?: PF late position raise w/ medium pairs, why?

[fire_fly]

This is a general question (as well as my first post, so cut me some slack if this is a naive question /images/graemlins/smile.gif)
I've played 30k hands of .25-.50 and am beating it at the rate of 6BB/100, so I think I'm doing ok. The 2+2 SSH is the book I credit much of this winning to, but my question is this. SSH recommends to raise all pairs down to 88 in late position loose games. Pairs down to JJ I understand (from a pot equity standpoint) but 1010, 99, and especially 88, seem to pretty much never win unimproved against a large field, so I don't see why raising is recommended.
Here's what seems to always happen when I do raise with these from late position. 3-6 ppl limp, I raise, all limpers and 1 or both blinds call. Either 1 or 2 overcards come to my pair on the flop and 1 or more ppl show strength/I then call (large implied odds if i hit make it worth it) fold to turn bet when I miss, or no one shows strength, I open bet, everyone calls (getting 8:1 or better) overcards come on turn/river, I lose.
So it seems like the only times I win with these hands is when I make a set. So why raise? If it is because I have pot equity, why not raise with all pocket pairs seeing as how this is a similer situation. By that I mean I only win with 22 when I get help from the board also. I just checked my pokertracker database and in the last 14k hands, I've won with pocket 88s in late position twice w/o making a set. So why raise? It seems more intuitive to me to call so I can fold when I miss and not be tied to the pot. Again, this is my first post, and I know this question may be stupid to some, but it's the one part of SSH's preflop guidelines that I just do not understand. Thanks for the help.

[GrunchCan]

Welcome to the forums.

You raise 88 in LP becasue on average your hand is better than your loose opponents' hands. Also, when you do hit your set, you win very large pots that more than make up for the many many times you hit nothing but third pair and have to fold.

Raising 88 in LP isn't always right. It's probably not right when your opponents are tight. But then again, you really don't want to be at a table where raising 88 in LP is -EV.

[Carmine]

Do not raise your small-medium PP against a large feild. You are playing these for set value only 90% of the time. Once you miss the flop you let them go. You are 23:1 to hit your set on the turn so you almost never have odds to call. If you chase these you will lose $$ with them.

Now with PP like 88,99 if you can narrow the field or better yet isolate one player then a raise is in order. These hands will win UI against one or two callers. TT-AA will win UI against even more callers so you can raise with these always. The higher the PP of course the better off you are and the smaller the field the better off you are.

These are generalized staements, of course, for a general question.

[elmitchbo]

your only supposed to win when you make a set. the idea is that raising to build a pot makes the hand profitable in the long run by allowing you to take down a huge pot when you do make a set. it's not supposed to happen every time... if you win 1 out of 10 you'll come out ahead. it is a similar situation to smaller pairs, but you said that you had won twice with 88 unimproved, never happens with 22. that's a pretty significant difference.

[OilMan]

Elmitchbo,

Your post does not seem right (maybe I'm wrong). With hands like 88 or 99 in late position you are raising to narrow the field (not trying to build the pot). You want to narrow the field so that your 88 or 99 has a chance to hold up unimproved. If your playing 88 and 99 from an early position (or smaller pocket pairs from late position), then your treating them as drawing hands and you want as many callers as you can get.

Your post said that you would raise to build the pot with 88 or 99 so that when you make your set you will win big. If I was planning to make a set I would want to have as many callers as possible. If I raise pre-flop, I would drive some of these callers out. Any thoughts...?

[Carmine]

[ QUOTE ]
your only supposed to win when you make a set. the idea is that raising to build a pot makes the hand profitable in the long run by allowing you to take down a huge pot when you do make a set. it's not supposed to happen every time... if you win 1 out of 10 you'll come out ahead. it is a similar situation to smaller pairs, but you said that you had won twice with 88 unimproved, never happens with 22. that's a pretty significant difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, when you are playing for a set you do not want to raise or have the pot raised. You are 7.5:1 to hit you set on the flop. So you need 7.5 bets in the pot to make the play breakeven. Your implied odds however are huge and that is where the money is made. If the pot is raised you now need 15 bets into the pot be breakeven. If there are enough players calling a raised pot then you can make up the bets on latter rounds otherwise you fold. You will not hit often enough or be able to make up the bets you lose PF against one or two opponents. I am reffering to the sm. PP here. As the pairs get bigger things change because you win with them even when you miss the set. That is a more involved subject however and everyone has slightly different opionions and preferences.

[detruncate]

Three good things can happen when you raise PPs in this situation:

1) You hold up unimproved

2) You hit your set

3) You get checked to on the flop and get to see a free turn

When you raise pf, you're assuming that the increased value from winning a larger pot unimproved + the longterm result of sometimes getting a free turn card makes up for extra pf deficit you create wrt hitting your set.

You don't have to win unimproved very often for the extra value you gain to significantly increase your overall EV. That's what makes 99 so much better than 44. When you're going in with the best hand, you'd like to get your money in early.

Likewise, each time you get an extra shot at hitting your set (via a free turn card) it's +EV. You're also making a play for the button if you're raising from MP3 or CO, which you're happy to have. Button = $.

The idea behind raising pf is that the overall EV is increased. With 4-6 callers in front of you and the blinds likely to join in, you're not giving up very much -- you're ~7.5:1 against to hit your set, and making up a couple BBs in a field that large is fairly easy. In other words, you're not hurting your implied odds to a large enough extent that halving your pf investment would yield greater overall EV.

Remember that this is a long-term proposition. When you're counting on the ~22.5:1 against shot of making your set when you get a free look at the turn to add value, you have to play out several times that many free turns for things to start to converge.

[Carmine]

Very good point with #3. However I think it is important to consider the table when considering this as a benifit to raiseing. At a passive table it is definatly something to add to the equation. At an aggressive table or with a few maniacs you are not going to be checked to very often.

[rmarotti]

[ QUOTE ]
So why raise? If it is because I have pot equity, why not raise with all pocket pairs seeing as how this is a similer situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Welcome to the forums. Think about how many overcards come to 22. Now think about how many come to 99. See why raising one is better than the other?

[reubenf]

[ QUOTE ]
At an aggressive table or with a few maniacs you are not going to be checked to very often.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course if I can manage to isolate a maniac who is betting at every flop he misses, I'm going to call down with medium PP.

[Carmine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At an aggressive table or with a few maniacs you are not going to be checked to very often.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course if I can manage to isolate a maniac who is betting at every flop he misses, I'm going to call down with medium PP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heck, with a med. PP (88,99) I will try and isolate anybody. Doesn't have to be a maniac. Except for Doc Rock who only raises QQ-AA of course.

My previous responses were more related to multiway action with the smaller PP (66 and down). These are more your set only hands. Although, yes you can isolate with these or take down 3-4 handed pots under certain conditions, but I believe that goes beyond the "General questions" the original poster was asking.