Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

I've experience and seen this situation all too often. You get AA preflop (woohoo), raise it up 4x standard. Get a caller. Board comes something like 2sTcJc. Its drawy, better bet out big here to chase out the flush and straight drawers. You make a 3/4PSB and get raised 3x. He must be on a draw or have something like AJ or maybe QQ, KK. I'm either reraising AI or calling and betting out on the turn and river (provided no draw hits). This then goes to showdown and he turns over a set (and you feel like a idiot).

Now my question is if its ever possible to avoid getting busted assuming a stack size of 100bb each. I know that this will be read dependent. So how would you play it out considering if its a :
A) TAG
B) LAG
C) Crazy Calling Maniac

Most of the time, i get busted by all 3 groups of people in such situations. Is there some theory or method of playing to avoid it? Would like to hear from you guys.

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

For c) you simply re-raise. He gets lucky and hits a set here, but often enough you will have a guy sitting with KJo or something like that. Everything else goes out the window for the other two, and honestly I am only moderately good at sorting those situations. In particular I see a lot of smooth-call preflop, smooth-call flop, re-raise turn type plays from standard set-whores. Somebody with KK or QQ (or even AK, JJ) is probably going to re-raise preflop so you can probably toss those out of your read, and you are left with either semi-bluff and/or set, probably on the T or the 3. At any rate, you kinda have to understand your opponents tendencies at this point, so making this call is VERY read dependant.

Remember, AA is only an overpair. If you can't manage to bloat the pot pre-flop, or get heads-up with an obvious donk, you probably want to practice some pot-size control and not get over committed. Given these considerations, with calling and betting out the turn, you can probably put your opponent on a set if he bets out big on the river. If you are in position, your turn bet acts as a nice little blocking bet as a set-whore may think you will bet out again and thus let the action fall to you, in which case you can check and collect your winnings or wallow in self pity at losing to pocket 2's.

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

You should read this book: http://www.amazon.ca/Professional-No-Lim...5982&sr=1-1

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

I actually had a situation like this last night. (.25/.50 blinds)

I'm in mid position with 44 (four handed game) and raise 2.25, I get raised 6.5 total. I call because we've both got about $200 stacks at this point and I have a very aggressive image in this game. Flop is 4-3-8 and i lead out $7, I get raised to $22 total. At this point I know the TAG player has QQ/AA/KK and am pretty happy but don't know how to proceed.

I feel that if I re-raise I will give away my hand, but calling likely would also. I ultimately decide to make his $22, $57 and he thinks and flat calls me after a little while (slightly confusing). Turn comes 9 and I bet $100 and he pushes his remaining 25 or so and shows QQ.

IMO it was not that difficult of a fold for him on the flop when i make it $57. It was about the 7th or 8th hour of play and that likely had something to do with the decision. As did my really aggressive image at the game. He's a member of here so maybe he'll see this post and have additional input

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You should read this book: http://www.amazon.ca/Professional-No-Lim...5982&sr=1-1

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You should read this book: http://www.amazon.ca/Professional-No-Lim...5982&sr=1-1

[/ QUOTE ]

While normally a big fan of 2+2 books, I must say I didn't care for this one.

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Somebody with KK or QQ (or even AK, JJ) is probably going to re-raise preflop so you can probably toss those out of your read, and you are left with either semi-bluff and/or set, probably on the T or the 3.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is they might not 3bet with the premium hands or they could be trapping in position, we could never really toss this out of our reads.

[ QUOTE ]
Remember, AA is only an overpair. If you can't manage to bloat the pot pre-flop, or get heads-up with an obvious donk, you probably want to practice some pot-size control and not get over committed. Given these considerations, with calling and betting out the turn, you can probably put your opponent on a set if he bets out big on the river. If you are in position, your turn bet acts as a nice little blocking bet as a set-whore may think you will bet out again and thus let the action fall to you, in which case you can check and collect your winnings or wallow in self pity at losing to pocket 2's.

[/ QUOTE ]

With a 100BB stack size, pot control might not be even possible. Its so easy to get it AI by the river with such sizes. In my given example, we might check the turn for pot control, but if he then makes something like a 3/4PSB again, we'll be likely to call cause 1)our check might seem weak to our opponent who then thinks his TPTK or KK/QQ hand is good and bets out or 2)he might be trying to push us out of the pot. And by the river, we'll be pot committed to call his shove (another 3/4PSB should do it).

I'm starting to think that sets are 1 of those situations where you have to pay your opponents off provided they dont do something stupid. Hope this is not so.

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

One of the key things to remember is what players are giving you credit for. If you slowplayed AA preflop, then they won't give you credit for such a hand. If you re-raised pre and bet the flop and got put all-in, this is a much bigger clue that you are beat.

TAGs are tough so you may or may not get away. You should know a rock is betting a good hand. Against a maniac you can never get away because of the number of times you are beating them.

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

D) passive rock.

You shouldn't go broke against D.

Re: Is it ever possible to avoid getting busted by sets?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Somebody with KK or QQ (or even AK, JJ) is probably going to re-raise preflop so you can probably toss those out of your read, and you are left with either semi-bluff and/or set, probably on the T or the 3.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is they might not 3bet with the premium hands or they could be trapping in position, we could never really toss this out of our reads.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I did use the qualifier "probably". And still yet, trying to trap with less than KK is pretty dangerous in itself, but sure, this could be the case. I just think it is less likely, at least depending on the stakes in question (again I only play $50nl now).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Remember, AA is only an overpair. If you can't manage to bloat the pot pre-flop, or get heads-up with an obvious donk, you probably want to practice some pot-size control and not get over committed. Given these considerations, with calling and betting out the turn, you can probably put your opponent on a set if he bets out big on the river. If you are in position, your turn bet acts as a nice little blocking bet as a set-whore may think you will bet out again and thus let the action fall to you, in which case you can check and collect your winnings or wallow in self pity at losing to pocket 2's.

[/ QUOTE ]

With a 100BB stack size, pot control might not be even possible. Its so easy to get it AI by the river with such sizes. In my given example, we might check the turn for pot control, but if he then makes something like a 3/4PSB again, we'll be likely to call cause 1)our check might seem weak to our opponent who then thinks his TPTK or KK/QQ hand is good and bets out or 2)he might be trying to push us out of the pot. And by the river, we'll be pot committed to call his shove (another 3/4PSB should do it).

I'm starting to think that sets are 1 of those situations where you have to pay your opponents off provided they dont do something stupid. Hope this is not so.

[/ QUOTE ]

All valid points, so it really reduces to reads, and that is difficult. Truth be told I have lost my stack enough times to say that sometimes you really do have to pay your opponent off.