odd little hand 215

[citanul]

Hi, my name is citanul and I'm in love with sets. As a result of that, I kinda like pocket pairs. It's possible I play them in spots I shouldn't. Was this one? Bear with me.


Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t50 (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

BB (t885)
UTG (t690)
UTG+1 (t837)
MP1 (t2005)
MP2 (t1280)
MP3 (t1028)
CO (t1180)
Hero (t1245)
SB (t850)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises to t125</font>, MP3 calls t125, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>,

Ok, so here we are the first time. It's 125 to the hero, on the button, with a pair. And not just ANY pair, but SEVENS! Oh, and there's already 325 or so in the pot, and everybody in the hand has &gt;1k chips, so my implied odds all look nice and dapper.

Hero calls t125, <font color="#CC3333">SB raises to t275</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP2 folds, MP3 calls t150,

Oh now, that just wasn't very nice at all. The upside: Well, I can put the sb on an incredibly narrow range of hands, all of which I take his whole stack if I hit my hand, and well, once again, the immediate odds are looking pretty hot. So of course,

Hero calls t150.

Flop: T/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>

Hm, the converter seems to have crapped out on me:

SB bets 250, MP3 is all-In 753, and well, HERO's decisions were made before the flop, no set, no bet, Hero folds. SB is all-In [325]

Well fortunately for me, I'm not an idiot (or am I?) because well, I knew that there was no way that AQ was good. Sadly for MP3, he did not know that secret, and lost a lot of chips.

meh?

citanul

[Jman28]

Dude, I love pocket pairs too.

But this is a clear fold preflop. I don't know where I heard the rule, but it is:

For low PPs in early rounds, fold if you can't get in for 1/15th of your stack or less (or the next biggest stack in the hand)

You're 7.5:1 against hitting the set, and you aren't gonna double up nearly every time you hit. I like the rule.

-Jman28

[citanul]

hmmm... i called off 1/10th of my stack the first time, but with 2 opponents already in the pot. is that really so much worse than 1/15th? and where are you getting this rule from?

the second raise i think is an easy call.

[The Yugoslavian]

Ok, so you really need to like pm Dali/Gramps/[215er] or something on this one....but for whatever it's worth:

I'm not sure I like calling behind here. Sure you're not getting repopped too often but you will a bit of the time and this is no good. Then, there are those times you hit but never really get any/enough action.....then there are times when you lose to a flush draw or something....and those times u lose to a bigger set (yes, I know this is very small...).

I'd want to be *veryveryvery* certain I'm getting all of someone's chips if I hit my set here before calling off a significant (yet not anywhere near/close/in the ballpark of crippling) part of my stack with 77.

Yugoslav
Who has never played a $215, but has watched some....FWIW.

[citanul]

I don't see any good reason to "call in the big guns" I'm sure that lots of little guns can shoot down my possibly poor play just as well.

I'm not sure I even like my play at all in this spot, so uh, have at thee?

citanul, who must admit right away that he doesn't like putting too much stock into the concept that he might lose when he flops a set. meh.

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]

citanul, who must admit right away that he doesn't like putting too much stock into the concept that he might lose when he flops a set. meh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I hope it was clear from my thinking that this is not the primary reason I don't like the call. I don't like it due to getting paid off...all the ways you can still end up losing and/or having to abandon this hand preflop are just like negative bonus points....the positive bonus points by somehow winning a checked showdown don't negate them IMO....

Okay, so I think your chips are better served in a different spot.

Yugoslav
Do you play 22 the same way here?

