"No Set No Bet"

[bluewilde]

All right, I realize that there's a philosophy of "no set no bet" around here, but I thought this was a clear exception.

1) Are tens ok to raise from late position with 1 limper? This seemed like a weak enough field to make a raise OK. Would I at least raise JJ?
2) Nobody at the $11s pushes when they hit trips, so I have to put the guy on a 9 or a pair (higher or lower ionno). I think that makes this a call (even though one of the hands he likely has hits the turn). Standard exception or "no set no bet?"

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t30 (8 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

UTG+1 (t340)
MP1 (t1575)
MP2 (t1515)
Hero (t860)
Button (t645)
SB (t625)
BB (t265)
UTG (t2175)

Preflop: Hero is CO with T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, T/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP1 calls t30, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to t120</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB calls t105, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP1 folds.

Flop: (t300) K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, K/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero calls t505.

Turn: (t805) 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>

River: (t805) 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>

Final Pot: t805

[durron597]

That is a near perfect board for you. I would have a very hard time folding to that push.

The safe play is just calling from the CO but I think the raise is fine with position.

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
All right, I realize that there's a philosophy of "no set no bet" around here, but I thought this was a clear exception.



[/ QUOTE ]

I must have missed that meeting.

Seriously, I think that applies to small pairs in multiway pots where you don't have the lead (and the board is kind of scary).

Don't get me wrong, I divorce a lot of small pairs in raised and unraised pots even where no one is showing any interest, but there are a lot of times where either:
1. You have reason to believe your hand is good but vulnerable
2. You think you can move your opponent off a better hand

Here you have a great hand post flop. SB makes a very suspicious push which is begging you to fold. Easy call. If he turns out to be the type who would take the lead and push with a K here, note it.

He could easily have a 9 or a hand like 77 (people play weird). He could also be on a stone bluff, or just be misplaying a hand like AA/QQ/JJ (in which case it sucks to be you.) (though again, open pushing hands like this may not be misplaying them, if he has reason to believe you will look him up with a worse hand since his bet looks like it wants you to fold, which should make you want to call.... but I don't know that people think that deeply in these things. I know I don't have time to, so I just play erratic, err, I mean, mix up my game and play hands in different ways...)

[skierdude1000]

With your preflop raise, it's quite possible he does that with a king to overbet it.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
All right, I realize that there's a philosophy of "no set no bet" around here

[/ QUOTE ]

No there isn't.

eastbay

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All right, I realize that there's a philosophy of "no set no bet" around here

[/ QUOTE ]

No there isn't.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes there is; in the sense that it exists, not in the sense that it's correct or that good players adhere to it.

Though I suppose that's what you meant.

[bluewilde]

Usually I apply the "play for set value" advice in multiway pots early on with weaker hands. None of these conditions really apply here so I ignore it, but felt like I needed to raise the issue for my own clarification. Sounds like it's not as solid a rule as I thought I was hearing. So I really need to qualify the situation based on position, number of opponents, strength of pair and texture of board?

I've also been put under the impression that TT and JJ are much weaker than I originally thought. Clearly they have strength on this flop, but what about preflop, given the timimdity of the table?

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All right, I realize that there's a philosophy of "no set no bet" around here

[/ QUOTE ]

No there isn't.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes there is; in the sense that it exists, not in the sense that it's correct or that good players adhere to it.

Though I suppose that's what you meant.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well you could also say "I know there's a philosophy of misplaying AK, playing too loose early, etc." because someone thinks just about everything. In which case pointing it out is kind of silly.

But I think what he meant was that there was a consensus, or a conventional wisdom about "no set, no bet." I don't agree.

eastbay

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
But I think what he meant was that there was a consensus, or a conventional wisdom about "no set, no bet." I don't agree.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. Actually there are many players here who adhere to a "no set no bet philosophy". But none of the best players are in that group. (If the previous sentences weren't true I wouldn't have replied in the first place).

[reecelights]

A lot of the thinking about JJ and TT, which stemmed from AleoMagus' "How to beat the Party $10+1s" classic has changed since the arrival of Harrington on Hold Em. Harrington advocates protecting JJ and TT in your situation with a larger than normal bet in late position, which is almost what you did. A raise to about 150-200 would be more along the lines of his thinking for an online tourney. I think your call is a good one on the flop, as he probably has A9, T9 or 98, a smaller pair or is bluffing with AQ. As previously noted, if he has AK or KQ, you call and take a note that he makes this play.

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
With your preflop raise, it's quite possible he does that with a king to overbet it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a thinking play though. If villain is a thinker and tricky, I am much more apt to lay down. BUT, if he (the thinking player) is not doing this with hands weaker than TT some, too, he is giving up a lot of info, and would be better off checking the flop. (The giving off a lot of info bit is important since, so far, I tend to see the thinking players a lot more than the non thinking ones. That is, at any given table there will be on average more non thinking players, but most of the people I have any appreciable number of hands on are decent or better.)

[45suited]

JJ and TT have significant value and do there are very, very many situations where they can and should be played for more than set value. Your raise with TT here is perfectly acceptable.

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
I know I don't have time to, so I just play erratic, err, I mean, mix up my game and play hands in different ways...)

[/ QUOTE ]

What buy-in do you usually play? IMO, unless you are playing at the highest buy-ins (where you see the same opponents frequently and they probably pay attention to how you play) mixing up your game and playing hands differently has little to no value in and of itself. (Other than you getting used to playing hands in different ways.)

By this I mean that sometimes I see players write that they don't want to play hand X a certain way every time they get it because then their opponents would know what they had. But the pool of players at almost all the levels below the 55s is so big and your opposition pays so little attention that this is not even a consideration for me.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All right, I realize that there's a philosophy of "no set no bet" around here

[/ QUOTE ]

No there isn't.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

i think there is, but there's a context to it. if you limp 44 in level 1 in a 5-way pot and start putting a bunch of chips in when you don't have a set, the forum will (correctly) heckle.

but this obviously doesn't apply here; it'd be like check-folding AA on the flop because you "miss."