Micro Stakes Online NL Poker Forums

I'd like a clearer explanation from those who believe this is an easy bet. I'm at work so don't have any tools at my disposal, but on this board, against UTG and CO multiway pot, I guess our equity is prolly 35% or even less. When we bet, I don't think we're getting many folds from their combined range, and as such we're more likely to value own ourselves in the hand than to get value out of a worse hand. Secondly, when we do get folds, it's all the junk that we were ahead of in the first place. Thirdly, on the turn on the majority of cards our equity will drop, there will be a lot more draws and we'll have to make a more difficult decision in an inflated pot and all of this only because we feel compelled to bet our pocket pair that might be best on the flop... this board I'd bet sets and FDs and I'd bet both of them big and barrel them a lot. Pocket pairs you can't take that line because you have show-down value, thus best to check it back I think?

@EUSSI sounds like what I call betting and hoping to get called by worse. Really you should have some kind of an idea of what hands your opponents play, how they play them, and what the best course of action is. Not just bet for the sake of betting and check fold river or when raised.

question, what do you do in a 3 way pot on this flop with this hand when you are the pfr and last to act and the 2 players checked to you ?

btw when i bet here i doubt we are gonna get called a lot here.
we are betting to collect death money & fold out the equity both villains have, why would we check and risk an overcard hitting the turn that kills our hand ?

question, what do you do in a 3 way pot on this flop with this hand when you are the pfr and last to act and the 2 players checked to you ?

It depends. You're changing the dynamics quite a bit

I think predominantly I will take the same line and I'll explain why. How big of a mistake do you think it really is for one of the two (or both) to call your bet here with a hand like AQ, QJ, a draw? Add to that that they sometimes have a higher pocket pair, or spiked a ten, or feel like pulling out a bluff - it makes the hand quite difficult to play both on the flop and later on. So this means that they are not likely to make huge mistakes in the hand and we are likely to make mistakes in the hand at some point (either folding the best hand or betting/calling with second best). This is why I like betting this board with a set or draw, because we either are getting clear value versus their range, or we have potential to suckout when they do have a better hand.

On a tangent, I would bet this board if I were versus a single opponent and I would be less enclined to fold at any point in the hand. I'd prolly bet two streets and call a river bet depending on the board, action and size. This is because our equity in such a situation is more likely to be coinflip and I do think we've got some fold equity here and there and catch them when they are drawing.

I hope my thought process makes sense

it makes the hand quite difficult to play both on the flop and later on.

Passing on a +EV play because it may make things difficult to play later in the hand is bad thinking. I bet here and plan on double barreling any non-flush card/ace.

Passing on a +EV play because it may make things difficult to play later in the hand is bad thinking. I bet here and plan on double barreling any non-flush card/ace.

LOL can you explain why?

Its easy bet for protection and value...we also have position and block a motif drawsvillain can have...so his range is a TX and SDval/overs which outweighs the TX and we r beating and need to protect here....and if you think he has a monster he is probably gonna b going for a c/r somehwere the only gay part about the hand is villains stacksize is really short which leans towards he's a fish and has a wide range...so should be prepared to stack off for 30bbs if we bet flop.

LOL can you explain why?

Because the the object of poker is simply making the most +EV play at the moment and betting here is the most +EV play.

It's multi-way and there were two villains in the pot that your betting against...

It's multi-way and there were two villains in the pot that your betting against...

Yet both show weakness vs a semi-coordinated board. Do you really think the initial raiser is going to check to induce multi-way OOP with a strong value hand?

I dont know, Stanmore didn't give a whole lot of information about the players or any reads. The thing is I look at the spot and evaluate equity, their ranges, the board, what could happen, and how future streets will play. My decision is an average of all possible scenarios which is why I think checking might be the better option against your typical player at 10NL. I suggested that by analysing the spot it will give Stanmore more insight as to how he can best play this

You still haven't explained your thought process behind the barrel. Do you think they are calling with worse / folding better?

I think their calling range is going to be primarily overs + BDFD, flush draws, 7x and pp's. Needless to say, I bet the flop for value and barrel the turn vs any non-diamond or ace.

OK I'm back.

Hi so anyway. Here's what I think UTG's ranges are going to look like…

I don't think his stats are terribly interesting to this spot, which is why I didn't post them. I didn't have many hands but it's 10NL and we know it's a fairly passive game and he had fairly weak tight tendencies. Enough said.

I think he leads his over pairs half the time… and check raises them the rest of the time. I don't see him check calling an overpair here.

I think he'd lead sets half the time, check raise some, check call some in an attempt to be deceptive. That considered I'm going to give one combo of TT and 77 to his flop check calling range.

I think he'd lead AT almost always… and I don't think he has other Ts in his UTG opening range often enough to worry about too much.

I think he would check call 99 and 88 half the time and lead them half the time...

I think he check folds any pocket pair hands lower than 77 that he might have had up to that point.

I think his over cards hands therefore make up the bulk of his check/calling range. A few of those over card combos have flush draws too… but I think a weak tight player won't push the combo draw with something like a check raise so… keeping all those in.

All these assumptions above are exactly that and all come with the caveat that I'm always willing to be surprised by what a 10NL player does with a hand…



So I stoved an opening range of 55+ ATs+ KJs+ AJo+ and KQo (10% of hands… maybe KJs is a bit loose but it's 10NL and KJs is pretty)

I'm a 55/45 favourite vs this entire range on this flop with my 88s.

