[2-4]: Flopped Straight but Flush comes in on the River

id call pre fwiw

live mostly a race to take fish's money and trading small mistakes for large ones. think if u fold this hand after whale limps you dont get it

Fold pre. I get it btw and still folding pre.

Will have to do the math. I’m going to say no.

guess i am behind the rest of u

Sklansky's low stakes book recommends limping a lot to take advantage of postflop mistakes. IMO, it is fine to limp behind Q9s/86s/A9o and similar hands, but this hand is too weak. If you are limping this, you are limping a lot in CO. Plus you really have to limp/fold to a raise behind you.

how much of a bb do u think u r losing if this is losing at very low rake? do u think u can make that up in subsequent nodes by playing ip vs obviously weak players, particularly one who have u observed making the largest punt you have ever seen in live poker? if you're losing .1 of bb here on a limp here do you think that the value of being more focused / image make up for that?

fwiw i pretty sure its just winning albeit small given average skill level / passivity of live poker let alone with whale in there and nit behind us who maybe raises 10-12%? of the time given description

if you think its bad bc sklanksys book said it or datamined online samples suggest it idk what to tell u, we must simply agree to disagree

live isnt really about getting every decision right, its about getting the big decisions right

To I guess clarify where I stand on this, I consider this:

to prove that limping this hand is profitable provided you don't get raised.

I think normal people treat something like this as just one of many possible arguments? But um well my brain works differently! I think just looking at at the equity settles the issue. Like this is itself conclusive. Either there's something wrong with this, or limping QTo is in fact profitable. It cannot be the case that you have > 1/6 equity after contributing 1/6 of the pot, and a positional advantage, and a skill advantage, and make less than 1/6 of the pot on average. It's just not possible. I don't need any other arguments.

So yea, none of this:

really matters for me. The best player in the world could tell me this is a bad limp and I wouldn't believe it if I have an argument that proves it's +EV. Okay, I think you get the point.

(This was a similar issue I had in the past when I posted equity calculations. The point was never to be an argument but to replace arguments.)

The only response that criticized the above was this:

But I don't agree with this. I don't really want to get into specific points but overall I just think there's no way that position doesn't outweigh playability of the hand. Like there's just no way your realized equity isn't higher than your actual equity in position because the hand isn't suited -- and again, the raw equity is already > 1/6, so it only has to raise it by a few % to compensate for the maybe 15% that one of the last 3 players raises preflop. (And bolded part applies to all other players equally, of course you'll fold a hand that improves sometimes, but you can fold it a more correct % of the time than other players if you have more information; this is not an argument against over-realizing your equity.)

I mean personally I actually suspect that you can over-realize more multiway than heads-up because people just play so predictably. And you can absolutely bluff. Again I think you can actually bluff more effectively than heads-up in many cases because hand-reading is easier and people will almost always give you credit. So yeah, I guess I just very strongly disagree with "you can't over-realize your equity multiway". I feel like I've seen enough to be certain that this isn't true.

I don't think "86s is good but QTo is bad" passes the sniff test. 86s is better, sure, but not by much. These are very small differences, and I highly doubt that QTo reliably falls below the 0 mark and 86s above it. It seems much more likely that the difference is outweighed by other factors, such as the probability of someone raising behidnd you, whether there's bad players in the pot, the rake structure, or your multiway skill, and that in most cases either 86s and QTo will be both +EV or both -EV.

(Not to open a can of worms but this is kinda similar to people who see you bluffing with something like 86s and go like "well you can 3bet bluff 87s profitably but not 86s". And it's like, sure 87s is better, but the difference is tiny. It's just gonna get swamped by other factors, like how likely the other person is to fold or 4bet. I think this is just kinda a fundamentally wrong way to think about it, like other factors are almost always going to ougweigh those tiny differences in preflop hand strengths.)

OK, in your example QTo has 17% equity in a 6 player pot, therefore +EV. What about rake? Kind of an important point.

In your ranges above, every single player is -EV after rake.

He is playing is England with no rake on less than £48.

It isn't about raw equity. You hit a Q and are way behind KQ/QJ/AA/KK/QQ. You hit a T and are way behind AT/KT/AA/KK/QQ/JJ/TT. It is a good way to lose a lot of money when you make a pair. Even if you make 2 pair, people play high cards, so you lose a lot to straights and higher 2 pair. On KQT, AJ/KQ/KT/KK/QQ/TT beat you.

KTs/QJs/QTs/JTs are decent hands even though they don't usually make the nut flush. Unsuited high cards are trash.

