Turn Puke vs CRAI

I disagree with docvail on sizing up significantly on flop here versus the sizing chosen by Banana. You are just copy+pasting Marc Goone's HHP strat and mis applying it here in this 6-ways multiway pot.

Playing pot-sized bet or check on the flop is horrible. Especially horrible to play overbet or check.

At this SPR, we don't need to pot the flop to get stacks in against worse hands. And we especially don't need to overbet the flop to get stacks in either.

Maybe we can argue for cbetting $50-$60 instead of $40. But I doubt that I would want to size up my flop anything more significantly than that.

It's not horrible to overbet dry Ace high flops when our opponent has so much Ax in his range and simply can. not. fold. Same reason you can overbet overpairs on low flops like TT on a 236 board. 77+ will treat it like they have AA. They might even gii with you because you just always have AK.

I said I think we can sometimes expect Tx to call. I think it's possible when Tx limp-calls pre and flops middle pair. I'm not suggesting we're trying to get stacks in with Tx, unless Tx improves to a worse 2P. I'm mostly targeting Ax, and any worse 2P on the flop. If Tx folds, so be it.

We're not getting three streets of value from Tx and missed draws. Probably not naked Ax either. We should want to get as much money into the pot as possible, as soon as possible. The hands that call three times will often be better hands by the river. The hands that are going to call a flop c-bet are going to be somewhat inelastic, at least on the flop. So we can size up.

I'd bet small with AA and AK. I'd go for three streets and size up on the turn with AA, and pot control by checking back turn with AK. But AT is too in between. It's very strong but not invulnerable. We're going to hate any Broadway or wheel cards that come out, and also hate runner-runner straightening run-outs. There are enough hands we can target for value with a flop over-bet that we don't need to drag opponents to the river with their entire range.

I'd probably take a more traditional line if this were heads up or just three ways. But six ways, I prefer to fast play and go for max value, expecting someone to have enough of a piece to want to continue.

I agree $40 is too small, but I think over-betting the flop just gets tons of folds of hands that would call $60. Pretty much every hand that doesn't beat us folds to an over-bet, unless banana is a maniac and has been caught doing that as a bluff often (seems doubtful). Just go for value here.

I also agree that doc's posts are too long, so I rarely (if ever) read them :(

I have definitely seen recs fold Ax bad kicker faceup in multiway pots on Axx flop where the PFR made a very large cbet into the whole field.

That's what I am basing my comments on.

I don't care if someone wants to post an entire essay about poker theory. I am just using my common sense based off hands that I have played and talking to strong live pros who have had many years of experience who I am super lucky to count them as friends.

This is a completely different scenario than the OP. Not sure why we are going this route since it has absolutely nothing to do with the hand?

Ma’am, this is a Wendy’s. 😏

there are at least 5 people in this discussion saying overbetting the flop is horrible, one of them even saying he might fold an ace. So while on the topic of overbetting I outlined another scenario in which flop overbets are practical as it represents the same inelastic tendencies of LLSNL players.

Part of the problem with c-betting small on AT2rb after raising small pre and getting 5 callers is that any opponent who calls the flop c-bet gets to the turn with such a wide range that literally any card can be a scare card when V check-jams the turn, and many people here apparently just $hlt the bed and are unwilling to go with top 2P.

Observe...

Turn is a 2, everyone thinks V has trips (or a boat with A2). Turn is a 3, 4, or 5, we think V has a wheel. Turn is a J, Q, or K, V made a better 2P or Broadway. Turn is a 6, 7, 8, or 9, V turned a set. Turn and river put three to a straight on board, which would always be the case, he has to have gotten there with whatever draw comes in.

And why wouldn't he show up on the turn or river with a better hand, when we try to get cute with top 2P on this board?

Like, we raised pre with ATs, flopped top 2P on AT2, c-bet 1/3 pot into 5 people, and suddenly we're concerned that V has 54, 33, or 22? Seriously? Maybe if we sized up pre, and sized up on the flop, we could rule out the three improbable hands that beat us. But we didn't, we bet small, allowing V to get to the turn with such an absurdly wide range that we might actually fold.

