set of 44's,
1/3 nl
Two very loose players limp, I over limp in the CO with 4d4h, folded to the BB who raises too 20, limper one calls, limper two folds, I call. I am the effective stack with 400. The BB has been very loose with calls and pre flop raises. His OOP raises did seem to be strong. This has only been an hour worth of play.
(60 in pot}. 4c2dAc....BB checks, limper checks, I bet 45, BB calls, limper folds.
(150 in pot) 4c2dAcQc....BB checks...How do I proceed?
When we're ~nutmining with speculative hands, which we're pretty much doing with non-large pocket pairs in non ~HU pots, we actually want to encourage as many people as possible to see as flop with us. Like literally the best result is a family pot due to (a) awsum immediate odds and (b) that much more of a chance there's at least one idiot in the hand that has hit enough to pay us off for gobs postflop when we bink. So we couldn't really care less about having no showdown value UI. And posit
My challenge to that is the lower our pocket pair, the more likely it becomes that we get coolered, set over set. So I think it's appropriate to play 22-44 more aggressively pre than 55-77, which we'd play a little more aggressively than 88-TT, etc.
Almost every time I've gotten beaten set-over-set, or seen someone beaten that way, it's in a limped or single-raised pot that went multi-way, where one player has 22-44 and played it passively pre-flop.
its horrible if people see through it and 3b you light. im not convinced most 1/3 players see through bet sizes.
if everyone calls though you have tripled the pot size and probably got yourself a 4 card flop with a disguised hand with implied odds to win a bit pot, where if you flop a set and cbet a small-medium size mulitway you will probably get callers from multiple people drawing dead (this wont happen in a limped pot).
that said limping obv fine too, you only hit a set 1/8 times after all. ma
Is this dependent on people not donking in multiway pots?
Where I play, noones waiting to bet if they connected with the flop in any big way in a pot with 4 or more people. You're not getting many free cards you wouldn't get anyway in a limped pot. I also don't think limpers are going to fold to a small preflop bet if theres already so much dead money.
When we're ~nutmining with speculative hands, which we're pretty much doing with non-large pocket pairs in non ~HU pots, we actually want to encourage as many people as possible to see as flop with us. Like literally the best result is a family pot due to (a) awsum immediate odds and (b) that much more of a chance there's at least one idiot in the hand that has hit enough to pay us off for gobs postflop when we bink. So we couldn't really care less about having no showdown value UI. And posit
A set of 4s is not a hand you happily get in an SPR of like 25 OTF in a family pot. Youre viewing it this way because youre playing half as deep, so your SPR is like 13.
My challenge to that is the lower our pocket pair, the more likely it becomes that we get coolered, set over set. So I think it's appropriate to play 22-44 more aggressively pre than 55-77, which we'd play a little more aggressively than 88-TT, etc.
Almost every time I've gotten beaten set-over-set, or seen someone beaten that way, it's in a limped or single-raised pot that went multi-way, where one player has 22-44 and played it passively pre-flop.
Totally agree that small sets can have some nasty RIO, so obviously we have to evaluate their strength as best we can given what happens postflop and act appropriately.
But ramping up the aggression with them preflop (i.e. raising them versus limping them) has zero affect on whether we get over setted since ~no one folds pairs to preflop raises. So all we're actually doing is making it more likely we'll lose our stack in this situation due to dramatically decreasing the SPR.
Gnothatin',justsayin'G
A set of 4s is not a hand you happily get in an SPR of like 25 OTF in a family pot. Youre viewing it this way because youre playing half as deep, so your SPR is like 13.
As I allude to above, setmining is always a two step process. First, make a set. Two, carefully evaluate what that set is worth given the board / runout / action / opponents involved / stacks involved. Sometimes attempting to play for stacks in family SPR 25 pots is clearly best given what happens postflop; other times, folding the flop will be best. Thanks to mostly being in position and hopefully a smidge better at poker than our opponents, we should be able to make some pretty good postflop decisions.
GcluelesssetminingnoobG
Totally agree that small sets can have some nasty RIO, so obviously we have to evaluate their strength as best we can given what happens postflop and act appropriately.
But ramping up the aggression with them preflop (i.e. raising them versus limping them) has zero affect on whether we get over setted since ~no one folds pairs to preflop raises. So all we're actually doing is making it more likely we'll lose our stack in this situation due to dramatically decreasing the SPR.
