85s in BB, the book says fold, I would call

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Easy call in that situation in my opinion. What justification do they give for folding?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably that it was an EP raise, but I'd snapcall here.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think they're probably not that dumb.

[wackjob]

insta call!

[AragornX151]

This is an instacall for those used to no-limit, where the pot odds and potential to get someone's whole stack with shrewd play after the flop makes it a no-brainer for a strong no limit player (honestly, I'm still improving in no limit, so I may get myself in trouble more than I should!).

HOWEVER.

In mid-limit games against the standard opponents, this is -EV. You have to play exceptionally well after the flop to even make it a break-even play.

As the poster above mentioned, the pot odds for 2 pair or a flush are NOT 7-1. That means that you have to win pots where you don't hit one of those two things, coupled with the implied odds. But can you do that regularly? And what about all the times you lose more than the one call, either a small or large amount?

What's going to happen far more often than a shrewd c/r bluff that takes down the pot is that the flop will come 826, and you'll know that these players suck so you'll try to outplay him because "he would be calling with 77 to the river here." Sometimes he'll have 77 but hey, fish get dealt cards too, and more often he won't.

Or you'll bet, get raised, take one off, then fold on the turn. Or you'll flop a gutshot and a backdoor diamond draw, and feel the need to take one off due to pot odds. Playing hands like these, even for "just one more bet," increase your variance dramatically, AND decrease your equity. You'll obviously occasionally pull in some big pots with these calls, but they are not optimal limit strategy in the long run.

Honestly, I'm surprised by the amount of fancy play syndrome and "creative" plays I see the folks in this forum feeling the need to use. In the 10-20 through 20-40 games I've played plenty of in Vegas and AC, I have had to use practically none of them (which is NOT to say I don't find merit in them or aren't capable of using them in tougher games. They are simply wasted here).

The games are so soft that you don't HAVE to play hands like 85s for "image purposes" or the like. The proper strategy in these games is old school tight aggressive. That does NOT mean be a rock, but it means play your strong hands for value, play some speculative hands that can flop the nuts or sets in unraised pots in late position, and do NOT play three-gapped suited connectors out of position just because "it's one more bet to you." I'd rather limp this hand on the button then a call a raise in the BB. Note that the pot will be so big at this point that your "crappy" opponents will be getting good odds to draw to just AK if you hit top pair. So they'll be making what would often be a "bad call" but it's the right one. Is that what you want? Your crappy opponents to play correctly unintentionally?

In my experience, these types of calls too often result in seeing your chips dribble away and go into undeserving fishes stacks.

IMO, poker players are all obsessed with the Gus Hansen/Phil Ivey super-aggressive style, and everyone is trying to use it WITHOUT ACCOUNTING FOR THE SITUATION. In limit games against loose-passive or loose-aggressive opponents, folding with hands like 85s is not "nitty" or "too tight." It's the proper move under the circumstances.

(BTW if you're in a tight game where you can take pots away from your opponents and you play well postflop, discount this. Then there's some merit to a call, though folding is still fine. But you obviously need to mix it up much more in tough games).

[cgrohman]

Sure, but if you have to be able to drop your hand for 0 bets if you hit only so or you feed the reverse implied odds.

[Howard Beale]

I think the proper action depends entirely upon the game conditions. You are going to have to toss that hand most times on the flop. If the game is such that you can expect a lot of action if you hit then I think a call is good. If not, I think it's an easy muck.

[rafiki]

fast track to 3bet town :P

no seriously, I usually base it on who some of the other guys in the hand are. Could they pay me off well on all streets should I fluke it.

[amulet]

you are assuming that the early position raiser needs to hit to win. AK, AQ, AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, there are 32 ways to make AK and AQ, 30 ways to make the big pairs. it is almost even money that he has the big pair. of course there are additional hands that he can raise with. but people often discount the idea of a big pair, they think it is a remote possibility - it's not. this is only part of why the call is a mistake.

see my post above for a more complete description of why calling had a neg ev.

[Clarkmeister]

Who bumped this thread from 2001?

[Hielko]

Your reasoning is wrong. When you hit a flushdraw, twopair+ or a straightdraw (gutshot or better) you can usually play the hand +ev postflop. You are getting 7:1 to call and the probability that you flop one of those hands it probably better than 7:1.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
AK, AQ, AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT,

[/ QUOTE ]

Holy wow at tight preflop ranges. Let's add AJ (16), KQ (16), KJs (4), ATs (4), 99 (6), and quite probably 88 (6).