[citanul]

don't forget: sometimes you triple or quadruple up too /images/graemlins/smile.gif

and yeah, i'd probably play 22 the same way here. depends on my mood. sometimes i muck both i guess. sometimes not. we'll see which should become my "always" play soon i guess.

citanul

[johnnybeef]

i don't like your play and ill tell you why. your relative postion sucks. there are still 2 people to act after you. an interesting article on this is in ciaffones improve your poker on pg. 178 entitled "where's he from". if you would have been last to act after the raiser i would not mind your call. as it stands you have induced yourself to make a series of correct calls that could have been avoidable and in the process have blead away 300 in chips which will be much more valuable later on.

my .02

[citanul]

meh. the percentage of the time that one of the blinds is reraising is tiny. i welcome them to call the raise, as more people means that if i hit my set, i'm more likely to double or double+ up. i think that worrying too much about the reraise is a bit silly.

still, i'm not going to say that my original call was correct necessarilly.

citanul

[johnnybeef]

[ QUOTE ]
meh. the percentage of the time that one of the blinds is reraising is tiny.

[/ QUOTE ]

then you are posting a situation that is unlikely to come up again for a while. as far as calling a raise with a middle pair, i love this play if the stacks are much deeper. as it stands you are on a very limited br.

edit: as is every one else

[citanul]

did i title my post incorrectly or something?

it doesn't look like i titled it "hand that happens all the time."

nonetheless, the frequency of what happens is totally unimportant to me. i care much more about what the correct play is. specifically, what the correct play is when the action is on me the first time preflop. honestly the second time the action is on me preflop, i don't think there's any debate about if it's a call at all.

citanul

[microbet]

The SB had AA right? Just curious if he would try that raise amount with KK considering his stack.

I don't know about the hand for sure, but I lean towards folding. It seems like you are trying to find the tiniest +CEV edge here and won't get to +$EV. I'd like to have TT+ so I have another shot at winning if the flop is raggy (that's what I would be thinking before the SB raise).

[curtains]

I just read a few responses, but one thing is for sure is that "IF" you call the first raise, it's impossible to say that folding to the second raise is correct. It's a much easier call than the original call, due to the money already in the pot.

Also it's better to call the 2nd raise because your opponent probably has an overpair and you will get paid off. One of the reasons the first call is suspect is because you aren't going to get paid off all the time when you hit.

[Apathy]

I would fold the first one unless I had either a very specific read that the raiser was extremly tight (could only have QQ,KK,AA,AK and you get his stack 90% of the time if you hit) or that they played very weakly post flop and never made continuation bets post flop. This opens up your options on winning the pot (you have more chance then hitting a set to win)

This is rarely the case (and the second caller makes it less likely you can bluff flop) so I fold.

The second call is miles better then the first and is imo correct, whereas the first one is imo, not.

[citanul]

oh, yeah, i'm pretty sure that no one pulls this stuff with kk in this spot.

[citanul]

cool cool. i thnk taht yeah, the concensus is probably right, and that i should be folding to the first raise here. i think i get carried away when i see a raiser and a caller and i kinda assume i can get enough chips in there from ONE of them when i hit to make it worthwhile.

anyways, thanks for the thoughts guys.

citanul

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
and where are you getting this rule from?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wish I knew. If no one claims it, maybe we can name it after me?

As far as the second call, I think that's okay, but I wouldn't call in the first place, especially if you have reason to suspect a reraise.

-Jman28

[johnnybeef]

[ QUOTE ]
did i title my post incorrectly or something?

it doesn't look like i titled it "hand that happens all the time."


[/ QUOTE ]
the way that you adress everyone around here suggests to me that you are an extremely spoiled individual who could really use a good ass kicking and a reality check. i took a shot at giving you some advice as i figured we could possibly both get something out of the discussion, and this is the thanks i get? you ungreatful prick.


i told you in the second post that yes indeed calling a raise with as limited a br as 20 bb is a leak especially when you consider that all of your opponents stacks are in the neighborhood of 20 bb also, and then you fire at me with this nonsense

[ QUOTE ]
nonetheless, the frequency of what happens is totally unimportant to me. i care much more about what the correct play is. specifically, what the correct play is when the action is on me the first time preflop

[/ QUOTE ]

which is something that i have already given my opinion on.

[steeser]

I would call here on the button provided that I believe calling wouldn't induce one of the blinds to go all-in. Once they min re-raise, calling the 2nd bet is easy.

I'd say it's player/read dependent, but as a very general guess I would call 60%, fold 30%, raise 10%.

