Standard top pair flop fold, right?

[ArturiusX]

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (7 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is BB with T/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 6/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, Button calls, SB completes, Hero checks.

Flop: (5 SB) 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets</font>, Hero folds

[toss]

Yeah since your gutshot is worthless and you're two pair outs gone.

[Harv72b]

I might have called to see what happened behind me &amp; raise if SB led out again on a safe (i.e., non-diamond, non-A, non-J, non-8, non-K, non-Q,) turn.

Okay, I can see folding.

[dantheman_05]

fold flop

[brettbrettr]

I raise.

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
I raise.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm drunk, but I'm shocked at the response. Educate me.

[Paxosmotic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I raise.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm drunk, but I'm shocked at the response. Educate me.

[/ QUOTE ]
You know you're replying to yourself, right? Which makes it all the more frightening that you're correct. This is a raise, all day, every day. Face everyone with two cold and anyone with a gutshot calls to their detriment.

[JacksonTens]

What if he's betting a straight draw? I raise to protect my hand. Yes I think TPPK is worth protecting, why let overcards call. I raise, especially from the BB, peopl emay even put you on Two Pair.

JT /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[chief444]

VERY coordinated board with TP no kicker in a 5-handed unraised pot this is a pretty standard muck for me.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
I raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
Me too. And it's not close.

[brettbrettr]

Yeah, I meant for it to read as if I replied: "raise." Then read all the fold comments, then said, "huh." Cuz that's how it went...

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
VERY coordinated board with TP no kicker in a 5-handed unraised pot this is a pretty standard muck for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

*But* I'm in great position to convine the draws to fold, no?

[chief444]

Most draws you want to fold aren't folding anyway whether you raise or not. Any better hands than yours aren't folding whether you raise or not (at least the typical 2/4 player isn't folding a T here for 2 SB's). And there's a pretty good chance you don't even have the best hand now. And you're fighting over 6 SB's. I think this is a textbook time to get away from a marginal made hand early. The only thing you may fold out is a J which would be very nice but even that at 2/4 will often call.

[jason_t]

Nice hand. Small pot, marginal hand that if ahead has to dodge a lot cards in a large field which, at 2/4, won't be cleared by a raise.

[Harv72b]

A flush draw is getting at least 4:1 (depends on any other callers before him) to continue on the flop, so they're correct to call if Hero raises. An OESD is iffy with the two-suited board. A gutshot is incorrect to call, and this is 2/4 Party so at least one probably will.

What you also have to consider is the very strong possibility that, even if none of the draws come in, Hero's hand is not the best right now. A flop like this, combined with the preflop limpfest, is pretty likely to have produced a pair of tens with better kicker (i.e., JT, QT, even KT), two pair with a T9 or 97s, possibly a set. You also cannot discount the possiblity that there is already a made straight out there, with J8s or 68s.

Now, most of the deck is a scare card when it comes on the turn, and only the two remaining tens in the deck can be considered "good" outs for Hero (although they still don't help the kicker problem, or the possiblity of a draw still coming in).

In short, you have a situation where Hero might have the best hand, or at least a better hand than SB, but where Hero has few if any good outs to improve if he's not ahead. If I am going to continue this hand, I'll be calling the flop bet and looking to raise a "safe" turn card, assuming there isn't a raise behind me on the flop.

Honestly, there are just so many ways that this hand can go wrong for Hero that I think a fold is probably correct, or at least only very mildly wrong.

[baronzeus]

This is a bad, bad call/raise. Any Ace, King, Queen, J, 8, 6, or diamond counterfeits your hand. That's 27 cards out of 47, and there are 2 cards to come. Then there's the possibility of running hearts, or someone calling with a 7 or 9 and having the board pair thatway. This is all assuming that someone doesn't have 2 pair or Tx with a better kicker already.

[dantheman_05]

board is way too ccordinated. ppl with overs and big draws are going to call. u will lose this hand too often

[ArturiusX]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
Me too. And it's not close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[baronzeus]

Just to give you an idea of your equity here, this is a PS of you and four typical (30% VPIP) players. The bet narrows down SBs hand a bit and reduces your equity even further.


Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

6,276,529 games 39.640 secs 158,338 games/sec

Board: Td 9d 7h
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 16.5801 % 15.86% 00.72% { Ts6s }
Hand 2: 20.8744 % 19.36% 01.52% { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 3: 20.8587 % 19.34% 01.52% { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 4: 20.8541 % 19.33% 01.52% { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 5: 20.8328 % 19.31% 01.52% { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }




Easy, easy fold, especially since you have to fold the turn UI here almost 100% of the time.



