, 2-3 callers, and now you're almost committed. It's tough to select the right range preflop.

I’m investing 20% of my stack with that 3-bet.
Not sure, but I think the best play here is:

3-bet with 99+, AQ+
Call with JTs+, 22-88, Axs+, KQo, K9s, Q9s, J9s, 87s+

Thoughts?

If that's our 3B range, maybe it needs to be divided into hands that fold to a 4B, hands that call a 4B, and hands that 5B-jam. Not sure where 99 is in that range, but I'm guessing it's a 3B-fold.

I'm not suggesting we shouldn't have any 3B-fold range, but it might be worth considering if the only 3B range we should have would be a 5B-jam / 3B-call range in a spot like this. I get angry at myself when I raise with a good hand that has to fold to a raise, and end up thinking I should have just flat called.

Things get harder to figure out when we have a multi-way scenario with some shorter stacks involved. Hindsight being 20-20, easy to say "bad 3B with 99, because now we have to fold".

But maybe it isn't. Maybe it's just a standard or correct 3B-fold, regardless of the stack sizes (unless the 4B-jam is less than 2.5x and we're HU), and the presence of the shorter stacks and odd action are just confusing distractions.

That's sort of what I was getting at in my first post. If the LJ did the bet-4B'ing here, we'd probably say this is an easy fold. The fact that the LJ just flatted our 3B, and the CO back-jammed makes the situation unusual, but we need to cut through the strangeness and realize that we're effectively committing to play for $500 if we call for $300, because we're not folding if the LJ re-jams, so we can look at this situation as if it was the LJ who jammed, and decide if we want to play 99 for $500.

Looked at through that lens, maybe we don't need to try and range CO or LJ, and instead just shrug-fold.

All that said - if we would have won, I'd want to go lay down in traffic.