200nl: set with bad turn card

[As armas]

I dont understand the turn bet 60 idea. If he has a diamond with his probable PP, were giving him ~3 to 1 on the call when he is ~4 to 1 to hit. Most villains would gladly take those odds we gave them instead of considering a fancy bluff raise. We did take a strong line here by checkraising and continuing to fire. And when that diamond does peel off are we gonna fold to a smallish bet with 240 out there? I think you need to bet enough that its a mistake for him to chase even if he hits and we pay off on river....

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
calling oop with small pp's is a leak HU [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


Not if you flop a set.

[chiTown22]

[ QUOTE ]

You hit a set 1 out of every 8.5 times, and your implied odds are outstanding in those situations with full stacks. You don't have to stack Villain every time, you can usually get a bet or two out of him. The other ways to win w 55 are just a little added bonus.

[/ QUOTE ]
In a standard situation it will cost you 3 B-Blinds to call, and so to break even you would need to win 25 BB each time you hit a set to break even on this play.

This is the point I was making in my first post. The guys range here is too large to put him on a hand big enough to consistantly pay you off when you hit your set. When you call out of the blinds with a hand like 55 you will need to consistantly win a 50 BB pot when you hit your set, that is $100 at 1/2.

Think about a standard opening range. KT+, 22+, QJ, A2s+, etc. You need to hit your set and have the other guy hit the flop hard enough to pay you off, this simply doesn't happen often enough to make the play +EV.

I do not think you are getting the implied odds. I believe over estimating the implied odds of a small pair preflop is a come leak.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You hit a set 1 out of every 8.5 times, and your implied odds are outstanding in those situations with full stacks. You don't have to stack Villain every time, you can usually get a bet or two out of him. The other ways to win w 55 are just a little added bonus.

[/ QUOTE ]
In a standard situation it will cost you 3 B-Blinds to call, and so to break even you would need to win 25 BB each time you hit a set to break even on this play.

This is the point I was making in my first post. The guys range here is too large to put him on a hand big enough to consistantly pay you off when you hit your set. When you call out of the blinds with a hand like 55 you will need to consistantly win a 50 BB pot when you hit your set, that is $100 at 1/2.

Think about a standard opening range. KT+, 22+, QJ, A2s+, etc. You need to hit your set and have the other guy hit the flop hard enough to pay you off, this simply doesn't happen often enough to make the play +EV.

I do not think you are getting the implied odds. I believe over estimating the implied odds of a small pair preflop is a come leak.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then 3-bet it instead. Or pick off a c-bet. Or float. You hit a set by the river 1/5 times when you can get there.

[chiTown22]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You hit a set 1 out of every 8.5 times, and your implied odds are outstanding in those situations with full stacks. You don't have to stack Villain every time, you can usually get a bet or two out of him. The other ways to win w 55 are just a little added bonus.

[/ QUOTE ]
In a standard situation it will cost you 3 B-Blinds to call, and so to break even you would need to win 25 BB each time you hit a set to break even on this play.

This is the point I was making in my first post. The guys range here is too large to put him on a hand big enough to consistantly pay you off when you hit your set. When you call out of the blinds with a hand like 55 you will need to consistantly win a 50 BB pot when you hit your set, that is $100 at 1/2.

Think about a standard opening range. KT+, 22+, QJ, A2s+, etc. You need to hit your set and have the other guy hit the flop hard enough to pay you off, this simply doesn't happen often enough to make the play +EV.

I do not think you are getting the implied odds. I believe over estimating the implied odds of a small pair preflop is a come leak.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then 3-bet it instead.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes 3bet or fold > call. IMO. I would just fold pairs < 77 most of the time.

[Some9]

when calling OOP with a small pair vs a wide range then you obv have win some pots w/o a set.

c/c safe flops, lead some dangerous flops, c/r some K high flops, rep some draws.. etc

[chiTown22]

[ QUOTE ]
when calling OOP with a small pair vs a wide range then you obv have win some pots w/o a set.

c/c safe flops, lead some dangerous flops, c/r some K high flops, rep some draws.. etc

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, and that is why I believe folding preflop is a good option a large % of the time. Putting yourself in a marginal situation like this is simply unnecessary at SSNL and overall -EV for most players.

[terp]

flop c/r is fine, i like to deviate from the standard 3x thing, but here you're gonna need three streets to get the bling in unless you go exorbitantly big on the flop or turn.

bet/call or bet and shove basically all non-diamond rivers.

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
when calling OOP with a small pair vs a wide range then you obv have win some pots w/o a set.

c/c safe flops, lead some dangerous flops, c/r some K high flops, rep some draws.. etc

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, and that is why I believe folding preflop is a good option a large % of the time. Putting yourself in a marginal situation like this is simply unnecessary at SSNL and overall -EV for most players.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, I thought about this more, and have to admit you are right for the truly crappy pairs. I've folded 22 and 33 to button raises without much thought, just because you are on the ass-end of everything (set over set, strong draws, getting counterfeited). But even 55 I think is worth a call in most cases.

[orange]

bet and call