[Alpha Fhish]

First of all lemme just say it is good to be on the site. I may have been lingering about this site like a stale fart for way too long. Ok now to the good stuff. Citanul, 77 blows donkey fart in that position with the raise. I dont implied odds enough justify this call. I agree with the Yugo and curtains. Second call after SB raise is fine. ALso, I may be as dumb as a nipple hair. I wouldnt trust me.

-Fhish
bubbleo0o0bubbleo0o0

[Alpha Fhish]

One day when my stuffy nose finally subsides I hope to smell my own feet and say "wow! this is what a veteran's foot smells like! I bet citanul's smells the same"

bubbleo0o0bubbleo0o0

[rickr]

With the blinds at 50, I don't put alot of value to mp2's raise or mp3's call. That could simply mean "I have 2 pretty cards, let's try a weak steal". Might have even tried a reraise depending on read. If you reraise here you will narrow hands considerably and it's a nice size pot if you take it down. If you were willing to call a raise you should have raised, since you had position. So flat calling in my opinion is not really that great, because even a miniraise leaves you scratching your head. SB mini reraise screams big pockets. He doesn't want anyone to fold, so my guess is AA. Even KK would want to charge Ax more to see the flop. Or a total bluff. Folded to me since I was closing I would have to call and dump without the set. Of course them being 7's I would dump them, as they are my only losing pp's, so I could be pretty sure I wouldn't hit, lol.

Later,
Rick

[jcm4ccc]

[ QUOTE ]
oh, yeah, i'm pretty sure that no one pulls this stuff with kk in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I think there is some important stuff here that I don't understand. Why is it so obvious to you guys that he has AA and not KK? What do you mean by "no one pulls this stuff with kk in this spot?"

[Alpha Fhish]

Rick you are my favorite non veteran poster. Even with just 124 posts, reading your wisdom makes my nipple hairs stand. PLease reply and get 125 posts.

Fhish
bubbleo0o0bubbleo0o0

[rickr]

As I stated in my post, KK would want to charge Ax more to see the flop. It's hard to play KK post flop when an ace falls, so your more inclined to get your money in early after a couple people have showed aggression, and you avoid hard decisions later.

Rick

[rickr]

Well thank you, I think. (Not too sure about the nipple thing. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif)

Later,
Rick

[sabre170]

I've only read the first line, /images/graemlins/cool.gif
Another sets-addict!

[citanul]

yessir.

personally, looking at your previous post with the line "then you've posted something that very rarely happens" or whatever, that isn't exactly what i'd call the most advice dispensing post i've ever seen. my point is that i don't give a rats ass how often the situation comes up. neither does/should anyone else. in fact, most of the posts that are really interesting are because they are so infrequent, as with about 30 total questions or so you could answer all the questions that "come up all the time."

i thank you for your advice in your original post, and, would like to point out another couple things:

1) when in my reply i said "nonetheless, the frequency of what happens is totally unimportant to me. i care much more about what the correct play is. specifically, what the correct play is when the action is on me the first time preflop" - it really didn't need any response from you about whether or not you've already done something of that kind. see, it's a short thread, and i can read. thus, i know that you've already responded, so you making a post that says effectively, in tenor, "i already told you what to do there, so clearly you don't need to seek other opinions," is pretty bleh to me.

2) when you're playing poker and you have some money on the table, and the money isn't deep, that is not referred to as "playing on a short bankroll." it is referred to as "playing with a short stack." bankroll refers to total money available to buy in to a game, not the table stakes.

in other news, my general mood while typing varies a lot. sometimes i'm in a very good mood, others pissed off by idiots. i'm going on vacation tomorrow, so hopefully when i get back, i'll be in a more idiot friendly mood.

citanul

[citanul]

hm.

i'm beginning to think i should have put a poll in this thread.

thanks for the input.

citanul

ps: this talk about nipple hair is going to get old pretty quick.

