[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
So while yes, you end up paying more preflop to shoot for your set, you are going to more than make up for that postflop in a game like this.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you sure about this? The math doesn't work for me.

The standard assessment is that you need about 9-1 or 10-1 to pay for your set, assuming you fold on the flop if you miss. You're 7.5-1 against hitting your set in the first place and sometimes your set won't win, especially in pots like this where people have odds to draw to gutshots and BDs.

So if you pay 4 bets PF to play a PP, you'll need a 20-22BB pot just to break even. The pots were big the other night, but "only" 15-20BB. I don't think, even in this game, that you could count on the huge pot you need to play 4 bets PF for a set.

BTW, this is even more true for speculative hands like suited connectors. With those, you'll often flop a draw and be forced to put in more bets on flop and turn hoping to connect. At least with a pair, you'll be able to get away with only 4 bets if you miss.

I hope I didn't give people the impression that the whole table was on tilt, because that wasn't the case. The whole table was after the maniac's money. Often we'd see 3-4 people to the flop for 4 bets, but not 6. And people weren't just playing awful hands; I think it was more that they were getting trapped in the scenario soweak describes:
EP limps with a decent hand.
MP limps with JJ intending to LRR
Hero limps with 98s
Maniac raises
EP calls
MP raises
Hero has a tough decision now. But he called intending to see a flop so he calls.
Maniac raises...
Etc.

I chose to avoid 98s and the like here but of course I'm not sure if it was the correct thing to do.