Fold this set? [Archive] - Two Plus Two Newer Archives

b2l_cricket

03-05-2007, 12:56 AM

Villains stats are 60/2/1.8 over 200 hands. No other read than that.

Absolute Poker
No Limit Holdem Ring game
Blinds: $0.25/$0.50
5 players
Converter (http://www.neildewhurst.com/hand-converter)

Stack sizes:
UTG: $8
CO: $64.63
Button: $30.65
hero: $115.20
BB: $49.90

Pre-flop: (5 players) hero is SB with 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif
UTG calls, CO calls, Button folds, hero raises to $1.5, BB calls, UTG calls, CO calls.

Flop: 3/images/graemlins/club.gif 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif 7/images/graemlins/club.gif ($6, 4 players)
hero checks, BB checks, UTG checks, CO bets $4, hero raises to $12, 2 folds, CO calls.

Turn: T/images/graemlins/heart.gif ($30, 2 players)
hero bets $20, CO raises all-in $51.13

Maybe i should have raised more preflop, i was just trying to get some money in the pot in case i flopped a set. Do you think this turn is a fold? I don't beat a whole lot except some 2 pair hands

Vyse

03-05-2007, 12:56 AM

Hell no.

I'll further explain.

In my experience, the thing about really passive players is whenever they DO get a good hand, they go insane. Sometimes that hand is AK PF and they have a gutshot on the flop and they still call. Sometimes it's just top pair. Here it looks like 2P, and whenever a passive player gets 2P, it's like, "Now's the PERFECT time to put all my money in! I have a hand!"

MrMxyztplk

03-05-2007, 12:57 AM

Is this a joke?

Marshall28

03-05-2007, 01:06 AM

OP, you seem to be thinking result-oriented, im gonna go ahead and figure that he had a bigger set than you and thats why you are posting here, cuz there is no way you second guess yourself in this situation if you won the hand.

only things i woulda done differently is raised more pf, i woulda raised it to 3, and i woulda lead this flop, cuz id hate to have it checked around and lose the pot to someone who caught a baby flush or a straight or whatever.

orange

03-05-2007, 01:06 AM

played well...now call.

b2l_cricket

03-05-2007, 01:07 AM

No it wasnt a joke. I called. I have been running terribly latly so i have been unsure feeling unsure about my play, i was just checking.

Vyse

03-05-2007, 01:10 AM

[ QUOTE ]
OP, you seem to be thinking result-oriented, im gonna go ahead and figure that he had a bigger set than you and thats why you are posting here, cuz there is no way you second guess yourself in this situation if you won the hand.

only things i woulda done differently is raised more pf, i woulda raised it to 3, and i woulda lead this flop, cuz id hate to have it checked around and lose the pot to someone who caught a baby flush or a straight or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

lololol I'm shocked you don't fold w/o quads

Marshall28

03-05-2007, 01:15 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP, you seem to be thinking result-oriented, im gonna go ahead and figure that he had a bigger set than you and thats why you are posting here, cuz there is no way you second guess yourself in this situation if you won the hand.

only things i woulda done differently is raised more pf, i woulda raised it to 3, and i woulda lead this flop, cuz id hate to have it checked around and lose the pot to someone who caught a baby flush or a straight or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

lololol I'm shocked you don't fold w/o quads

[/ QUOTE ]

dude, i dont think u understand the difference between a raised an unraised pot, its probably a big leak in your game if you are playing them the same.

Vyse

03-05-2007, 01:17 AM

Ryanb9

03-05-2007, 01:25 AM

no im calling every time here

evazan

03-05-2007, 01:44 AM

MrMxyztplk

03-05-2007, 01:48 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP, you seem to be thinking result-oriented, im gonna go ahead and figure that he had a bigger set than you and thats why you are posting here, cuz there is no way you second guess yourself in this situation if you won the hand.

only things i woulda done differently is raised more pf, i woulda raised it to 3, and i woulda lead this flop, cuz id hate to have it checked around and lose the pot to someone who caught a baby flush or a straight or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the OP choose the right amount to raise pf. The point of raising the small pp is to build up a descent pot in case you hit your set. Not to chase out everyone who will you pay you off when you hit and thats what a 3 dollar raise would do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Raising small and raising big are both fine. There are advantages and disadvantages to each.