[citanul]

indeed, i'm sure our feet smell much the same. but our farts, well, mine smell like roses.

citanul

[citanul]

hrm. i'm really disliking reraising with 77 here.

my general comments about how likely i think it is that a blind reraises basically come from how narrow a range of hands i would think that the sb and bb would reraise with, and well, narrow is narrow.

the read on the reraise is the only possible read you can come up with i think.

it's either an idiot playing aa, or an ENORMOUS FOOL playing KK, QQ, AK or something like that.

citanul

[citanul]

as rick said, kk played by someone with more than just a fragment of a brain here will want ot knock out Ax (x being anywhere up to J or Q possibly) by reraising a lot. AA has much less to fear and people often try to put in one of these "milking" raises. i rarely see it against several opponents though.

citanul

[jccookjr]

I think Moneymaker had the 1/15 rule in his SNG advice. He also said don't commit more than 1/10 of your stack to a raise and only call if the raiser has ten times the amount of the raise.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]

I just read a few responses, but one thing is for sure is that "IF" you call the first raise, it's impossible to say that folding to the second raise is correct. It's a much easier call than the original call, due to the money already in the pot.

Also it's better to call the 2nd raise because your opponent probably has an overpair and you will get paid off. One of the reasons the first call is suspect is because you aren't going to get paid off all the time when you hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

enough to cover 7-1 i'd bet...the question is, is covering the odds here worth those 7 times you dont hit and have called off 1/10th of your stack. IOW, how is playing with that much less chips affecting your game those 7 times...Implied odds are imprtant, but also consider the implications of playing semi-shortstacked that many times and its effect on your ROI...

1. If you hit, you're still not guaranteed ITM, let alone 1st...2. those ~7times you dont hit, how many less ITMs can you factor bc of this call PF?

I think the macro implications should be considered too.

[Seadood228]

Come on guys, 1/10 is not enough???

Personally, I don'think you can go wrong with folding or calling in this spot. Normally my standard line is to fold any marginal situations on levels 1-3, but I wouldn't neccessarily call this a marginal situation.

As for reraising, I'm not a huge fan of it given the structure. Sure the original raiser and caller may be weak, but you'd have to commit a large portion of your chips, and from my experience in these things (admittedly I don't play 200s), your reraise has a good chance of getting action, especially on levels 3-4.

I like the call, and of course like the second call.

Which would you rather have, playing a small pair a) in a raised pot for 1/10 your stack or b) in an unraised pot for 1/15? I'll take option A, there's much more upside.

I can't fault folding, but I don't see how you can fault calling either.

[rickr]

[ QUOTE ]


As for reraising, I'm not a huge fan of it given the structure. Sure the original raiser and caller may be weak, but you'd have to commit a large portion of your chips, and from my experience in these things (admittedly I don't play 200s), your reraise has a good chance of getting action, especially on levels 3-4.


[/ QUOTE ]
Since I'm the only one who has talked about reraising here, I'll assume this is directed at me. You say there are 2 to act. True, but since when does being on the button mean out of position? The small blinds mini-raise got the BB to drop and the original raiser to drop. Now your thinking of dropping as well. He has improved his chances of winning, right? Let's put some hands to people. What does MP raise with. If he's smart at all any cards he wants to play. Limping is terrible in his position. Second caller simply calls, and you simply call. From the SB's point of view, the only person that really likes his hand is the original raiser. Small blind is a perfect steal position with this situation. Stop and Go, any 2 cards. He set it up perfectly. Original raiser is now stuck between a reraise and 2 flat callers. He's laying down everything except premium, on the same fear that SB is holding a monster. So he's got it down to 2 people, the CO and Button no less, that have shown no strength. He can pretty much narrow you down to suited overs or small pockets. Perfect stop and go on a baby flop. You could have stopped this with your own mini reraise. Without a premium hand SB would dump. I'll bluff into one guy sandwiched showing strength, but not two, is what he'll say. BB folds, original raiser folds, leaving you isolated aginst flat caller who is out of position and has shown no strength. Check to you on the flop. A standard continuation bet, and you take down the flop. Done. That is what will happen a large portion of the time. Now, IF SB comes over the top of you, you can safely lay down knowing he wouldn't re re raise without a premium hand. You spent no more money, but gave your medium pair a much better chance of winning for the 7 times the set doesn't hit, and you also improve your chances of taking all of someones stack when it does.
If you are only playing it for set value, the no set no bet rule, then the original call is questionable. Using your position, stack sizes, reads, etc, have been negated. You are simply playing your cards, and nobody elses. I call that weak. Can I lose the hand? Sure. I could also lose to a flop of A72r when I do see the flop and original raiser shows AA. So what?

