SC in multiway 3bet pot

If you get c/r it's almost always by a better hand. Protection is actually very relevant here given how frequently there are 3 or 4 over cards all folding the flop. B/F like 4.50, claim 100% of the pot and aviod the chance to make turn mistakes if one of them bets.

Fold pre.

Agree with Carroters on the bet. You got yourself in to that mess, if you could take it down with a smallish flop bet then hooray for seeking out the fit and folders.

But that's not really the issue with this hand. It's calling pre. You can flat this from the button HU depending on the preflop raiser when you consider his opening range and post-flop tendencies.

Calling the 3bet is a huge leak. Sure, you have position, but you don't have nearly the implied odds to be seeing a flop with T9s. With a low SPR, you're not going to have much wiggle room in terms of flop play (see hand in OP). You're bleeding money.

You want a very high SPR with SC's, which is why it's profitable to limp behind with them rather than auto-isolating a bunch of limpers, and possibly bloating the pot out of control. If you're looking for a number, I'd say you should be looking for an SPR of at least 15.

If you're playing super deep stack poker (like where they buyin on HSP for like 1000bbs) then you'd have a case for calling the 3bet in this spot. But it's still really marginal.

I've done some research on it and I'm happy with my preflop call now after reading this thread on 2+2
The 2+2 Forum Archives: Suited Connectors, Implied Odds, and You (Theory/Math)
tl;dr you can use the 5/10 rule IP with suited connectors. And thats for HU so with the multiway pot its an ez call. You have about a 12.5% chance of flopping a 12+ outer or 2pair +.
I'd reccommend reading the whole thread its very good stuff.

the first call pre is only really ok if blinds are passive fish, especially bb. Fold to the 3b pre and it's not even close.
As played it's super-easy bet-fold about $6 repping die Damen

as for having done research - you should probably try and explain why your calls are both good now, you'll learn a whole bunch more that way. Like, if you understand what you read then the explanation will be easy. It may also prevent you spewing a whole bunch of money with scs over the next 100k hands...

Ok here goes then. Assuming a stacking off rate of 50%...

5.6% of the time we flop a monstro with 90% equity
6.9% of the time we flop a 12+ draw with 50% equity
0.056*0.9*0.5= 0.0252
+
0.069*0.5*0.5= 0.014
= 0.0392
or ~4% expectation of effective stacks

BUT we can also continue alot with our smaller draws ie oesd or fd. Odds for that is ~19.1%. Taking out the combo draws we've already counted thats 19.1%-6.9%= 12.2% with ~35% equity.
0.122*0.35*0.5= 0.02135 or ~2% expectation of effective stacks

Adding these its clear we have a ~6% overall expectation of effective stacks.

Obviously now we need to adjust these figures for position, as clearly we will be able to extract more of the effective stack IP, and less of it OOP. Being conservative lets say your 25% more effective at getting stacks IP and 25% less effective OOP.

Thats ~7.5% expectation IP and ~4.5% OOP

I'm being asked to call $2.8 for access to an effective $24.95 stack
thats 2.8/24.95=~11.2%
So if we were HU here this would be a clear fold.
But there is another stack involved too. Since the other guy covers me the effective stack is $30.79
thats 2.8/30.79*100=~9.1%
So even 120bb deep its still a fold if we were HU vs this guy.

But what about my hand where I'm playing both at once? Well it seems obvious that we need to get to (11.2+9.1)/2=~10% expectation. We already have 7.5% so basically we need the 2nd player to have a stack off rate of at least 1/3 the first player (1/3 of 7.5% would be 2.5%, adding to get 10%).
So we look at his stats. He seems quite loose so its reasonable to assume hes going to be stacking off at least that often.

And remember we haven't even counted the times we make a pair and take down the pot with it! (As this is what happened in my specific hand I have to assume it happens a non trivial amount of the time, more often as villains 3bet range gets wider)

Feel free to check my maths or assumptions.

Originally Posted by Viscaro

Ok here goes then. Assuming a stacking off rate of 50%...

5.6% of the time we flop a monstro with 90% equity
6.9% of the time we flop a 12+ draw with 50% equity
0.056*0.9*0.5= 0.0252
+
0.069*0.5*0.5= 0.014
= 0.0392
or ~4% expectation of effective stacks

BUT we can also continue alot with our smaller draws ie oesd or fd. Odds for that is ~19.1%. Taking out the combo draws we've already counted thats 19.1%-6.9%= 12.2% with ~35% equity.
0.122*0.35*0.5= 0.02135 or ~2% expectation of effective stacks

Adding these its clear we have a ~6% overall expectation of effective stacks.

Obviously now we need to adjust these figures for position, as clearly we will be able to extract more of the effective stack IP, and less of it OOP. Being conservative lets say your 25% more effective at getting stacks IP and 25% less effective OOP.

Thats ~7.5% expectation IP and ~4.5% OOP

I'm being asked to call $2.8 for access to an effective $24.95 stack
thats 2.8/24.95=~11.2%
So if we were HU here this would be a clear fold.
But there is another stack involved too. Since the other guy covers me the effective stack is $30.79
thats 2.8/30.79*100=~9.1%
So even 120bb deep its still a fold if we were HU vs this guy.

But what about my hand where I'm playing both at once? Well it seems obvious that we need to get to (11.2+9.1)/2=~10% expectation. We already have 7.5% so basically we need the 2nd player to have a stack off rate of at least 1/3 the first player (1/3 of 7.5% would be 2.5%, adding to get 10%).
So we look at his stats. He seems quite loose so its reasonable to assume hes going to be stacking off at least that often.

And remember we haven't even counted the times we make a pair and take down the pot with it! (As this is what happened in my specific hand I have to assume it happens a non trivial amount of the time, more often as villains 3bet range gets wider)

Feel free to check my maths or assumptions.

cool, well summarised
only a couple of things to comment on
1 = you're basically giving sb a range of exactly AA when you start doing things like this. Add KK and think about the effect of ace high flops on villain's desire to stack off. Add AKs and think about villain's desire to stack off on boards he misses (the ones that you manage to miss too)
2 = this analysis ignores reverse implied odds situations -> i prefer better than the 5-10 you're referring to.

based on the optimistic 50% and the rio spots you're kind of ignoring I think pre-flop is closer than you do.

anyway, there's pretty good consensus on flop bet-fold and that seems to be what you did. Hope your sizing was smart