I totally disagree with your fancy play syndrome logic, though you make strong arguments to defend yourself. However, they do give you credit mw and you can slip one by them. AK is a good bluffing hand.

I think you’re lost in the equity, so there’s really no more to talk about.

We will still be the ‘fold pre’ people
and
you remain the ‘but equity’ person

I think Negreanu said while most people are looking to fold, he was looking for every way to get into the hand and play. I think that is strong logic for MTTs and apparently the prim philosophy.

However, in cash games, the rake (don’t like to talk about, because there’s nothing to change it) demands that you come into pots strongly in every way. I have never seen a crusher limp in with QTo. Just saying…

Right. Just say that next time so we don't waste time arguing about a fairly trivial pre-flop spot. Fwiw, your flop + turn sizing, targeting a whale, confirms my reasonings for why this is a fold pre.

He is a she.

I can see that point too. Is a raise better though, or are we just trying to keep our bingo entry fee as low as possible?

I am assuming the whales won't fold---which is why they're whales---but that some of the others might.

Free, go back and read what she's said her table's rake structure is. It's not zero rake, but it's a whole lot closer than anything else I've seen in a long time.

Make small mistakes to get in more situations with bad players who will make big mistakes, sounds great. We just have to be sure we're not also making big mistakes too.

QTo is an excellent hand to make postflop mistakes with.

Incidently, I do limp behind or raise a wide range with a bunch of limps and I am in CO or BTN. However, QTo is not part of it. Unsuited broadway may have good equity allin preflop, but it plays really badly. It isn't much different than T9o.

Not only is it possible, it is routine that hands will overrealize or underrealize their raw equity. The raw equity tells us we have 1/6th of the current pot if no more money goes in. But more money probably is going in and the pot is going to be a lot bigger and we're going to have different equity in a much larger pot. It is inevitable that limping in will have an EV that is materially larger than 1/6th of the pot positive or negative because there are implied odds. Position and skill advantage are factors that can help overrealize, but for all hands there will be flops that you will be forced to underrealize your equity on. This is all solved.

In a 6-handed 100bb deep game, raising with AA UTG is 574% of the pot, because Vs are going to sometimes call, sometimes raise and you're a big favorite to win. Raising QTo UTG is -0.1% of the pot with perfect play. On the button, with all folds before, AA has an EV of 683%, and QTo has +10.8% of the pot. If there is one raise, from say the CO, QTo has -3.8% EV. K2s has -3.2%, 53s has -2.5%, 96s has -3.9%, Q8s has -2.6%. If you look at deepstack (400bb) with straddle where there is overflatting, vs a raise from SB the straddle has 20.1% EV/pot with QTo. However, if the BB calls that declines to 3.4% EV. And that's assuming the BB raises a lot of their strong stuff that fish might not. In solverland, straddle is never running into AQ from the bb and even QJ should raise a lot, making QT a bit safer if it flops a Q. We can't be that confident that is true with fish.

It all comes down to the reality that we aren't always going to be able to realize our equity on all flops. With QTo, if the flop comes out A52FD, you are going to underrealize your equity. Even if no V has an A, there are a ton of hands that had worse equity preflop that might bet, and you aren't calling anything right? Vs can bet any FD and often might. Say a V has T7dd on a Ad5d2x board. QTo has 51% raw equity, but are you EVER calling any bet with QTo (no diamond) on a Ad5d2x board? You are underrealizing your equity on that flop a many similar flops. And this is true for absolutely 100% of hands, some flops you will overrealize your equity other flops you'll underrealize it because your hand can't bet or can't withstand likely bets from hands that are inferior or even hands that are better but are giving you correct odds to call. (if V has J7dd, you have 45% equity and should call any normal sized bet. But are you calling a pot sized bet? No you aren't.)

So that has to be offset by other flops where you might overrealize your equity. AKJhh should be a flop we overrealize on because what better flop can we possibly have? Yet in this hand, we didn't get all the money in. Didn't notice if results were posted or not, but OTR, we aren't getting a jam paid off light and we're losing more if V does have the flush. So V gets to overrealize FDs while we underrealize after we flopped the nuts. With a near perfect flop.

A suited version flops a FD or flush about 12% of the time. Which means that it flops a hand that can either withstand pressure or generate pressure itself significantly more often than the offsuit version. FDs are going to be one of the primary means of overrealizing your equity, because FDs can often get aggressive on later streets by bluffing or sucking out on better hands, while the offsuit version just has a ton of flops that are pure give ups. This is on steroids if your folding top pair because you convince yourself that the fish are only betting with a better Q or folding when the T pairs. Because a lot of your raw equity, comes from hands that flop a pair and get better even if they aren't the best right away.