spacetime

03-05-2007, 01:48 AM

results oriented thinking.

evazan

03-05-2007, 01:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP, you seem to be thinking result-oriented, im gonna go ahead and figure that he had a bigger set than you and thats why you are posting here, cuz there is no way you second guess yourself in this situation if you won the hand.

only things i woulda done differently is raised more pf, i woulda raised it to 3, and i woulda lead this flop, cuz id hate to have it checked around and lose the pot to someone who caught a baby flush or a straight or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the OP choose the right amount to raise pf. The point of raising the small pp is to build up a descent pot in case you hit your set. Not to chase out everyone who will you pay you off when you hit and thats what a 3 dollar raise would do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Raising small and raising big are both fine. There are advantages and disadvantages to each.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you give some reasons relating to this hand why a 3 dollar raise would be superior? With a three dollar raise you will most likely not get more then one caller if you even get any. I always thought that its better to play small pp multiway rather then heads up as your much more likely to get paid off if you hit. Raising to three might win the pot pf but I think theres more value in raising small and hitting a set. Thanks

Marshall28

03-05-2007, 01:58 AM

thinking about it further .. i really think its more of a style dependant type decision.... personally, i raise a lot of pots, like 18-20 percent,and i bet a lot of flops regardless whether i hit or not, so in general, i want my raises to have as much FE as possible, i want to chase out all but 1 or whatever callers, or perhaps just take it down right there. im basically playing my hand for more than set value, which is why i play it the way i recommended,but i really suppose it could go either way, if you want to playit for set value then 1.5 is fine i suppose.

MrMxyztplk

03-05-2007, 01:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP, you seem to be thinking result-oriented, im gonna go ahead and figure that he had a bigger set than you and thats why you are posting here, cuz there is no way you second guess yourself in this situation if you won the hand.

only things i woulda done differently is raised more pf, i woulda raised it to 3, and i woulda lead this flop, cuz id hate to have it checked around and lose the pot to someone who caught a baby flush or a straight or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the OP choose the right amount to raise pf. The point of raising the small pp is to build up a descent pot in case you hit your set. Not to chase out everyone who will you pay you off when you hit and thats what a 3 dollar raise would do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Raising small and raising big are both fine. There are advantages and disadvantages to each.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you give some reasons relating to this hand why a 3 dollar raise would be superior? With a three dollar raise you will most likely not get more then one caller if you even get any. I always thought that its better to play small pp multiway rather then heads up as your much more likely to get paid off if you hit. Raising to three might win the pot pf but I think theres more value in raising small and hitting a set. Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

So you understand why raising to 1.5 can be correct. Thing is, if you raise to 1.5 and you DON'T hit, you've basically lost the hand, and that will happen very often (about 6 out of 7). Now if you raise to $3, you can win preflop, albeit a small amount. Or, you could get a call and win with a C-bet. Yes, sometimes you'll C-bet, get called and lose. But sometimes you'll hit that 3 and take a stack. That's much more easy when you're heads up in a standard raised pot than multiway in a small raised pot where people will be more careful about stacking off with one pair or whatever hand is relatively weak on the board.

There are also a few metagame considerations...

eigenvalue

03-05-2007, 03:29 AM

A very easy call. You have to put $30 into a $80 pot and you are beaten only by better sets. But he can do that with all kinds of overpairs, 2 pair hands, pair + OESD hands. You are way ahead of his possible range and you have odds as favorable as they can be.

jtr

03-05-2007, 09:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
A very easy call. You have to put $30 into a $80 pot and you are beaten only by better sets.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd call too, obviously, but given the guy's VPIP then J9 and 96 can't be ruled out.

.KeviN.

03-05-2007, 02:01 PM

Why isnt anybody disagreeing with raising preflop and checking the flop????? Theyre both disgusting plays.

marvin_1935

03-05-2007, 02:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why isnt anybody disagreeing with raising preflop and checking the flop????? Theyre both disgusting plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

Hoffma

03-05-2007, 02:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why isnt anybody disagreeing with raising preflop and checking the flop????? Theyre both disgusting plays.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree with the preflop also (I am just completing from SB) but is his c/r really that bad? I would've c/r'd more ($18 or so) but I don't think checking from SB with a set and three opponents is necessarily a bad play.

