Will this boat float or sink?

I pretty much snap jammed, expecting V2 to have a flush, or maybe put in a crying call with trip Q's, perhaps not realizing I only had another $100 behind when he bet. I thought he might be a little tilted from getting stacked, because his opponent sucked out on him, and pushing with more thin value and bluffs.

I figured he's going to raise QTs pre sometimes, and any combo of QT would raise flop sometimes, or raise turn sometimes, or go for the river check-raise, or just over-bet jam, such that he shouldn't have QT all that often. But he could have enough "creative" value-bluffs that block all the nutted hands, like AsQx, KsQx, QxJs, or perhaps he just flatted pre with some weak AsXs that slow played the whole way.

I just didn't see how I could fold, and calling to leave $100 behind seemed pointless. I figured V1 was never over-calling, just folding or jamming.

is 1/3 flop sizing always a thing regardless of SPR?

Nope.

There's some theory that says our small bets should be really small and our big bets should be really big, and we should mostly be avoiding medium sizes that don't force our opponents to figure out an optimal response.

Thinking about this hand more, I think I could argue in favor of going even smaller on the flop, and then going small again on turn, or going huge on flop and checking back turn to bluff catch river. In retrospect I don't like my turn bet size, because it isn't small enough to induce raises or large enough to deny equity from draws. I was mostly just thinking about my river jam sizing, and not enough about what my sizing actually accomplishes.

Pre/flop/turn great! River id be calling until V1 reaches for chips. Now, im still calling but im even less happy about it. If he jams behind you can fold, pot odds doesnt matter when youre dead, and he has to invest $275 to bluff at it so its not like his FE is good or anything. I think its marginal so I think folding is fine.

Also one takeaway from GTO is that the concept of indifference means that in genuinely marginal spots, what you do doesnt cost you any EV so its basically the least important spot of all. Im not sure if this spot is marginal or not though. I could be convinced its a snap call or snap fold (couldnt be convinced its a jam)

Why do we like this small flop bet? I think turn is fine but to me I think we can go bigger on the flop.

EDIT: Tomark, I’ll disagree with your second paragraph for one reason. With the amount that humans deviate from GTO, I think it’s really important to distinguish “what theory says is supposed to be a marginal spot” from what actually is a marginal spot given how our Villains are playing.

It's neither.

Must admit. The GTO talk about a 1/3 live hand is quite amusing.

100%.

Something that occurred to me yesterday...when hands get discussed here, it's without all the little pieces of info we have at the table, and also without the pressure of being in-game, with money at risk. I don't know how much not having all the little pieces matters, versus being in a better position to think more clearly.

I think once we get to the river the way we do, and without more reads on V2, it's hard to range him well enough to say with confidence that we should snap call or snap fold. But in hindsight, I wonder if the action from pre-flop to river should have led me to think I was probably behind when V2 donk bet.

Like, what happens if I check back the flop? Maybe V1 stabs turn, and V2 raises with his turned set, allowing me to make a more or less trivial fold. Maybe if V2 calls and I over-call turn, V1 barrels river, V2 jams, and I can fold then. I don't know.

When I raise pre and go bet-bet, for a smaller size, I think it becomes less likely my opponents are slow-playing flushes by the river, and more likely V2 has a bigger boat. I would expect a solver to never fold 33 on the river, but I wonder if it's ever a fold against live opponents.

I dunno. If we give V2 three combos of QT, two of 5s5x, and then one of Qd5d, that's six combos. There's maybe six combos of AQ, KQ, and QJ that make sense as value-bluffs, making us indifferent to calling or folding (I guess?).

If we don't know enough about V2 to rule out flushes, we can never fold. I don't know if a call is better than a jam, but maybe it is, if a jam can never get called by worse. If I jam for another $100 on top, there's no fold equity, so I can't be bluffing. I'm basically repping nothing but boats.

That's kind of the point here, why I posted this hand, wondering if the highest EV play is to just flat call, rather than jam. I don't think anyone would say we should fold, nor blame me for jamming, but the more I think about this, the more flat calling seems like it may have been the best play.

PS to everyone who posted - thank you all. I realize I can come across as argumentative, but that's not my intent. I am sincerely interested to understand how others think about these situations.

