Set over set

[AlexB182]

You have to try to see those things independent from their results. Of course you'll lose in set over set situations every now and then but in general and in the long term, playing for stacks in these situations is +EV.

[Mike Kelley]

our odds of hitting a set

1/7.5 our neighbors odds of hitting a set 1/7.5. So, my estimate is that set over set should occur about 1 in 56.25 times you get one? I know the math could be taken to a much higher level, but is this completely wrong from a statistics stand point? I need to ask this in the probabilities section and see what those booger eaters say.

[justscott]

Google is your friend.

http://www.math.sfu.ca/~alspach/mag86/

[Sounded Simple]

Isnt it something like

For Middle Set:
"1/17 (their odds of PP)" x "1/49 (They can hit 1 of 49 cards on the flop)" x "No. Of opponents"
Or - 1/833

For Bottom Set:
"1/17 (their odds of PP)" x "2/49 (They can hit 2 of 49 cards on the flop)" x "No. Of opponents"
Or - 1/416.5

Can anyone confirm?

[Sounded Simple]

Thinking about it the above wrong unless you assume that your opponent has seen the flop with a random hand. You need to use what % of his Preflop Range are PP.

Therefore it should be -

For Middle Set:
"No. of times they have a Higher PP/All other hands in their range" x "1/49 (They can hit 1 of 49 cards on the flop)"

For Bottom Set:
"No. of times they have a Higher PP/All other hands in their range" x "2/49 (They can hit 2 of 49 cards on the flop)"



Bottom line - not often enough to worry about unless you have an insane read.

[Mike Kelley]

[ QUOTE ]
Google is your friend.

http://www.math.sfu.ca/~alspach/mag86/

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the link. I'll look over that tonight. From scanning it's pretty freaking rare, even more so than I stated.

[Cry Me A River]

Generally speaking you should be worried about set over set very rarely. And folding in these types of situations is going to cost you money in the long run - Over the long haul, you loose more potential money folding the best hand than you loose the rare time you're smoked.

The one time to be worried about set over set is when you have bottom set after a PFR and a set miner suddenly comes alive.

For example, you have 22 in LP. A fishy with a PFR of 2.0 who can't fold overpairs raises EP. A set miner calls. You call as well. Flop is T52 rainbow.

Fishy cbets and everybody at the table knows he has QQ+. Set miner in front of you raises. There are no real draws on that board and no 2pair hands. Set miner has TT or 55 virtually always.

If you had 55, then you would need to get it in. You're going to win this hand 50% of the time and there's enough money already in the pot to give you a nice overlay. Don't be afraid of TT when you are beating 22 here.

The only other time I ever worry about set over set is against TAG or weak tight opponents who don't generally want to play for stacks without monsters who then make it clear they DO want to play for stacks. However, these situations often include enough draws, 2pair and bluffing possibilities that even though your spidey-sense might be screaming, you can't usually get away.

One thing you need to realize about poker... If you're never getting stacked it means you're playing badly. It means you're leaving money on the table and you're too passive.

Obviously you want to win more stacks than you loose, but if you wait for only when you have the nuts to get it all in there you're going to have a miserable time at this game.

[Kos13]

In general, folding sets is ridiculously -EV. There are a few very rare instances where you can get away from them, but other than that, I cream my pants when I have a set and someone wants to play for stacks.

[Ctrl.Dominate]

Never in a raised pot. The hand you posted would always get it in if I had it. In a limped pot with bottom set on a 348 I could possibly see a fold.

[seki]

[ QUOTE ]
Some great bluffs could be made with infinite stacks. I think with 100bb stacks it's hard to go wrong because so many people will play 2 pair and top pair like it's a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I had infinite stack, I'd obviously never fold because I have infinite money. Then again I probably wouldn't think poker had a point, either.

It does bring up an interesting/pointless question about what size stacks it would take to fold 2nd/3rd set on a given board.