|
|
#12
10-29-2007, 09:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $27 - bottom set, go broke?
[ QUOTE ]
Calling 4bb pre = never folding set on the flop please [/ QUOTE ] Yes. I still disagree that it's an easy call preflop. Meh, maybe I'm too nitty early, but I just hate seeing multiway flops OOP in a sng. 
|
|
#13
10-29-2007, 09:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $27 - bottom set, go broke?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Calling 4bb pre = never folding set on the flop please [/ QUOTE ] Yes. I still disagree that it's an easy call preflop. Meh, maybe I'm too nitty early, but I just hate seeing multiway flops OOP in a sng. [/ QUOTE ] We get more than good enough odds to play for set value here.
|
|
#14
10-29-2007, 09:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $27 - bottom set, go broke?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Calling 4bb pre = never folding set on the flop please [/ QUOTE ] Yes. I still disagree that it's an easy call preflop. Meh, maybe I'm too nitty early, but I just hate seeing multiway flops OOP in a sng. [/ QUOTE ] We get more than good enough odds to play for set value here. [/ QUOTE ] Only if we assume that our opponents are not as nitty as we are this early, and will go broke with top pair. Obviously we'll stack aces or kings when we hit a set, but that's not happening very often at all. edit: I am probably wrong(ish) about wanting to fold PF, but if the aggressor is a good tight regular for example then I think it might be a better play.
|
|
#15
10-29-2007, 09:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $27 - bottom set, go broke?
We have to call 70 to win possibly 1500+.
What odds/criteria do you need then.
|
|
#16
10-29-2007, 09:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $27 - bottom set, go broke?
BTW does anyone care to see their hands and the result of this hand?
|
|
#17
10-29-2007, 09:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $27 - bottom set, go broke?
[ QUOTE ]
We have to call 70 to win possibly 1500+. What odds/criteria do you need then. [/ QUOTE ] See my edit.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