Just look at the action. V over-limped behind two limpers, then over-calls a raise, closing the action and getting 6:1. His range is the widest of everyone in this pot, and his action the most loose-passive. On the flop, everyone folds to our c-bet until it gets back to him, and he flats, getting 4:1. Tell me what hands we can definitively rule out of his range getting to the turn?

You're telling me *THIS* guy folds any AX combo to a single bet, even an over-bet? He's folding when he's up over half a buy-in, apparently running good? He's folding to Banana (sorry Banana, but your table image is surely doo-doo very often)? How is he folding any AX to an over-bet, if anyone is thinking he might have called the 1/3 pot bet with T3 or 32, and he's CRAI with those combos?

How in the name of L. Ron Hubbard are we even thinking of folding to his CRAI when we get to the turn the way we do? If it's because we think we're beat, sizing up on the two prior streets would likely narrow his range down enough that we're not giving him 22, 33, or 54, or any of the other crap that might make a better hand when he we laid him 6:1 pre and 4:1 on the flop.

No way do I fold here. If we sized up even a little bit pre, and potted it on the flop, my chips would have beaten his into the middle. AINEC. He's going to have to show me 22, 33, or 54.

Overbetting the flop is pretty bad. These are loose/passive ABC players -- they are folding any A they get here with to a flop over-bet unless they have two pair. Maybe, just maybe, one of them limp/called w/ AQ, but they are still scared of AK and will often fold to an over-bet.

Your TT over pair scenario is so different it does not represent anything related to this hand.

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. In my experience, sure a fish will raise an eyebrow at an overbet, possibly even commenting "why so much?" or "you know there's only $60 out there!"....... and then call. But it sounds like the pool you play in folds anything less than TPTK, so I guess you're overbetting all of your bluffs at every opportunity starting with the flop, yeah?

idk i think the hand is wp lol (would size slightly bigger otf and slightly smaller ott but i think it makes neglible difference)

i think overbetting the flop is pretty bad 6 ways even more so when 3/5? 4/5? of opponents are spr 3-4. it feels to me like one of those weird arguments that people that don't really play make where its like "well exactly what $ amount do you think this person will fold x hand in this spot" when its a guy you've played 12 hands with and have no idea wtf they would do and neither do they. i am open to b50 otf though

hu srp its a conceivable (cbet size as overbet) strategy on some textures and id think this one qualifies? but would not do it here esp when the overbet will actually be quite large in $ terms for the game

javi, we are not talking about an entire player pool. We are talking about loose/passive ABC players. These are the players who fold to over-bets w/o at least two pair.

I have guys I play against whom I will snap call or even raise an over-bet w/ an A here, and I play against guys who will call w/ an A for multiple reasons, but these aren't the H or Vs for that scenario.

I just don't any reason in an SPR 6 pot on a fairly drawless board (i.e. not a heckuva lotta scary runouts to prevent money going in on later streets) to overbet the flop and sometimes risk our target hands to fold, when we can easily offer them enticing odds on all 3 streets to sigh call their stack off. I mean, what's the benefit I'm missing? The most we can play for is stacks, and stacks can trivially go in over three streets, so why attempt it in ~one? Much more reason on a super drawy board to overbet the flop to get stacks in over just two streets before a river action/hand killing card comes, but that doesn't look to apply on this flop.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Java; so when are you overbetting?

It depends. If I know a calling station is on a draw, I'll over-bet. If I know a maniac going to call w/ any two trying to steal, I'll over-bet. If I know a weak player will fold a pair, I'll over-bet bluff. Can we go back to the actual hand now? Writing of which, if I have a strong hand and I'm going for value against weaker hands, I'll value bet.

These are the same thing, but anyway just wanted to see if you ever overbet as a bluff.

No they are not. When I know someone will call an over-bet w/ a draw, I'll over-bet. If I know they will call a value bet with a draw but not and over-bet, then I'll value bet.

So you were just derailing the thread again with a completely new scenario?

Very well said on all the important points.

It's a common fallacy for people to say something like "I would never bluff 2x pot because I just get called by TP every time" while in the same breath saying "I cant shove for 2x pot with the nuts! He might fold TP!" Just making sure you werent succumbing to line of thinking since you were so staunchly against overbetting and and arguing with me about why I brought it up, even after explaining why. But it seems to me like you have some sort of attitude or axe to grind and just want to argue for the sake of arguing so Imma ignore anything else you say.