PLO25 KKJTss 2nd set OOP 4way

I think this is fairly clear squeeze preflop with such connected ss kings? Without read on MP being tight at least. We would need to fold to 4bet though.

Flop I would like to x-r if we had weaker KK. Issue with our combo is that we block AK and wraps so could be again one of slowplay candidates. But then again we are oop and probably villain continue quite straightforward on turn. So we don't usually get second barrel that often. Positive side could be though villain improving to some two pairs etc. to give action more often. Sometimes it will obviously backfire with some bd stuff coming in but we also have one bdfd.

If raising I would like to go for smaller x-r sizing like 1/2 pot though. Try to keep villain in pot more often as we crush the board so heavily.

Maybe we could also think of leading flop in such massive multiway pot?

Yes KKJTss is a squeeze but calling is okay too, solver is mixing this specific hand combo leaning more towards squeezing. I´d rather squeeze and some more even weaker KKss since RFI-and flatting ranges tend to be too wide and not well balanced.

Again multi-way we have no leading range multi-way oop in the BB. 3-way with CO, SB and BB we would be leading exactly 0% and 4-way theoretically we should lead even less than 0% which is not possible. There is a difference which position is stabbing, like against the CO we are supposed to check-raise less often than we would have to against an earlier position. Don´t ask me why. Ofc one of the few check-raising candidates is middle-set but we are check-raising less then 40% and check-calling more often. The better check-raising candidates are those with backdoor side values like pivot or bdfd and some little blocking pair like :Ax::Kx::Kx: and :Kx::Kx::6x: whereas aiming to crack bottom-sets seems to be no issue. I guess it makes sense to deny the freecard by check-raising when it is more likely we are up against a straightdraw. The gutshot versions :Kx::Kx::Jx::Tx: and :Kx::Kx::Qx::Tx: are indeed 100% check-called slowplays. Don´t forget to check-call enough of those sets oop!

The mian reason for me not squeezing here is that there was already 3 playeres in the pot and I had no ace.
I would squeez it without an ace if I was ds though.

Maybe we could also think of leading flop in such massive multiway pot?

I do a lot of leading with sets OOP on more wet boards.

Again multi-way we have no leading range multi-way oop in the BB. 3-way with CO, SB and BB we would be leading exactly 0% and 4-way theoretically we should lead even less than 0% which is not possible. There is a difference which position is stabbing, like against the CO we are supposed to check-raise less often than we would have to against an earlier position. Don´t ask me why. Ofc one of the few check-raising candidates is middle-set but we are check-raising less then 40% and check-calling more often. The better check-raising candidates are those with backdoor side values like pivot or bdfd and some little blocking pair like :Kx: and :Kx: whereas aiming to crack bottom-sets seems to be no issue. I guess it makes sense to deny the freecard by check-raising when it is more likely we are up against a straightdraw. The gutshot versions :Kx: and :Kx: are indeed 100% check-called slowplays.

That's really interesting. Thanks

Don´t forget to check-call enough of those sets oop!

Yes sir!

These 4+way pots are kind of special case imo in a way that for solid reason almost no one is going to make light bets. So yeah this flop is obviously great for preflop raiser uncapped range but is he anyway betting without actual value hand versus three opponents?

That is why I think small lead has certain value as if we bet like max half pot we can get sort of light calls. E.g. some Axxx might feel like they need to call small bet but not do betting for themself. Also other sort of stuff like gs can call. That versus weaker players and as these 4+way pots rarely exist without (at least couple) weaker players in table they are main targets to get value from. So in these spots I like to think about maximizing value from individual hand view as stuff like protecting check range is less relevant.

But yeah if there is some aggro fellows we can still get action more often with check. But I would not be as worried about how gto would approach these spots for reasons mentioned.

I agree that betting can make sense in a loose environment against loose players and also where the players ip are stabbing less than they should. I firstly wanted to show the approach from a GTO perspective first where checking oop2 in multi-way spots is more naturally and to make clear leading is not a standard line here. If we bet we should size it up a little to 2/3 or 3/4 as we want to protect and build the pot with an overall stronger range.

raising because dont want to let drawing cheap is leaning strong towards being overprotective. especially when bomb that big.
you have J,T, 2*k, blocking lot of rundowns and also the strongest holdings of the board. so when bombing aginst unknown you just force them out 99% of the times most likely. almost same for betting big flop imo. plus we have good additional equity with the gs, k high bdfd which could givevillain two pair f.e. or other weaker stuff on later streets. and we can also lead the turn quite frequently.
flop think would just check/ call most likely, as we block so much plus the solid additional equity. maybe when there are two or more known super stations bet like half pot plus one or two bbs although i think check call >>> bet here