Top Set Mining (TSM)

[Knight Vision]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Money, I finally hit.

Hold'em No Limit ($0.25/$0.50) - 2007/05/10

Seat 2: seat2
Seat 3: seat3 ($54.75)
Seat 4: seat4
Seat 5: TopSetMiner($35.15)
Seat 6: seat6
Seat 7: seat7
Seat 8: seat8
Seat 9: seat9

seat2: posts small blind $0.25
seat3: posts big blind $0.50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to TopSetMiner [6h 6d]
seat4: folds
TopSetMiner: calls $0.50
seat6: folds
seat7: folds
seat8: folds
seat9: folds
seat2: calls $0.25
seat3: checks
*** FLOP *** [2c 2d 6c]
seat2: checks
seat3: checks
TopSetMiner: checks
*** TURN *** [2c 2d 6c] [Jc]
seat2: checks
seat3: bets $1
TopSetMiner: raises $2 to $3
seat2: folds
seat3: raises $2 to $5
TopSetMiner: raises $10 to $15
Seat3: calls $10
*** RIVER *** [2c 2d 6c Jc] [5d]
Seat3: bets $39.25 and is all-in
TopSetMiner: calls $19.65 and is all-in
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Seat3: shows [4c 3c] (a flush, Jack high)
TopSetMiner: shows [6h 6d] (a full house, Sixes full of Deuces)
TopSetMiner collected $67.80 from pot

[/ QUOTE ]

You mis-apply. Fish.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is an interesting hand to look at more closely.

I think a call is incorrect here but close. It's $20 to win $50 so you are getting 2.5 to 1 on your money. Let's look at the villain's range for pushing the river:

{22, JJ, 34}

So you lose to 66% of them. This makes the call mathematically incorrect. But ... I read in a book that there is always like a 10% chance that the villain is bluffing, so you have to factor that in.

It's easy to say "call" after seeing the results, but that's just being results oriented IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually it's not even that close. Hero shouldn't have gone to the river. He has, what, 1 out our something? And who knows which other player on the table might have already mucked the 6s, nobody chatted. Hero has to fold to the min 4-bet on the turn. That's a gut shot draw like never. Only 22 or JJ make that action in teh Limitless poker game. After Hero's ecspert min-raise Villain knows he's WA/WB.

Hero got soooooooooo lucky here. I fold to that min 4-bet like always. Save 4BBs please. k thx.

[e_phemeral]

[ QUOTE ]
Drawing to quads is just a recipe for disaster.

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread is gold. I LOL'd.

[HBomb]

22, 33: Dump this like 98% of the time - you will never have Top Set with this hand. Sometimes call for quad value if you are deep enough. There is always a chance that villain might draw to overquads, but that's just a standard cooler if it happens - you can't worry about overquads when you have quads.




I like this line

[a breath of air]

A+ would read again.

[californicator]

i invented TOP SET MINING back in 03' at pacific. this is standard

[Novles]

"66: Play it carefully on a 236 board. Hope the board pair or villain could have 45 and stack you. Board pairing is a hidden blessing - what if villain just got quads? The 4th 6 is the gin card we are looking for. Blocker bet all the way down and unless another 6 hits, just check/call river. If you hit quads, value bet."

hahah, awesome

[rakemeplz]

[ QUOTE ]
Lol this theory sucks worse than Kevin Federline.. As this is BBV I wont get into why, suffice it to say anyone who is slow-witted enough to be coached by you gets what they deserve

[/ QUOTE ]

Federline is awesome dude. OP is tl/dr.

[Twoool]

[ QUOTE ]
This is an interesting hand to look at more closely.

I think a call is incorrect here but close. It's $20 to win $50 so you are getting 2.5 to 1 on your money. Let's look at the villain's range for pushing the river:

{22, JJ, 34}

So you lose to 66% of them. This makes the call mathematically incorrect. But ... I read in a book that there is always like a 10% chance that the villain is bluffing, so you have to factor that in.

It's easy to say "call" after seeing the results, but that's just being results oriented IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, after looking at this hand, I can see how lucky I was. The dreaded overquads!

[SteamingFish]

One of my biggest leaks is playing underquads out of position in a multiway pot. What I started doing is min-check-raising the button, hopefully getting the pot heads-up and also putting in the minimum when I'm behind. I then make a smallish blocking bet on the next card. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I'll post results when I get a bigger sample size.

[Twoool]

Yeah baby, yeah!

I sure was getting tired of laying down bottom set. Finally, my patience paid off.

Hold'em No Limit ($0.25/$0.50) - 2007/05/11

Seat 1: Seat1 ($67.50 in chips)
Seat 3: Seat3 ($56.35 in chips)
Seat 4: Seat4 ($28 in chips)
Seat 5: Seat5 ($26.90 in chips)
Seat 6: TopSetMiner ($84.15 in chips)
TopSetMiner: posts small blind $0.25
Seat1: posts big blind $0.50

*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to TopSetMiner [Qh Qd]
Seat3: raises $1.50 to $2
seat4: folds
seat5: folds
TopSetMiner: raises $4 to $6
Seat1: calls $5.50
Seat3: raises $12 to $18
TopSetMiner: calls $12
Seat1: folds
*** FLOP *** [9h Qs 2c]
TopSetMiner: checks
Seat3: bets $18
TopSetMiner: raises $48.15 to $66.15 and is all-in
Seat3: calls $20.35 and is all-in
*** TURN *** [9h Qs 2c] [4d]
*** RIVER *** [9h Qs 2c 4d] [Kd]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
TopSetMiner: shows [Qh Qd] (three of a kind, Queens)
Seat3: mucks hand
TopSetMiner collected $116.70 from pot

I'm proud of how I got it all in before I could get hit with quads or an overset.