Later,
Rick

[Seadood228]

So you advocate a minimum reraise?

Sorry I thought that you meant a pot sized raise, somewhere in the neighborhood of 400-500, which would lead to a difficult decision on the flop if you are called and you miss.

I guess a lot of it depends on whether or not you will get action on your reraise. From what I've seen, level 3 is where people start to get desperate, and I think your reraise is pretty likely to get met by an allin reraise from one of the other players, which you don't want..

But then again I don't play 215s /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Oh and for the record dumping after the baby reraise is beyond stupid IMO.. I never advocated that /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[curtains]

I hate reraising preflop. You are simply going to be played with too often by a dominating hand.

[rickr]

Advocate is probably not the right word, but yes, I was talking miniraise. If you are concerned with SB and BB, this will fold them out. If I was closing the betting, then never raise. All I do is open back up the betting. But with a flat caller there, and 2 to act, I believe I like it more than flat calling. 1, it will knock out SB and BB barring a premium hand. Who wants to get involved in this hand with a raiser, flat caller, mini reraiser? 2. The original better is going to have to have balls of steel to not reraise with hands that have us dominated, and our reraise also screams big pockets. 3. He also has to worry about the flat caller. Now if he reraises all-in what hands do you put him on? AA,KK, maybe AK,QQ? What else? Yes I hate that because those are the hands that you get payed off on when you hit your set, but that doesn't happen everytime. You want to set yourself up to have a chance to win the 7 out of 8 that it doesn't. Save the set play for when it's folded to you after a raise and you can close the betting. But, he will flat call with many hands that we are ahead of though. Remember, he is the original raiser. He could have paint cards, suited connectors, baby pockets, or TT JJ. We have now, for very little more money, defined a hand, as well as narrowed the field. We spent the same amount of money calling the SB's mini reraise and didn't learn anything. I'm just leaning towards betting early to define, especially at this level. Later on it becomes push or fold, but not at T50. You can still play poker here. Not saying this is right though, just that it's a differant, less passive approach that gives medium pockets a few more ways to win the pot.

Later,
Rick

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]

I hate reraising preflop. You are simply going to be played with too often by a dominating hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

[pooh74]

it will knock out SB and BB barring a premium hand. Who wants to get involved in this hand with a raiser, flat caller, mini reraiser?

I am jumping back in the middle here...but are we still talking about the 77?

You should WANT to get involved w/ all of the above (BB SB)...i dont think anyone here should "advocate" playing this for anything but a set, and the more people in, the better your express pot odds and also your implied odds if you do hit...the more people in, the better chance one will pay you off.

This is not hand where you want to isolate...if you all think 77 is a good heads up hand postflop then you're all better players than I am.

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]


Oh, and there's already 325 or so in the pot, and everybody in the hand has &gt;1k chips, so my implied odds all look nice and dapper.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how calling 125 (or more) to win maybe 1000 or so chips is dapper implied odds. I would call that crappy implied odds.

Calling 15 chips to win 1000 is dapper implied odds.

This isn't odd... it's just bad.

