Small PP - two preflop questions. - Page 3

Jaran · #21 01-19-2007, 11:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. OK. Im asking the experts now (in hope they are gonna reply): Why is hand nr. 1 not a fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummmm...did you read teh thread?

-Jaran

unterfish · #22 01-19-2007, 11:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]

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.

[/ QUOTE ]
Really? Why?
Thats probably a leak by me.
But is the situation much different when you cold-call 55 PF?
Dont get me wrong. I like to play PPs, but I think sometimes theres a time to foldem.
And btw: What is the big difference between 77s and 55s (for instance) in this situation?

unterfish · #23 01-19-2007, 11:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. OK. Im asking the experts now (in hope they are gonna reply): Why is hand nr. 1 not a fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummmm...did you read teh thread?

-Jaran

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I didnt. But now I have. See the post before [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

cold_cash · #24 01-20-2007, 01:13 AM

There's no real difference between 5's and 7's in the first hand. The reason you call there is because the SB will often times puke chips all over you when you flop good.

There's also a possibility of getting the other guy to make a mistake and fold a 6-outer somewhere along the way, leaving you headsup with position against a maniacal opponent in a big pot.

unterfish · #25 01-20-2007, 02:00 AM

Ok. Youre advocating that there is no difference between 7s and 5s.
So, the only reason why someone is calling this is the fact that villain is a maniac?
Do I see this right?

Brain · #26 01-20-2007, 02:26 AM

I'm probably calling hand 1 vs. a maniac. Pretty easy to play postflop.

Hand 2 is a definite call and it is very east to play postflop (no set, no bet).

bravos1 · #27 01-20-2007, 04:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]

So, the only reason why someone is calling this is the fact that villain is a maniac?
Do I see this right?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, not quite..
You have to understand that the implied odds you are getting here when hitting your set will make up for what yu are putting into the pot. As already mentioned, you will need to make up roughly 10SBs for every one you put in. When it is 2 back to you, you essentially need to drag a 20SB (10BB) pot when you do hit. If you call, there will already be 9SBs in the pot. Making up ~5BBs on the remaining 3 streets should be easy to do.

The bonus with having the maniac in the pot, is that he will typically pay you off even more when you hit and is padding the pot.

Aaron W. · #28 01-20-2007, 03:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

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.

[/ QUOTE ]
Really? Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sets can make a lot of money, especially when there is a preflop aggressor. Even more money can be made if there are multiple preflop aggressors.

[ QUOTE ]
But is the situation much different when you cold-call 55 PF?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. The pot is larger preflop, meaning you have less bets to make up postflop.

[ QUOTE ]
Dont get me wrong. I like to play PPs, but I think sometimes theres a time to foldem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but this isn't one of them. Folding in small pairs in EP at a tightish table is a good fold. Folding in LP when there's only one limper to you is usually a good fold (especially if a raise won't knock out the players behind you and villain goes to showdown too often).

[ QUOTE ]
And btw: What is the big difference between 77s and 55s (for instance) in this situation?

[/ QUOTE ]

There's not much of a difference.

rbowens · #29 01-20-2007, 09:27 PM

Both are easy calls. You're easily getting you're implied odds as discussed. I just want to add that with hand no.1, if no card higher than ten comes, i'd check raise to try and force the tag out of the pot and see what happens from there. You don't always need to hit a set to win with pp's, especially heads up or three handed.

unterfish · #30 01-21-2007, 12:13 AM

Ok. Im almost convinced now. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
So what we need is 6.5 BB post-flop, right?
Lets say 7-1 with rake stuff and such.
But: we really need the implied odds. Otherwise, we are screwed. Thats ok by me.
But I think the implied odds calculation is rather slim. It might be positive. But its slim IMO.