playing a set

[d-nice]

just wondering what u guys think the best way to play a set is. do u lead out, check-raise, slow play. does it change if there is 2 to a suit or even three, or 2 or 3 to a straight.

[Lego05]

Way too board, villian, and position dependent to give a generic answer.

[lippy]

[ QUOTE ]
Way too board, villian, and position dependent to give a generic answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

[UtzChips]

I recommend Lee Jones' Winning Low Limit Hold Em & Gary Carson's Hold Em Poker books, along with Lou Krieger's More Hold EM Excellence. 10,000 hands of limit at .25/.50 and then Sklansky's Theory of Poker & Yao's Weighing the Odds in Hold Em somewhere in the middle of those 10k hands.
A bankroll of $250.00 should keep you from going broke if you're good enough to squeeze out a profit.

[Matt G]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Way too board, villian, and position dependent to give a generic answer.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[tarheeljks]

this question is far too broad. the way sets are played is very dependent on board texture as well as player reads.

[filsteal]

If you insist on playing your sets the same way all the time, then I guess the best choice is to always bet out.

But, in case you hadn't noticed from the other replies, playing your sets the same way all the time sucks major anus.

[Phone Booth]

[ QUOTE ]
just wondering what u guys think the best way to play a set is. do u lead out, check-raise, slow play. does it change if there is 2 to a suit or even three, or 2 or 3 to a straight.

[/ QUOTE ]

I say "set" then take the three cards and add them to my pile.

[Poker Plan]

If in doubt, try to take the pot down asap (Limit). The amount of times I have slow played a set and given free-cards (and then been beaten) is obscene. And it hurts twice as bad knowing you had by-far the best hand on the flop.

[rubberloon]

Unless you think someone else has a better hand raise. Three of a kind ain't a surefire win, but it has a good chance. Don't fool around raise on the flop!