Big flop raise with two overs, the nut-flush draw, and the gut-shot nut-straight draw

Why wouldn’t we cbet small with the nuts?

I like a small bet on the flop if we did have the nuts for the same reason I don't like it when we have ace high with the NFD. On this board a small bet is likely to induce action.

We are supposed to bet small, and I don't see obvious reasons to deviate from theory.

We have the nut draw, if everyone calls it's worse for them than us.

We have a hand that can just shrug and shove, so getting raised isn't really a concern.

When we bet small here, even QhJh is in a bad spot (maybe lots of randoms wouldn't think that, but w/e).

Only reason I'd check this hand is if I thought one of the randoms would call wide but also bet wide, so I'd check to x/r.

I don't hate V's raise, esp. if he thinks we are betting flop too much ... but his reasoning/speech that we'd not bet a flush for this size suggests he's just clicking buttons and the button happens to be okayish this time.

I just typed up a long response and then lost it, but I would guess we should likely be mixing here at equilibrium between small bets and checks multiway OOP? I don't really think checking is much of a deviation, if at all. The EV should be pretty close at equilibrium either way. We need to be checking some strong hands and draws when we're OOP.

I like checking because we can define our recreational opponents' ranges much better that way, and we will have a lot more fold equity if we check raise vs when we bet flop small. Having the flop check through and realizing equity isn't a horrible result either.

I'm curious what the plan is on a blank turn if we bet small flop, get called and go to the turn OOP with 400 back and 300 in the pot? Overbet jam I guess? It's plus EV for sure, but I'm not sure that it's the highest EV line.

Rule of thumb is cbet 1/3 pot after a V calls hero’s 3b. Also bet small three way. Also bet your equity, about 60 in this case. That was my thinking in the hand

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I meant preflop.

Preflop: 4x 10 oop + two callers equals 60.

I was also thinking javanewt's wisdom: bet big with a big hand. People call too much.

Are people on 2+2 folding TT UTG after one caller followed by a big oop 3bet from the BB preflop? I think V's call preflop was a huge error. Betting big made it more expensive.

Preflop

PokerCruncher-Advanced-iPhone V.17.1.2

(Equity, Win, Tie)

Player 1: 40.2% 36.6% 7.63% [AdKh]

Player 2: 33.5% 30.5% 6.31% {77+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, AJo+, KQo}

Player 3: 26.2% 24.7% 3.29% {JJ-66, AQs-A2s, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 97s+, 87s, 76s, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+}
:

Live 1/2 players won't usually fold TT to a 3!, although I have seen them fold it face up. In a 5/10 game or something, it definitely is not a fold, because the 3! is not as strong a range.

Cbetting small puts you in a bad situation if raised or called. Checking or betting large is better. Easier to shove the turn after a big cbet or a checkraise. Looking in terms of rules for cbet size is not the best approach. Need to look at how it plays with this flop and preflop action.

I don't expect 1/3 players, including myself, to play anywhere near correct theoretically. Most charts I've looked at (though with considerably different assumptions than this instance) have UTG TT as mostly a call, occasionally a 4! vs a BB 3.

There's a lot of competing factors. And a lot of "shoulds", that may not apply at live 1/3, as we know. UTG should have a tight opening range. But they opened small, compared to many 1/3 tables. 2 overcalls in LP might induce a lighter squeeze from BB than normal. The sizing (which I thought was fine), still allows for OK 10:1 IO, if 1 or more of the callers also call the 3!

Which seems lower risk than going to war with TT with a 4! to 150 or so, though that was my 1st immediate thought placing myself in V's shoes. Depends on whether V thinks the callers have a backraise in em, or really how they view H.

Tbh, from H's prior posts in the forum, as V, I'd be tempted to give H a pretty damned tight 3! range. Much tighter than theory AIUI, albeit not full OMC. TT+, AQs+, AJo+, gives H a 57/43 advantage vs TT.

But I hope the above, admittedly sans solver, indicates that V wasn't making a gross error with their pf call.

I think your pre flop raise size could be bigger. Your flop c-bet size is probably too big when it's a 3BP that went multi-way and it's a monotone board.

I'm not even sure we should be c-betting at all here, OOP to two opponents. I think we can do a lot of checking from OOP.

Because we'll do a lot of checking, I think an argument could be made for betting larger when we do bet, but "larger" is still relative to the situation, vis-a-vis the pot size, board texture, and configuration.

With your specific hand, I'd think we'd either want to check and hope to improve without having to call a big bet, or we want to turn our hand into a bluff and commit to it by betting big and barreling.

