[shane88888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Pokerstove:

Player 1 JJ: 27.97%
Player 2 Random: 13.0%
Player 3 Random: 13.0%
Player 4 Random: 13.0%
Player 5 TT+,AQs+,KQs+AQo+: 32.97%

There ya go.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats WAY too optimistic. You're in a 2/4 B&M so without reads 3-better has AK, AA, KK, and maybe QQ. Thats it. Some players you could limit that even further to AA and KK, some people out to the range you gave.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, you're in a B&M 2/4 game. Where do you play? Because if a reraise automatically means AA/KK/AK or maybe QQ, then you play in the worst 2/4 game in the world. It's called GAMBOOOLING.

Some players you could limit to AA and KK, but we are working without reads here (as you restated). So assuming the presence of AA or KK in the Pokerstove would be irrelevant to the discussion. However, it is considered in the reraiser's range.

When I ran this I wasn't all that concerned about accuracy; I was trying to illustrate to ncskiier why more info than a naked equity percentage is preferable.

However, to better the discussion, feel free to run and post some alternate numbers. Pokerstove is free.

[ QUOTE ]
You also can't just assume people have random hands. I think you can easily assume two different overcards are out there (and likely all three) in people's hands and probably an underpair. I can't see that capping this is a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

These are live 2/4 players who limped, called two, and called again. No strength can be assumed about their holdings until they tell you otherwise. Again, we have no reads here.

[ QUOTE ]
And to whoever said you could cap almost on set value alone, you need a lot more players for that to be true (basically the whole table).

[/ QUOTE ]

You've put four small bets into a pot of 23 small bet.

4/23 = 17.39%

You hit your set on the flop 1 in 7.5 times.

1/7.5 = 13.33%

That, right there, counts as an almost.