Irieguy

[citanul]

calling 15 to win 1000 is really quite splendid, yes, but once the blinds get to 25/50, it's no longer an option.

i don't think that it's too unlikely when you hit your set here that you win signficantly more than 1000 chips. especially given that after my action, there is already 450 chips in the pot, and a preflop raiser.

anyway, the reason i posted the hand is, as you can see, there are people who range from "this is standard" to "this is attrocious." hence, "odd."

i am, however, confused at the idea that calling 125 to maybe win 1000 chips is "crappy" implied odds. i hold a bone to pick, or a contention, or something, with that statement.

citanul

[NegativeEV]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how calling 125 (or more) to win maybe 1000 or so chips is dapper implied odds. I would call that crappy implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume that you're discounting "implied odds" chips based on the probability that you'll stack your opponent if your card hits? In this case I understand hero to be saying that there is a ~ 100% certainty that he will stack the opponent if he catches his set (he put opponent on AA,KK if I read OP correctly). If hero is 100% certain about these implied odds, isn't the evaluation of those odds the same as simple pot odds evaluation? If so, then odds of hitting set are ~ 8:1 and effective pot odds are ~ 8:1 (if the 100% is assumed PLUS other player in pot does not pay off at all). Maybe not dapper, but not crappy either.

I'm not arguing the merits of OP's play, I'm just wondering if there is something else to consider in regards to implied odds. If it is just that you evaluate the chance of stacking opponent to be far less than 100%, I understand your post and have no further Q's.

[citanul]

i'm not saying there's close to a 100% chance that i stack the guy when i hit.

i'm saying that on AVERAGE, i expect to be getting more than about 500-700 chips TOTAL into the pot post flop from my opponents, and win, when I hit.

citanul

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not saying there's close to a 100% chance that i stack the guy when i hit.

i'm saying that on AVERAGE, i expect to be getting more than about 500-700 chips TOTAL into the pot post flop from my opponents, and win, when I hit.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are REALLY overestimating things here. The flop has to come pretty perfect to get you opponents stack. Your opponents do not necessarily have premium hands (in fact they likely do not) You would have to hit your set AND have them hit TP to get their stack, the odds against this are much worse then the odds of just hitting your set. If the flop comes 10 high with a 7 you win 0 more chips...maybe an extra 100 or 200 of your lucky and someone bluffs.

Not to mention the times that you hit you set and lose YOUR stack to a flush or two out suckout or set over set. There is no way the average would be 700 extra chips gained post flop without AA or KK beong in your opponents hands imo.

[NegativeEV]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not saying there's close to a 100% chance that i stack the guy when i hit.

i'm saying that on AVERAGE, i expect to be getting more than about 500-700 chips TOTAL into the pot post flop from my opponents, and win, when I hit.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you assume the ~ 100% or you assume that you'll gain chips from both opponents equal to the amount gained from the 100% is the same thing. I'm not interested in evaluating that assumption and that was not my point. I'm interested if I'm understanding Irieguy's post or if there is something else specific to implied odds that I'm missing. If you DID assume the 100% OR you assumed your combination, either way you get to "effective pot odds" that are =&gt; 8:1 which is not "crappy", so I'm wondering if there is an additional thought process that I'm missing.

You and I have the same thoughts here if we don't get hung up on semantics.

[NegativeEV]

[ QUOTE ]
Your opponents do not necessarily have premium hands (in fact they likely do not) You would have to hit your set AND have them hit TP to get their stack, the odds against this are much worse then the odds of just hitting your set.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is what Irieguy is also getting to then we are simply arguing the OP's assumptions and there is no new implied odds understanding that I will gather from this, so bummer.

[Seadood228]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are REALLY overestimating things here. The flop has to come pretty perfect to get you opponents stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually think he's underestimating. Once the pot is raised there will usually be a lot more action, but then again it could just be the eternal optimist in me.

And if you take into account him losing with a set, you also have to take include the possibility that Citanul will win the hand with 77 unimproved.

[general]

What does UTG, CO, etc, mean?

[Seadood228]

UTG - Under the gun. The player directly to the Big blind's left, and the first player to act in the preflop betting round.

CO - Cutoff. The player on the button's right

BT - Button..

etc - etcetera. Continuing in the same way..

Sorry couldn't resist /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[general]

How about MP? I assume that Hero means our hero as in the person in question?

[pooh74]

"Middle Position" MP+1 to his left, etc...

BTW (By the way) WTTFs! (welcome to the forums...not to be confused with "WTF?!?!?")

p (pooh74)