Gnothatin',justsayin'
It doesn't reduce the absolute frequency that we get set over setted that much (it still does reduce it some because of 3!s), but it reduces the frequency relative to how often stacks go all-in. If you're playing 100bb+ deep unraised family pot, then bottom set ceases to be a clear value hand when you get the final bet in (it's still usually in that 33-50% equity range where you're still often making crying calls with it for the final bet, and obviously there's explo vbetting against bozos).
In a raised HU 100bb pot between players in the LJ and later, essentially any nutted overpair+ has >50% equity by the river on a relatively dry runout when all the chips go in. So you are stacking all of your opponent's chips into your stack with bottom set far more often than they're stacking your chips into theirs in a raised pot.
Raise co dont limp, as played fold pre. Also is he regularly raising to $20? If not, id be at least somewhat suspicious of AA. As played im betting turn small like $40-50, and id do the same if i had the flush or if i was bluffing it.
Limping is fine, and folding getting better than 10/1 is out of the question.
It would be a disaster to get limp - reraised vs aggressive tricky villains, or 3bet and have to play a massive pot when we could of just saw a cheap flop in position vs aggressive villains multiway.
1/3 nl
Two very loose players limp, I over limp in the CO with 4d4h, folded to the BB who raises too 20, limper one calls, limper two folds, I call. I am the effective stack with 400. The BB has been very loose with calls and pre flop raises. His OOP raises did seem to be strong. This has only been an hour worth of play.
(60 in pot}. 4c2dAc....BB checks, limper checks, I bet 45, BB calls, limper folds.
(150 in pot) 4c2dAcQc....BB checks...How do I proceed?
Nice flop bet and sizing - we should have the best hand most of the time.
Turn is tricky - you can go ether way - sets check here sometimes or bet 66% pot. I personally wouldn't mind checking here sometimes vs an aggro who will probably fold everything and we can get him to bluff river or we can boat up the slight chance we are beat. Betting denies equity to random spades but it's going to be hard to get a lot of value unless he has the Kc or Jc - or flushes. I don't see how he can call often in live poker vs a $100 bet with out a really strong hand and we would hate to get check raised.
Totally agree that small sets can have some nasty RIO, so obviously we have to evaluate their strength as best we can given what happens postflop and act appropriately.
But ramping up the aggression with them preflop (i.e. raising them versus limping them) has zero affect on whether we get over setted since ~no one folds pairs to preflop raises. So all we're actually doing is making it more likely we'll lose our stack in this situation due to dramatically decreasing the SPR.
Gnothatin',justsayin'
You make a solid point, as far as it goes - if no one folds PP's pre, we can still get coolered set-over-set.
But raising rather than limping uncaps our range, and allows us to rep a stronger range of hands post-flop. It also helps define our opponents ranges a bit more post-flop. We're printing if we raise our small PP's from LP and anyone behind us folds a better yet still low PP.
You dont raise 44 to avoid getting set over set by 77 on a Q74r board, you raise 44 to win non set 44 under non set 77 on a K82r board.
You dont raise 44 to avoid getting set over set by 77 on a Q74r board, you raise 44 to win non set 44 under non set 77 on a K82r board.
How often are you cbetting that board 5ways? Cuz after "two very loose limpers" in the CO we're going multiway a lot in a typical LLSNL game.
Gnothatin',justsayin'G
I dont go 5 ways because I make it $18-25 here depending on V, and itll go 2 or 3 ways (or itll fold around and ill win $10 outright). I get it HU plenty, 5 ways is a bad result, if i knew for fsct it was gonna go 5 ways id just fold pre, because 44 is a garbage hand to have 5 ways.
if i knew for fsct it was gonna go 5 ways id just fold pre, because 44 is a garbage hand to have 5 ways.
I think this where we have our disagreement in thinking. If you think that you aren't going to be profitable with your skillz advantage against the typical LLSNL lineup in a multiway pot for cheap in position with a speculative hand at a very playable SPR, then I can see why you believe this is a raise or fold spot. It is possible I'm massively deluded, but I'm happily overlimping ~40% of hands here (and experts playing ~ATC in this spot are likely only making a small mistake at worse).
GwillhavetoagreetodisagreeonthisoneG
