33 UTG preflop

[Guy McSucker]

Party 3/6, full table.

I have 33 UTG. The table has been kind of loose/passive preflop, with typically five to the flop for one bet.

This being the case, I limp.

Question 1) Would you do the same? Or is 33 sufficiently fragile that the danger that this hand is the one where nobody else comes in, or where it gets raised and rereaised, is enough to sway you to folding?

I'm assuming nobody wants to raise here. Correct me if I'm wrong. Back to the hand.

Two more players limp, the CO spoils my fun by raising, Button and SB fold, and the BB makes it even worse by three-betting.

This is the first time I've seena preflop 3-bet at this table so I have no idea how the limpers behind me will react, or how likely the CO is to cap.

Question 2) What should I do here?

Guy.

[Haupt_234]

Your limp is fine given the description of the table.

After it is raised and reraised behind you, it is an easy fold, even at an aggressive table. The only raise I would call here would be a single one.

Haupt_234

[sthief09]

1. easy limp with 33 UTG
2. with an easily dominated hand, like AJo, you should muck here. but a hand that thrives on implied odds, like 33, is worth a call here. if you spike a set, you'll win a lot of bets in postflop.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
After it is raised and reraised behind you, it is an easy fold.

[/ QUOTE ]


nooooooo way man. it's time to spike a set and win a monster. he's sandwiched in between both preflop raisers and he can take them both for a ride.

[jt1]

Pretty simple: This is $3-6 so will you win $48 if you hit? Might you win $72? If you definitely will win $48 and might win $72 then you must call.

[Ralph Wiggum]

[ QUOTE ]
a hand that thrives on implied odds, like 33, is worth a call here. if you spike a set, you'll win a lot of bets in postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a close one for me. If the other limpers weren't there, I'd muck it. But with two other limpers and also 2 PFRers in EP & LP (potential to trap a lot of bets), I'd have to think about calling. However, if it gets capped then I don't know that I can make up all those bets postflop.

[Aces McGee]

If it gets capped behind you, you only have to make up one "extra" SB than you would if you simply called two more and there was no cap. It's really no big deal.

-McGee

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
If it gets capped behind you, you only have to make up one "extra" SB than you would if you simply called two more and there was no cap. It's really no big deal.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

technically you'd have to make up 7.5-(# of other players in the pot). you technically need 7.5 SB for every SB you put into the pot preflop. basically this is the formula:

# of SB's you need to win postflop = (# of SB's you put in preflop)*(7.5-# of players in the pot)

if it gets capped 5 ways, you need to make up 4*(7.5-5) = 10 SB postflop, or in other words, the pot will have to be 15 BB to get set value.

but that's not considering that sets can and do get cracked.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If it gets capped behind you, you only have to make up one "extra" SB than you would if you simply called two more and there was no cap. It's really no big deal.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

technically you'd have to make up 7.5-(# of other players in the pot). you technically need 7.5 SB for every SB you put into the pot preflop. basically this is the formula:

# of SB's you need to win postflop = (# of SB's you put in preflop)*(7.5-# of players in the pot)

if it gets capped 5 ways, you need to make up 4*(7.5-5) = 10 SB postflop, or in other words, the pot will have to be 15 BB to get set value.

but that's not considering that sets can and do get cracked.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is right, and I get the feeling that it is, then I have just made a pretty bad post in response to Ralph.

Sorry Ralphie. I have no idea why my understanding of pot odds malfunctions once multiple bets are involved.

-McGee

[Ralph Wiggum]

[ QUOTE ]
If this is right, and I get the feeling that it is, then I have just made a pretty bad post in response to Ralph.

Sorry Ralphie. I have no idea why my understanding of pot odds malfunctions once multiple bets are involved.


[/ QUOTE ]
Leave the bad/incorrect post responses to me. I would use a number like 10.5 instead of the 7.5 that sthief09 used to account for the heavy losses you'll take when your set loses. I don't use his formula either. I just take how many bets I put in PF (4SB) and multiply that by 10.5 = 42SB or 21BB. With 10BB in the pot, I need to make up another 11BB. My numbers may be more conservative than some other people's.

[sthief09]

actually, technically, my post just has to do with hindsight. you HAD to call 4 SB, so you NEED to make x SB postflop.

now let's say you've put in 2 SB, and so have 2 other people, but one guy 3-bet, and one guy capped. let's take 2 scenarios:

1. everyone's going to call- the pot will be 20 SB. you're investing 2 SB, so you get 18-2, which is more than set value, so it's a simple call.