If we bet small from OOP, we're not generating much fold equity. We could be inducing raises we'd rather not face. We're also not really threatening to play for stacks. We're making it easier for our IP opponents to call and evaluate, or raise, putting pressure on us to find the optimal response, if we don't want to surrender our equity.

So, in this spot, I think our preferred actions would be check, bet $30, or bet pot, with a plan to jam any turn that doesn't pair the board or complete a draw. If we actually improve to a made hand, we could bet small instead.

I don't think he made a huge error by calling pre. He has a good starting hand and he's got position on you. I wouldn't love having another player in the hand behind me if I was him, but I think it would be a bigger error to 4B. He basically called to set mine.

I actually think his flop raise is more debatable. Even though he flopped middle set, he's not really nutted. Either of his opponents could have a better hand on this flop.

He's effectively committing himself to calling off the rest if either of his opponents jams for $500-ish. He's basically turning a very strong bluff catcher into a bluff, in a spot where his opponents aren't likely to fold better hands.

Part of the reason I'd like to 3B bigger pre-flop is that there were already two callers behind V. He's incentivized to 4B more, to make them fold, so he can get this HU and IP with us. We don't really want them calling either, but nor does our hand love calling a 4B at this stack depth.

Like, if we made it $100 pre, he can call and the other two will probably fold. We'll have around 2 SPR on the flop, which isn't a lot of room to maneuver, but does leave us enough to over-bet jam, or c-bet small and then jam for a PSB. He might actually fold pre, which we don't mind at all.

If we make it $60 and he decides to 4B, he's likely to make it at least $150, which is approaching our GII threshold. We'll have around 1.5 SPR or less getting to the flop, which sucks if we don't drill TPTK.

If we make it $80 and he goes to $200, we have a clear jam or fold decision, which keeps us from having to decide what to do on the flop, but puts our stack at risk for a flip.

I think $100 is better than $80, and $80 is better than $60.

Our 3B size puts him in an awkward spot with hands like TT, that aren't really strong enough to 4B, but seem too strong to fold. He's going to flat call more frequently, which is likely to bring along at least one of the other players.

TT might be a fold at 1/2 because 3! ranges tend to be like KK+, but it isn't a fold at higher stakes or by GTO.

I would cbet maybe 3/4 pot setting up a turn shove. You could play for a x/r, in which case it might check through, which isn't a total disaster. When you cbet large, you represent AA/KK worried about the wet board or QQ/TT without a diamond worried about another diamond. You get him to fold a lot of pairs, which are ahead of you.

When he has TT, the money should all go in, and you are about 35% on the flop, but there isn't much you can do about that. You are in sort of bad shape against sets and flushes.

Note that if we are talking about V's non-GTO response by calling ... in GTO land 200bb: UTG opens; BB pure calls AKo. And close to pure calls QQ/JJ.

Even 100bb AKo only 3bets about 60% of the time, and QQ only about 15% of the time.

Depends on his perception of H's range. If it's only QQ and made nut flushes then yes, no bueno. What flushes does H really have here though? AKdd of course, but is H really 3! AJdd? KJdd?? Throw 'em in if you want, but that's 6-7 combos max. There are 3 AdKx, 3 AxKd that are easily in range. 3 AdQx, if you think that gets 3!'d. Plus 6 AA, 6 KK.

Villain's in the lead on the flop vs any reasonable H 3! range.

Depends a lot on what H bets, but would guess that's not true.

Simple, QQ+/AK preflop and only bets hands we "should":

ProPokerTools Odds Oracle Results (2.3 P...
Holdem, Generic syntax
Board - QdTd4d
PLAYER_1 AdKd,QQ,AdKx,AxKd
PLAYER_2 TT
29700 trials (exhaustive)

All-in Equity
[table=head]|Equity %|Wins Hi %|Ties Hi %|Wins Hi Count|Ties Hi Count|
AdKd,QQ,AdKx,AxKd|55.8232%|55.1414%|1.3636%|16377|405|
TT|44.1768%|43.4949%|1.3636%|12918|405|
[/table]

...although not sure we should bet AxKd.

If we include the obvious hands which might bet but I don't think they should AAd,KKd then TT is just in front with ~52% but if you drop AxKd then it's behind again.

If H has a bluffing 3bet range and we include AdQx,AdJd/Ad5d/Ad4d at some frequency it basically evens out.

Solver preflop ranges assume UTG raises are strong and calls are strong. Complete in garbage in determining what to do in a 1/3 game.