Small PP - two preflop questions.

[fretelöo]

I think the first must somehow be correct and the second at least not terribly wrong. But I'm not sure. Therefore --> line check.

Hand 1

Button is TAG (16/12/2), SB is a maniac (26/24/3.5)

PokerStars 0.10/0.20 Hold'em (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">SB 3-bets</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 folds, Hero folds, Button calls.

Yes?

Hand 2

Villain is 69/15/0.5
BB is 52/0/0.2

PokerStars 0.10/0.20 Hold'em (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Preflop: Hero is SB with 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. UTG posts a blind of $0.10.
UTG (poster) checks, UTG+1 calls, <font color="#666666">4 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises</font>, Hero calls, BB calls, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls.

I guess this is somewhat marginal, however with the likelyhood that BB will come along, UTG+1 definitely calling and the option of still getting UTG calling, I was thinking it's ok?

[kerowo]

Hand 1 I'd call because I'm discounting SBs 3-bet.

Hand 2 is close so it probably doesn't matter. Understand there aren't many flops you are going to be putting any money in on though.

[fretelöo]

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1 I'd call because I'm discounting SBs 3-bet.

Hand 2 is close so it probably doesn't matter. Understand there aren't many flops you are going to be putting any money in on though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hand 2: Of course.

Hand 1 though: Does it really matter? As my set-odds are pretty much screwed with only 2 guys and a 3bet pf, I rely a lot on my hand holding it's own without hitting a set. With a maniac and a TAG in the hand, don't I get very much the worst of it (folding the winner if maniac starts raising - showing down the looser when TAG stays until showdown) most of the time?

[kerowo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1 I'd call because I'm discounting SBs 3-bet.

Hand 2 is close so it probably doesn't matter. Understand there aren't many flops you are going to be putting any money in on though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hand 2: Of course.

Hand 1 though: Does it really matter? As my set-odds are pretty much screwed with only 2 guys and a 3bet pf, I rely a lot on my hand holding it's own without hitting a set. With a maniac and a TAG in the hand, don't I get very much the worst of it (folding the winner if maniac starts raising - showing down the looser when TAG stays until showdown) most of the time?

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of this depends on your reads of SB, is he a maniac who has a stuck raise button? Will he fold after he has 3-bet pre-flop? Basically the reason I would call hand 1 is because I know I'm going to get paid off a lot if I hit my set. If SB plays well post flop it isn't as easy a decision. Trying to play this hand for anything but set value is going to be too expensive.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1 I'd call because I'm discounting SBs 3-bet.

Hand 2 is close so it probably doesn't matter. Understand there aren't many flops you are going to be putting any money in on though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hand 2: Of course.

Hand 1 though: Does it really matter? As my set-odds are pretty much screwed with only 2 guys and a 3bet pf, I rely a lot on my hand holding it's own without hitting a set. With a maniac and a TAG in the hand, don't I get very much the worst of it (folding the winner if maniac starts raising - showing down the looser when TAG stays until showdown) most of the time?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your analysis of Hand 1 is bad. You get a lot of money with the best of it when you flop a set. Maniac will easily give you more than enough action to cover you when you miss your set (this is the essence of implied odds). Furthermore, TAG is a little more likely to pay off with a decent hand because of the presence of the maniac.

[Shillx]

Gotta call with sevens against a maniac

[fretelöo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1 I'd call because I'm discounting SBs 3-bet.

Hand 2 is close so it probably doesn't matter. Understand there aren't many flops you are going to be putting any money in on though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hand 2: Of course.

Hand 1 though: Does it really matter? As my set-odds are pretty much screwed with only 2 guys and a 3bet pf, I rely a lot on my hand holding it's own without hitting a set. With a maniac and a TAG in the hand, don't I get very much the worst of it (folding the winner if maniac starts raising - showing down the looser when TAG stays until showdown) most of the time?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your analysis of Hand 1 is bad. You get a lot of money with the best of it when you flop a set. Maniac will easily give you more than enough action to cover you when you miss your set (this is the essence of implied odds). Furthermore, TAG is a little more likely to pay off with a decent hand because of the presence of the maniac.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm roughly 1:10 for hitting a set, right? So, for every SB I put in PF, I need to make roughly 10SB. If it's 3bet pf, I have to make 30SB if I hit. That means a 15BB pot. Against a TAG (who I would assume knows how to fold middle pair against aggression) and a lone maniac, I would think that's not so easy...

That at least is my take on implied odds, applied to this particular situation?

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm roughly 1:10 for hitting a set, right? So, for every SB I put in PF, I need to make roughly 10SB. If it's 3bet pf, I have to make 30SB if I hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've already put in a SB (in this example).

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm roughly 1:10 for hitting a set, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's really about 8.5:1. The 10:1 number is used because sometimes you flop a set and lose, plus it takes into account that there will be money you put into the pot postflop that will inflate the pot size to something larger than what you actually profit. The 10:1 number is a soft number that can be adjusted slightly according to the situation.

[ QUOTE ]
So, for every SB I put in PF, I need to make roughly 10SB. If it's 3bet pf, I have to make 30SB if I hit. That means a 15BB pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have already put 1 SB into the pot and that money doesn't belong to you anymore, so you are looking at putting in 2 SB. That means you are looking for a 10 BB pot on average by the end of the hand. You already expect the pot size to be about 5 BB before there is any postflop action, so you're already half-way there. If TAG flops a pair when he has AK/AQ/KQ, you'll probably get decent action out of him. If he has an overpair to the board and you flop a set, you'll get good action. If maniac flops a piece, you'll get loads of action.

In general, it's rare to find a situation where it's right to fold a pocket pair after putting money into the pot. The only case where I would even consider it is if I limp and it comes back capped, or if I limp and it comes back for 3 bets against players who play very conservatively postflop.

[davelin]

Nope.
Yup.