Even when the ideal turn card comes, your equity still sucks a fat one.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

3,760,072 games 15.562 secs 241,618 games/sec

Board: Td 9d 7h 2s
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 21.7298 % 21.43% 00.31% { Ts6s }
Hand 2: 19.5437 % 18.65% 00.90% { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 3: 19.5922 % 18.70% 00.90% { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 4: 19.5689 % 18.68% 00.90% { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }
Hand 5: 19.5654 % 18.68% 00.90% { 55+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, A7o+, A5o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o }

[Skip Brutale]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I raise.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm drunk, but I'm shocked at the response. Educate me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its a theory called protecting your hand.

[Skip Brutale]

Why are most of you scared over the possiblity of overcards or a gutshot calling 2-cold vs. you?

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are most of you scared over the possiblity of overcards or a gutshot calling 2-cold vs. you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because players on party are morons. Facing a large enough pot, they will call with anything, especially at this level.

Plus, overlooking the fact that you're behind already a lot of the time is a major oversight.

[Skip Brutale]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are most of you scared over the possiblity of overcards or a gutshot calling 2-cold vs. you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because players on party are morons. Facing a large enough pot, they will call with anything, especially at this level.

Plus, overlooking the fact that you're behind already a lot of the time is a major oversight.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you dont like it when people call with incorrect odds? You are afraid of morons making bad calls? Laughable.

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are most of you scared over the possiblity of overcards or a gutshot calling 2-cold vs. you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because players on party are morons. Facing a large enough pot, they will call with anything, especially at this level.

Plus, overlooking the fact that you're behind already a lot of the time is a major oversight.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you dont like it when people call with incorrect odds? You are afraid of morons making bad calls? Laughable.

[/ QUOTE ]


See my equity post.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are most of you scared over the possiblity of overcards or a gutshot calling 2-cold vs. you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you convinced that top pair, 6 kicker is good on this board? Or that you actually have an equity advantage if those hands do call?

Raising this flop would be a classic example of misapplying SSH in a game situation. You do not have equity so a raise is not for value. Nobody is going to fold a better hand, and a strong draw has odds to call your flop raise, so it's not to protect your hand either. Erego, it's chip-spewing.

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are most of you scared over the possiblity of overcards or a gutshot calling 2-cold vs. you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you convinced that top pair, 6 kicker is good on this board? Or that you actually have an equity advantage if those hands do call?

Raising this flop would be a classic example of misapplying SSH in a game situation. You do not have equity so a raise is not for value. Nobody is going to fold a better hand, and a strong draw has odds to call your flop raise, so it's not to protect your hand either. Erego, it's chip-spewing.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm glad someone can put it into words. EOF.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
See my equity post.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your equity post is exactly why raising to protect your hand is often a good idea. If you just call to the river, you will not win your share. By protecting your hand, you are either folding out the people who will outdraw you on the turn or river, or at least making them pay by incorrectly calling. SSHE has an excellent example of this play on page 148.

The major difference between their example and this hand (besides that their hand is only 2nd pair) is the size of the pot. On one hand, the smaller pot might mean it's not worth fighting for. On the other hand, it's a lot less likely people will call with weak draws.

[baronzeus]

I'm going to try to explain this one more time. The hands that colcall your raise here are the hands that have the most equity against you. This includes gutshots/w one over (YES, their call is close to correct here), open ended draws, flush draws, pairs with an over, and better tens. Raising here will thin the field by removing people who do NOT fit in this category, thus making it so that your hand is only playing against those that you are behind.

[TiltsMcFabulous]

Okay seriously, if you aren't folding this hand without a second thought, that's a major leak in your game.

Calling is dreadful.

Raising is only slightly less dreadful.

Raising top pair no kicker in a 5 player pot on an uber draw heavy board in a super loose game is pretty much equivalent to tossing dollar bills in the fireplace.

~ Tilts

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
This includes gutshots/w one over (YES, their call is close to correct here), open ended draws, flush draws, pairs with an over, and better tens.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you raise, there'll be 8 bets in the pot. You would have to count all 7 outs completely undiscounted to make a gutshot and an over even close. Likewise, pairs with an over have 5 outs and need about 8-1 to correctly call.