.KeviN.

03-05-2007, 02:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why isnt anybody disagreeing with raising preflop and checking the flop????? Theyre both disgusting plays.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree with the preflop also (I am just completing from SB) but is his c/r really that bad? I would've c/r'd more ($18 or so) but I don't think checking from SB with a set and three opponents is necessarily a bad play .

[/ QUOTE ]

It is. Its a REALLY bad play. This boards pretty wet and the pots been bumped up pf. Why would we risk giving free cards when a pot sized VB is probably getting called in at least 1 spot? We raised from the SB after all these limps, so chances that theyll bet into us are real slim , especially when they would love to get a free card to complete the bunch of draws they could be on. We're OOP against 3 opponents with a wet board = im playing this as fast as I can. I think that checking this flop is alot worse than raising PF.

AceLuby

03-05-2007, 05:05 PM

We raise the pot pf so we can make a decent bet on the flop. Not betting the flop here is a HUGE mistake IMO.

spyderracing

03-05-2007, 05:26 PM

Flop is draw heavy, bet it. Not folding to the shove, you're getting better than 3:1 here, quite often you'll be ahead and when you are behind you have 11 outs to beat a straight.

losingdonkey

03-05-2007, 05:28 PM

villain has 1010 duh

spyderracing

03-05-2007, 05:37 PM

why is everyone saying limp pf? you raise to build the pot so you can get it in easier post flop.

EMc

03-05-2007, 05:42 PM

I think raising here OOP is a leak, esp a raise this size IMO.

Vyse

03-05-2007, 05:43 PM

I HATE raising this PF. 88 and up I do raise.

spyderracing

03-05-2007, 05:46 PM

Well let me ask you this are you raising it from utg first to act?

Thremp

03-05-2007, 05:48 PM

Raise size is horrid. Make it 3 or limp behind. Lead flop. Call turn.

EMc

03-05-2007, 05:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Well let me ask you this are you raising it from utg first to act?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

spyderracing

03-05-2007, 05:51 PM

Yea i agree the size of the raise sucks but calling raising a small pp oop a leak is pretty nitty imo

b2l_cricket

03-05-2007, 06:30 PM

If you limp behind here do you still think leading is better than check raising. It seems like limping and then leading is a good way to play a small pot with a big hand.

Vyse

03-05-2007, 06:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Well let me ask you this are you raising it from utg first to act?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but that's much different.

corsakh

03-05-2007, 07:01 PM

Sets = money. Folding sets = busto.

.KeviN.

03-06-2007, 11:15 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well let me ask you this are you raising it from utg first to act?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but that's much different.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is. The reason its different from UTG is because of the chances you can just steal the blinds, cbet agains caller behind you, or get calls from and have position on the blinds, etc. In this hand there are already 3 in the pot, all who have position on us. Please tell me how making this play consistently can ever be +EV???? "Build a big pot preflop in case i hit a set" I think this is a way of horribly misapplying the advice in NLHETAP. What about the 88.5% of the times you actually DONT flop a set? What about the times when you do flop a set, but have to deal with awful boards plus worse turn and river cards OOP against 3 players in a raised pot? When youre IN position, these decisions can be much easier, but what do you think itll do to your WR in the long run if you constantly put yourself in these kind of positions.

Like I said before, not betting this flop is alot worse than raising this PF, but Im pretty sure always raising in this situation PF will cost you money in the long run. I think a big leak for alot of uNLs is raising to lightly out of the SB against limpers. It just leads to bad situations, variance, stress, n all in all its just not a good time

prodonkey

03-06-2007, 11:36 AM

I agree.. I almost never raise this really small stuff out of the blinds.. I just play for set value. You flop a set 1 in 8 times.. you almost assuredly don't have the best hand, so unless your raise is putting in 8:1 you're losing money on this unless you think you can steal the pot on the flop often enough to win, and I seriously doubt that.

You raise from utg because 1. you might have the best hand 2. you could win the blinds

your raise here has neither of these things going for it.