Circling back to V1's pump-fake..

I didn't mention it in my OP, because I wasn't thinking about it at the time, but not long before this hand, there was another multi-way hand that got heads up and all in on the flop, in which we all saw a semi-OMC do a similar pump fake from OOP with what turned out to be a nutted hand. He lost when the PFR bet-called his jam and rivered the flush he was drawing to on the flop.

After he left the table, we were all talking about it. It's usually a weakness tell, hoping to discourage a bet, but everyone else at the table was saying it looked strong, which is easy to say after the semi-OMC reveals flopped trips.

In game, when I saw V1 do it, I thought it was strange for him, because he's usually pretty dialed in and buttoned down when he's in a hand. It occurred to me that he could very well be deliberately trying to be obvious when he did it here, to look nutted with weak value.

He said he had the As, but not what his other card was. If he was thinking about bluffing with air, it wouldn't make sense to pump-fake, because he'd lose if it checked through. It only makes sense if he was planning to check raise if I bet small again.

It makes me wonder if he had AsQx, and was hoping it would check through, but planning to check raise if not. I think he's capable of turning AsQx into a bluff in that way, and it makes sense.

Generally we're supposed to go smaller with our c-bets when we're multi-way, and smaller on monotone flops. Multi-way and monotone, we should go REALLY small. There are times when we can deviate, obviously. I don't know if this is one.

I think an argument can be made for checking back, betting smaller, or betting much bigger. If we go bigger, I would think we'd want to go huge, and then just check back turn if we get called, expecting to be up against a flush, and hoping to boat up on the river.

If we're being results oriented, a big flop bet might fold out 44-99 with one spade. But it probably doesn't fold out QT or 33 (obviously 33 is impossible here, but not if we're taking this line with other hands in our range), or nut flush draws, or combo draws.

The problem is what happens when we bet big, check back turn, and V donks into us on a brick or a board pair. We're back to the same dilemma, trying to range V.

I have QT, 5s5x, 33, QX, and a lot of non-nut flushes in my range here, that would all take the same line. But V could also have all those same hands, and play them all the same way, checking flop and turn, then donking river.

Not a fan of the turn bet, probably either checking or going 30$. AP I think I just flat. Calling a raise/shove.

In retrospect, I wish I would have bet $30 on the turn. It would have made it harder for an over-bet river jam to get called, but might have induced V1 to check-raise. If he does, I think V2 folds, and I just jam, then scoop on the river.

The problem with checking back is that we don't give our opponents a chance to raise, so we're going to the river with the same ranges that called flop.

If V2 overcalled the flop with trash 3rd pair with a trash flush draw ... do you really think he's folding turn when he hits 3rd set?

Yes, flop bet was "small" but still OVER calling 55s is pretty bad. I think it's super likely he just keeps calling on the turn, no matter the action.

I don't disagree, but everyone has a point at which they give up. Maybe he over-calls, but folds when there's a barrel and a check-raise.

As stated, this is 1/3 live. LOL. The $15 on the flop accomplishes so little -- basically nothing. Check or bet $30 - $35.

I cant even imagine what you mean by this. Like if youre saying they will never fold, then isnt $15 accomplishing a value bet you miss if you check as per your recommendation?

$15 might as well be a check, which is why I mentioned it. If you actually read through the posts, I said bet bigger. $15 is not charging them for any of their draws or for their Q. If you want value, get value.

It actually is a value bet of $15, which charges $15. I hope that explains it for you.

I guess I prefer more value.

15 conceivably too big in theory given its multiway

In retrospect, I agree, both because it's multi-way and the flop is monotone. I probably could have bet $10.

So, if you get raised on the flop, are you folding?

No, of course not.

You bet small and it lets them call with all their draws and float with anything. (Granted, floating with 55 was really bad, but it happens all the time -- and I don't think he was ever folding after the turn.)

I guess betting small is a thing you are "supposed" to do, but I am still not a fan for many reasons. I'd rather check or bet big, knowing they will chase straight/flush draws for the wrong price and usually call with a Q.

(Of course, nobody I play with studies poker or has any idea what you are "supposed" to do. Well, one guy talks a lot of strat, but he is scared money so easy to beat.)