2. the other two will fold- the pot will be 16 SB. you have to put in 2 SB. you're getting 8-1, which again, is better than set value

once you call one bet with a pair, it's rarely correct to fold. the pot has grown so large, that, while your first call has turned around and bit you in the ass, you can still make the best of what's left.

think of it this way. you limp and it gets raised behind you. you're angry. that SB you put in now has a negative expectation. that's a sunk cost. it's gone, and has been divided up among the players by their equity. but now you are faced with having to put more bets in. since the pot has grown so large, these new 2 SB now have a POSITIVE expectation. basically, you're making the most of a shitty situation. often, when you win, your first call will still turn out to have been -EV, but your additional calls will be +EV. often, the -EV of the first call will outweigh the +EV in the additional calls, meaning it was a "bad" limp to begin with, but you can't take the limp back.

it's a lot like in craps. your first bet on the pass line is -EV. but you can keep betting on the come line at even odds. so if you add these "good" (technically neutral, but let's call them good for the sake of the analogy) to the one bad bet, overall, it wasn't such a bad move. you shouldn't have placed the first bet to begin with, because it was -EV, but that's a sunk cost, so yuo have to make the best of the situation by betting on the come line.

[sthief09]

the reason we say that you need 7.5 is because when you flop a set, your pot equity is so enormous that a good part of every bet that enters the pot belongs to you.

mathematically you could say that, if you win 80% of the time you flop a set, then you win 80% of the final pot the times you flop a set. so you'd need to win about 25% more than I said you'd need to. I said you needed to win 10 SB postflop. since you'll only win about 80% of the pot, you actually need it to be 12.5 SB postflop.

[Aces McGee]

So is this concept of "making it up postflop" valid?

I mean, I've thought all along that after calling one bet with a pocket pair preflop, it is most often correct to call further ones, due to the odds you are getting from the pot. So when people talk about "making it up postflop," what are they saying?

I know I've been around too long to be asking these questions, but I'm a little stumped by this.

-McGee

[sthief09]

ok, let me try again, because my other post was probably just a mess of words.

Assumptions:
- you have a pair
- you will spike a set 2 out of every 17 hands
- if you spike a set, you'll win 80% (this is my rough estimate. it could be way off) of the final pot

so this is the formula of what you have to "make up" postflop (note that it'll only work if you're getting worse than 9.375-1 on a call):

# of SB you need to make up = (7.5*1.25 - # of SB you project will be in the pot going into the flop/SB you'll have to pay)(# of SB you have to pay), or to simplify it:

# of SB you need to make up = (9.375)(# of SB you'll have to pay)-(projected size of the pot preflop)

so let's say you're in a position where you anticipate having to call 2 SB preflop, and the pot will be 12 SB going into the flop if you call. you're getting 10-2. now plug that into our handy formula:

(9.375)(2)-(10) = 8.75, so you need to win 8.75 SB postflop to make the call.

so let's see how it varies, given the same 5-1 pot odds for different amounts you have to put in preflop:

5 bet pot, you have to put in 1 bet: 4.375
10 bet pot, you have to put in 2 bets: 8.75
15 bet pot, you have to put in 3 bets: 13.125
20 bet pot, you have to put in 4 bets: 17.5

how about just limping in?
3 bet pot, you have to put in .5 bet (small blind): 1.6875
3 bet pot, you have to put in 1 bet: 6.375
4 bet pot, you have to put in 1 bet: 5.375
6 bet pot, you have to put in 1 bet: 3.375

now let's say there are 6 limpers to you and you raise on the button with a small pair. how many bets do you have to make up for raising rather than limping (assume SB completes for no raise, folds for raise, but BB calls raise)?

8 bet pot, you have to put in 1 bet: 1.375
14.5 bet pot, you have to put in 2 bets: 4.25

so by raising, you attach players to their hands and only have to make up an extra 3 SB postflop. interesting stuff.

lastly, let's take Hero's situation. 2 or 3 SB to call, and either the pot will be 13 SB + his 2, or 17 + his 3

13 bet pot, you have to put in 2 bets: 5.75
17 bet pot, you have to put in 3 bets: 11.125 (still not even that much in a big pot with a 3-bettor and a capper)

[SA125]

First scenario you descibe is perfect spot to limp. Calling a 3 bet and cap will narrow the field considerably. I fold it here.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
1. easy limp with 33 UTG
2. with an easily dominated hand, like AJo, you should muck here. but a hand that thrives on implied odds, like 33, is worth a call here. if you spike a set, you'll win a lot of bets in postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, what he said.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
First scenario you descibe is perfect spot to limp. Calling a 3 bet and cap will narrow the field considerably. I fold it here.

[/ QUOTE ]

read the rest of the thread.