There is simply no way that you're overrealizing consistently enough with QTo to overcome the number of sheer giveups you have. Especially if you aren't getting all the money in when you flop the nuts on a wet board. We only got 10% of our stack in before the flush came. We aren't getting much value out of this hand even when we flop the nuts.

QTo is a reverse implied odds hand. It is good for losing money versus better Qs and Ts.

i dont really see much merit to raising this hand here. you probably never outright win pre, you shrink the spr, likely dont push equity, have a poor playability hand, and the alternative of limp seems better to me. i see argument to getting the button, but the button is nit, and i see mild argument for trying to iso the whale but i would personally just limp. i dont have a way to test the ev of the two (really 3 options) but from experience limping seems to work best. i think the guys harping on pre being a mistake also really really struggle with conceptualizing the ev of mistakes; if its bad its losing like .15 of a bb at absolute most. just cannot be worth focusing on to this degree

honestly dont really understand what anyone is saying in the thread from either side but i think river is infinitely more interesting and relevant than pre discussions. id probably block (15-20%) / fold bc of heart but i think that might be bad in practice. im open to minbetting too which im aware is unorthodox but i just think i will be able to have a better feel for what to do based on how they react to a size theyre not expecting / looks stupid. im not super interested in simming it or anything and my main sizing critique would really be potting the turn feels basically equivalent to this sizing from the standpoint of what they continue. you could convince me button always has Jxhh / 4xhh / Axhh fairly easily

Raising is worse than limping here. For one thing, you build a pot with a bad hand.

This is a junk hand, as discussed in old school books, including Doyle's from 50 years ago, and by solver simulations.

Say you flop a Q or a T. Not only can you lose a lot to someone playing a decent preflop hand. You also can't play it strongly or get much value when you are head.

Compare say ATo. It is a limped pot, so your ace in often good. You also have the best T.

This is total idiocy using allin equities. Sure A6o has decent allin equity, but is in not a playable hand.

In reconsidering this hand (still folding pre) but if I did end up with the nuts on the flop with a very weak hand like this, it might be best to just shove the flop. What do y’all think?

Instead of tiptoeing around trying to get value and possibly getting outdrawn, maybe getting it in right away is best even if everyone folds. The guy that calls you, probably won’t be the one that outdraws you.

It’s like having aces. There’s that fine line between going for value and letting someone catch up and beat you OR making too strong a move that causes everyone to fold. What’s the best way to think about these situations?

It’s so hard for me at times with the nuts. How do I get value without folding everyone? When they fold, I question myself, but when they call, I also wonder if they would have called a bigger bet. Does anyone have any tips?

You are really suggesting betting 700 into 24 on the flop???

Flop sizing is really bad though. 14 into 24 on a limped pot with a dripping wet board. Whenever you flop a straight with this hand (let's pretend it was QTs), it is a wet board and here there is a 2-flush on top of it. Should be at least pot on the flop. I know you don't want everyone to fold, but just over half pot is awful.

Yea I also submitted this hand thinking River is the only interesting street, but somehow it's the least talked about one.

Agree I should have bet bigger on the Turn. Idk about overbetting but like 10 more.

Anyway I guess I can post reveal before going back to the preflop stuff.

Reveal:
Hero bets 100. V2 calls. V1 folds. V2 wins with T♥6♥.

My own take is that the bet is okay but 100 was unnecessarily large. don't know if the best sizing would be something like 40 or something like 80 though. The only concern is that if you bet 40, it is not actually inconceivable that V2 makes a move with a weaker hand, though it's not likely. But I don't think there's anything that 100 achieves and 80 doesn't.

I can probably be convinced on this point but I don't really see much of a case for going bigger. I mean you either think that people call too much mutliway or too little. I think they call too much. If in fact they call too much, then they will make mistakes if you just make a normal-sized bet.

14 into 24 is almost 60% pot which already is unusually large given that we're 6way. And the reason I did it is because imE people care about absolute sizing in live poker, so I don't think 14 looks like a big bet, even though it is.

The goal really is to make a normal looking bet so people play normally against it. If you bet, say, exactly pot, 24, I think that will be perceived as "unusually large bet", and then idk what people do, but there's probably a lot of very crappy hands that now fold. I don't really think that's worth it. (That said maybe you could stretch the absolute sizing logic a a little more and go 16 or 18 and still get called by more or less the same hands.)

At the flop, we don't know that anyone even has a flush draw. It's completely possible that the strongest hands we're against are a gutshot and/or a pair.