Another look at Sklansky's pair

I am going repost this fascinating problem and give you four different pocket pairs:


"The game is 30-60, ten handed against all decent players. Early position raises and gets four calls including the small blind." You decide to call with:


A. black tens

B. black queens (we can debate a three-bet here)


"The flop comes 986 with two hearts. Small blind comes right out betting. Besides telling me what you would do (call, raise, or fold), I would like to see how you rate the other two alternatives from 1 to 10 (your choice is automatically assigned a 10)."


Rate the actions from 1 to 10 (ignore David's correction) for parts A and B.


The second part:

Same game, but you reraise with:


C. black kings

D. black aces


Everyone calls.

Same flop, 9-8-6 with two hearts. Small blind bets. Rate the actions (call, raise, fold) from 1 to 10.

10 being the preferred play, and the other plays rated by similarity of e.v., I'd say:


A. R10, C8, F5

B. R10, C7, F6

C. R10, C7, F4

D. R10, C8, F3


But here's a more interesting way to put the question, cua jacks:


What is the e.v. of this hand at the flop? i.e. how much would you pay to take over the hand in that situation if a friend offered it to you? Or what are the e.v.'s of the particular options: If you think fold is the best route, how much would your friend have to pay you to play and raise or play and call? or, if you think raise is the best option, how much would you pay if your friend said he'd sell you the hand, but only if you promised to call?


(I think sklansky's rating system is supposed to represent this in some way, but I can't get the numbers to correspond.)


My guess (and I really should get off my lazy ass and try to figure it out, it could be diagramed or simulated) is that the hand is profitable, but not by much, e.g. a small bet or less.


ben