But that number is not quite relevant because I've said that I expect some hands to lead… half his overpair combos half his sets and almost all his AT.


So with those combos removed I'm a 60/40 favourite vs his combined flop check/raise + check/call + check/fold ranges.

So I get check/raised by 3 combos of AA, 3# of KK, 3# of QQ, 3# of JJ, and 2# of sets. All of which have me drawing to 2 outs.

He check/folds the 55-66 12 combos.

He check/calls 5 combos of 2overcard+FD hands that are flipping with me
He check/calls 6 combos of 99s that have me drawing to 2 outs
He check/calls the 1 remaining combo of 88s that chop with me.
He check/calls 105 combos of over cards with no flush draw (backdoor sometimes)

So wow yeah… Overcard non flush draw hands are the epic majority of hands in this range…

And yes those hands are a 3:1 dog vs my 88s.

So this is surely a bet for value which I get some protection from considering a free turn card is 3 times more likely to help him than me…

The value I get from 100 combos of over cards easily makes up for the occasional bet/fold to a check/raise.




As for bet sizing I don't see a reason to bet bigger due to any sort of elasticity in calling ranges… though I can agree to a larger bet than the one I made in order to make a c/c with over cards worse given I expect them to mostly call a 55c bet as often as a 40c bet. So that just comes down to getting more value at that point and making it more -EV for those hands to call vs a villain who is unlikely to care enough about the difference between a 40c bet and a 55c bet.



A small post script is that I'm never in this hand super worried about "the other guy". I think his range is weak and he has not indicated much interest in the pot on the flop. I expect folds from him the vast majority of the time. That is why I have not gone into much depth for him. Though I guess his presence is a good added reason to make the bet like 55 rather than 40… as @huntse mentioned.


Betting the turn is going to be much much thinner because I expect a huge % of those over cards hands to fold to a turn bet on a blank turn. I still might consider a smallish bet to extract from stubborn AK hands, and Overs+FD hands… but probably not.

Does anyone see merit to the thinking that if I check through the turn I see some stabs from A-high on blank rivers I can call? This might be higher EV for me than attempting to bet the turn but I can't know what this villains tendencies will be. I just think it makes me look like I stabbed at the flop with air to try to pick it up, then shut down when I was called… so now he's going to try to stab at the river… but I dunno… probably over thinking it.

So to conclude for @Estist and others, unless I'm way off with the range (possible), or somewhere in the math, I think this spot warrants a bet mostly for value, and I get some protection for my vulnerable best hand vs a lot of 6-out draws.


@EUSSI while I think the situation where I'm the PFR and have two people OOP vs me… the dynamics of that situation are way too different… However the concept that players are forced to play more honestly in multiway pots does support a bet here when they both check despite me NOT being the pre flop raiser. So I agree with that to a certain extent.

Serious question here...

How much are you guys taking into consideration the vulnerability of your hand when it's likely the best hand now... when you decide to bet or not?

I mean... if we are considering getting your opponents to fold their equity (with say a big draw or 2 overs to my pair in this case) as a part of value (which I'm pretty sure Baluga talks about in EG3) then that reason for betting... protection... IS value.

So I'm getting VALUE from getting worse hands to fold if he folds KJ for example... it's not a bluff because my hand is better... but I get value from his KJ hand which has about 23-24% equity... dropping to 0% equity when he mucks...

@stanmore - I think this is a super good analysis! Given everything that you said it looks like it's definately a bet! However, the following bit is questionable:

A small post script is that I'm never in this hand super worried about "the other guy". I think his range is weak and he has not indicated much interest in the pot on the flop. I expect folds from him the vast majority of the time.

If you stove your equity versus both ranges it should be around 30%-40% depending on what you stick in there. So surely this must change your assessment on the situation somewhat? No reason to skip part of your analysis, a similar spot will come up again in future no doubt

Don't think people bluff very often on the river so might not be worth it at these stakes although versus a loose aggressive regular I'd definately consider it.

Solid analysis Stanmore!

As you showed this spot is pretty much always a bet on the flop here, checking back is a leak, maybe not a major leak but a leak nonetheless.

3betting pre could be ok but flatting will always be +EV, so readless a call can't be a bad option.

Serious question here...

How much are you guys taking into consideration the vulnerability of your hand when it's likely the best hand now... when you decide to bet or not?

I mean... if we are considering getting your opponents to fold their equity (with say a big draw or 2 overs to my pair in this case) as a part of value (which I'm pretty sure Baluga talks about in EG3) then that reason for betting... protection... IS value.

So I'm getting VALUE from getting worse hands to fold if he folds KJ for example... it's not a bluff because my hand is better... but I get value from his KJ hand which has about 23-24% equity... dropping to 0% equity when he mucks...

Perhaps think about how showdown value works a bit more deeply. The reasons for a profitable bet doesn't have to fall into a well defined "bucket" of value, bluff, protection, etc. In order to have showdown value you must actually reach the showdown and win. So think about the various turn and river runouts and your opponent strategies then see if that leads you to a spot where you can win the showdown. Only when you put together the entire hand including the turn and river play can you completely understand showdown value and how to best play hands and spots just like this one.

Also: all in equity calculations on the flop vs ranges misses the whole point here. Think about why this is and you'll get better at poker. Good luck!

How can checking ever be a leak? The essence of a value bet is that you want to get called. If this is such a clear bet then surely Stanmore should be betting bigger and delighted when he gets two calls?