Venetian 5-10 Deep Set - Page 6

TrueBritt · #51 09-02-2007, 03:56 PM

So, no other deep-stack players think I should have just smooth-called his initial bet, on the theory that it's a marginal situation, so I should keep the pot small?

Parlay Slow · #52 09-02-2007, 04:03 PM

i would also raise, but prob woulda raised a little less under the assumption that it would allow me to get action from a wider range

mikech · #53 09-02-2007, 04:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i would not be shocked - in the slightest - to see villain flip over AA here.

[/ QUOTE ]
oh c'mon. op said he had no particular reads on villain, he didn't say he had a specific read that villain was braindead.

[ QUOTE ]
people do [censored] stupid stuff, it's why deep is awesome, and it's why you cant ever fold here.

[/ QUOTE ]
tbh, i usually call here anyway, simply because i have pretty much never folded a set on the flop, but i think that's a leak. sure, occasionally he turns over some retarded crap, but i'm convinced that this is NOT a profitable call.

TrueBritt · #54 09-02-2007, 04:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i would not be shocked - in the slightest - to see villain flip over AA here.

[/ QUOTE ]
oh c'mon. op said he had no particular reads on villain, he didn't say he had a specific read that villain was braindead.

[ QUOTE ]
people do [censored] stupid stuff, it's why deep is awesome, and it's why you cant ever fold here.

[/ QUOTE ]
tbh, i usually call here anyway, simply because i have pretty much never folded a set on the flop, but i think that's a leak. sure, occasionally he turns over some retarded crap, but i'm convinced that this is NOT a profitable call.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you don't think he would do this with a set? Because if his range is 86s,44,77 then it is profitable. And if he does occassionally turn over something retarded, then it is even more profitable.

Edit:
As you say, if we add 86o or 63s to his range, then it is slightly unprofitable. I'm just not sure that these are more reasonable holdings than, say, 75s.