![]() |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
I know that small pairs and even pairs as large as JJ can be played for set value. [/ QUOTE ] It's almost never true. Playing for set value is almost never good. I plugged following settings to the simulation : -player A has typical UTG range of <22+, AJ+. A9+, KQ. KJs+, QJs> -player B has 6s6h -Stacks are 1000$ and blinds are 5$/10$ -player A makes a raise to 40$ and player B calls -player A makes continuation bet of 3/4 of the pot -player B folds if he doesnt flop a set and go all-in if he does -player A calls with top pair or better and folds otherwise All that cost 5.32$ on average for player B. He would need stacks of 1300$ to break even with that strategy. For Axs its even worse as you lose 30.8$ on average with 1000$ stacks. With 2000$ stacks you would lose 26$. You would need stacks of 8000$ to break even and that assuming your opponent still goes broke with top pair or better. Not realistic assumption. All in all playing for set or 2pair/flush value is not a way to make money. |
|
|