[Aces McGee]

Mathematical formulas aren't my thing, so I can't check your work or anything, but I get the idea of what you're saying. It's along the lines of what I've always thought. I just got mixed up with my language. Hard to believe I'm a writer, huh?

-McGee

[Ralph Wiggum]

If I was playing and I saw the other two limpers grab $6 in chips to throw in, then I'd call also. But there's no guarantee that that the other two limpers will also call two. I don't see this as an easy call.

[sthief09]

say one of the two limpers folds:

11 bet pot, you have to put in 2 bets: 7.75 SB
15 bet pot, you have to put in 3 bets: 13.125 SB

in between 2 preflop raisers. it's not hard to do. and we haven't even discussed the chances that you catch a straight (4*4*4*4*4*46)/C(50,5) = .022, so another 2% of the time you'll make a straight. if you flop a gut, you're not going anywhere with 6 clean outs, so that improves the situation even more.

and besides, how often do limpers fold? very rarely in low limits.

[Joe Tall]

Stheif rocks this thread, great posts.

So what happens to you at the NYC game? (Stheif09+sfer)*BottlesOf = LAG?

You limp is fine, calling 2-cold coming back is correct. You find more than enough postflop than what your lacking preflop by making this call in a big family pot.

Peace,
Joe Tall

[sthief09]

So what happens to you at the NYC game? (Stheif09+sfer)*BottlesOf = LAG?

Dave tends to bring out the worst in me. it's 5/10 now and not 3/6 anymore, so I have to actually try to play well /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[MAxx]

Honestly- I have been limping and calling 2 cold, but I would fold to a cap. Now I got to rethink this, Sthief... do you know of any related threads?

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly- I have been limping and calling 2 cold, but I would fold to a cap. Now I got to rethink this, Sthief... do you know of any related threads?

[/ QUOTE ]

there's a sentence in SSH about it somewhere.

folding to a cap might be right against a lot of passive players, who will underplay AA or KK. but worst case scenario in this example, you need around 6 bb from them, or 3 BB from each. basically that means 2 SB on the flop and 1 BB on the turn and river. that's not a lot to ask at all.

[StellarWind]

This is a case where I would almost welcome a cap. Right now you may not be the only player who is regretting his preflop play. Cutoff may have been caught with his hand in the cookie jar with something like AJ. In that case you are sitting in a very bad position with respect to the primary PFR and your implied odds for your set will not live up to your dreams.

On the other hand, if Cutoff caps then it looks like a fight to the finish and you clean up.

Let's analyze the no-cap situation. I'll guess that one limper will call on average. Your pot odds are 11.3-2.

You will flop a set 1/8.5 of the time. The PFRs will often have pocket pairs and usually see all five cards when they do. The set-over-set risk is high here and I estimate you will get your set cracked 20% of the time at a cost of 5 BB postflop. You need to win an extra 5/4 BB (2.5 SB) postflop when you win to pay this bill.

Your chances of winning are 1/8.5 * 4/5 which is about 9.5-1. Because you risked 2 SB with your preflop call, you need to win 19 SB + 2.5 SB to breakeven. 21.5 SB - 11.3 SB = 10.2 SB = 5 BB postflop. Probably somewhat optimistic. Don't forget all the times *you* were the PFR and groaned when you flopped overcards or an underpair. Big action for your set is not guarenteed.

This calculation seems close. This decision doesn't matter very much but I would be inclined to fold. We are sitting in the wrong chair compared to BB and it will probably cost us.

[MAxx]

thanks man, I started SSH the otherday and I will look out for that sentence or two. Interesting post. I really want to try and digest what your formula means. I just wonder about how we come up with 7.5 etc. You explained things real well... I just gotta digest it.

[BigEndian]

Sanity check.

Do not mistake the advice of a correct call for 2 more bets coming back around for it being acceptable to call 3 cold with a small pair. It's very easy to cross that line, I see players do it all the time.

The #1 focus in your mind is that you MUST be able to make ~8-1 on the money you get in up front to make taking a shot at flopping a set correct. Sometimes you get busted but must continue due to the new odds the pot is laying you. But only on rare crazy tables is coming on for 3-bets cold correct.

If you folded the the 3-bet up front here it's not that big a deal really. To feel really good about it, you should be reasonably certain the other players are coming along as well. 3-ways is a very tough scenario to make back your 8-1 on.

Also, when you get done with these hands that you do spike sets on, look back and see what your take on the pot was (not the actual pot, only their money) vs. the money you had in up front.

- Jim

[mikeyvegas]

I guess this is why some say that pocket pairs have such great value in loose-low limt games! I thought most people already knew this stuff, but I guess not. Great post.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
in between 2 preflop raisers. it's not hard to do. and we haven't even discussed the chances that you catch a straight (4*4*4*4*4*46)/C(50,5) = .022, so another 2% of the time you'll make a straight. if you flop a gut, you're not going anywhere with 6 clean outs, so that improves the situation even more.

[/ QUOTE ]
Chance of flopping OESD (654, 542) = 0.65%
Chance of flopping gutshot (8 ways) = 2.6%

The OESD+PP is a good hand but has less than half the EV of a flopped set for 654; it is even less for 542 because the ace outs are tainted.

The gutshot+PP will probably be charged 2 SB to see the turn on average. With only six outs the hand is approaching the pot odds limit. That means the EV of the hand is approaching zero on the flop. You will keep playing but there is little in it. On average you will not recover the full 2 SB you invested in the preflop coldcall.

The moral is the straight chances of this hand make very little difference in evaluating the preflop decision. Some players (I'm not saying you!) make the mistake of evaluating preflop decisions on the assumption that flopping a draw has the same value as flopping a made hand. This reasoning makes connectors much more popular than they deserve to be. The truth is that a typical good draw only wins about 1/3 as often as a big made hand. Furthermore, the made hand has great implied odds because every postflop bet is nearly pure profit, but the drawing hand spends much of its postflop profits paying for the losers.

[sthief09]

yes, even mentioning a straight might've been stupid and irrelavent. keep in mind though, that you don't have to flop an OESD to continue. flopping a 6 outer in a monster pot is far from missing. if you hit a straight 2.2% of the time in 5 cards, then you'll probably end up making the straight somewhere around 1% of the time. since you'll only win ~(.8)(1/8.5)= 9% of the time with a set, that added 1% increases your chances of winning by 11%. was the straight possibility worth mentioning? probably not. does it exist? definitely.

someone asked "what if both limpers fold?" so I basically used the straight potential to cancel it out that rarity.

EDIT: I got my math wrong though. it should be 3*4*4*4*46/C(50,2) = 1.67%

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
flopping a 6 outer in a monster pot is far from missing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Assume 15 SB in the pot. Probably the BB bets through you and on average you have to call 2 SB to see the turn.

Turn pot size is about 11 BB. You are about 7-1 to hit and win an average of 4 BB on the big streets. EV of this scenario is 15/8 BB. Reduce by the 1 BB you contributed on the flop and you net 7/8 BB.

If you miss the turn you have to pay an average of 1 BB to see the river. New pot size is 15 BB including 1 BB implied odds on the river. You average (15 BB * 1/8) - 1) * 7/8 which is about 3/4 BB. In this formula the 1 is the price of the river and 7/8 is the chance you missed the turn.

So your gutshot+PP is worth about 7/8 + 3/4 BB = 1.6 BB hand value on the flop. That should be reduced somewhat because these one-card straights and even the sets are somewhat accident-prone. Call it 1.5 BB.

So I was a little too negative about this draw. You will make your 2 SB preflop back with about 1 SB profit. Obviously I have made a lot of assumptions, but this provides a rough idea of the situation.

[sthief09]

very interesting stuff. great post.

[Victor]

The first call is definitely fine. Coming back to you its 4:1 and with the limpers adding more bets and your implied odds its easy to call.

[Guy McSucker]

Well, I certainly didn't expect such a thread from this simple little post. Thanks to all for some good stuff here. It makes me realize that I am getting lazy: a couple of years ago I used to run these numbers myself and post stuff like sthief09 has done here for me, in the NL/PL forum.

In the actual hand, I tried a quick calculation, thought it was close if everyone else called preflop, but not good if it got capped and the limpers dropped, so I folded.

Then it all came down perfectly for me, had I called: the limpers and CO just called the 3-bet. The 3 came on the flop, which was K-high, and the BB and CO capped every street: AA vs AK.

Obviously I soon realised that this time I could have made plenty back.

Now I know the general picture too. Thanks, everyone!

Guy.

[SA125]

I respect your opinion theif and agree with you almost all the time. I disagree with you here, even though Joe Tall is with you. That's not a good sign for me.

I think the bigger pairs have the implied odds against 33 in a likely 3-4 way pot that's been 3 bet late and maybe capped. Knowing you'll have 5 players is different.

I don't see playing a 3 way pot capped with 33. Do you?

[Mucking Idiot]

Assuming he flops a set, and its the only set.

[SA125]

Talk about taking it too another level. Impressive. I'm not sure about what I just read, but impressive. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I'm going to have to save this and do some homework. Good job.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
Assuming he flops a set, and its the only set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Weak thinking at its finest.