Opponents are far more likely to have a weak draw than a strong one. In the best case, you would get everyone to fold except sb. In that case you're getting 3-1 on your raise and you could be behind well more than 1/2 the time and still make a profit on your raise. And with such a coordinated board, it's pretty likely that sb is betting out on a draw.

In a more likely case, you'll fold out everyone but the sb and a strong draw. I think if you run your equity analysis with 2 opponents, one with a draw and one with a range of hands the sb could have, you'll find that the raise has bought you a lot of equity, although I'll admit this pot is so small that I'm not sure your raise will buy you 2sbs worth of equity. There'll be 11 bets in the pot so you'd have to go from 16% to 34% equity to make the raise pay for itself.

[TiltsMcFabulous]

[ QUOTE ]

In a more likely case, you'll fold out everyone but the sb and a strong draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

The most likely case by a country mile in the Party 2-4 is that everyone calls and you lose to the draw, the overcard that drops, or you are behind already and lose to the SB.

~ Tilts

[baronzeus]

Regardless of what you are saying, just because calling with a gutshot and an over is "moronic" against this type of play, a) players (morons) on party do it and b) they have close to the correct odds. Good luck to you if you make this call but you will lose a ton of extra bets in the long run.

[TiltsMcFabulous]

Agreed. If you call or raise here 1000 times in a row, you can expect to be several thousand dollars in the hole by the end of it all.

~ Tilts

[Moozh]

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of what you are saying, just because calling with a gutshot and an over is "moronic" against this type of play, a) players (morons) on party do it and b) they have close to the correct odds. Good luck to you if you make this call but you will lose a ton of extra bets in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I think folding is the right play here, I still think you're having trouble expressing why with your arguments.

First off, regarding your two points. The fact that morons on Party will call your raise incorrectly with a gutshot is a reason you would raise, not a reason you should fold. Since you want your opponents to make mistakes, you would love to raise and have them call incorrectly. As for your second point, after raising, you really don't give anywhere near the correct odds for gutshots and other long draws to call.

The reason you don't raise is very eloquently explained in Harv's post. You don't raise because you won't be protecting your hand. If you raise, you fold the hands you want to call and get calls from the hands you want to fold. Since you are out of position with a marginal hand that may be already beat, you let it go in a small pot.

[baronzeus]

Well, I'm trying to say this:

Let's say you have KJo with a diamond and you are moron A. Moron B bets out into this board with an 8, TAG 2+2er raises with his/her Txs, and you, as moron A make the call, as does a flush draw with Moron C, and it's folded back to Moron B, who calls.

A 2+2er almost never makes this call, because it's moronic with such a coordinated board. But since TAG 2+2er only has TPSK, and Moron B has a hand like 8x in general, he has made close to the right call. He has enough outs to continue here against said TAG 2+2er, and, if HU against the 2+2er, would be favored to win the pot.


To better illustrate my point:
Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

15,675,446 games 9.109 secs 1,720,874 games/sec

Board: Td 9d 7h
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 51.6698 % 51.11% 00.56% { KdJh }
Hand 2: 48.3302 % 47.77% 00.56% { Ts6s }


So you can't convice me that a) your raise is correct and b) a villain cold calling your raise is wrong when in reality he has the better hand.

[Moozh]

Ok, I like it. That expresses things much more clearly and I completely agree with you.

[brettbrettr]

Heh. Now I'm not drunk and this looks an easy fold...

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
So you can't convice me that a) your raise is correct and b) a villain cold calling your raise is wrong when in reality he has the better hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, I'll give you that it's a fold in this situation. Would it be a raise if the pot were bigger, say 15 bets?

[chief444]

[ QUOTE ]
Would it be a raise if the pot were bigger, say 15 bets?


[/ QUOTE ]
I'd probably call and hope to raise the turn especially if it's a passive game and likely a draw behind me will just call along vs. raise. But certainly pot size is critical in this example. I doubt if anyone would advocate folding TP on the flop with a much bigger pot.

[hicherbie]

very standard.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
But certainly pot size is critical in this example. I doubt if anyone would advocate folding TP on the flop with a much bigger pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
The reason I ask is that I'm trying to understand how this hand differs from the similar one in SSHE. They recommend raising in a big pot but it seems to me that the logic proposed in this thread is that your equity is too low for a value raise and you're not going to buy outs because the donks will call with too much stuff. This particular logic seems to be even more true in a bigger pot, since the donks are getting even better pot odds. Obviously there is a pot size that, when exceeded, a call is correct. But I'm wondering at what point (if any) people would start raising - and what factors change to make the raise correct in a bigger pot but not in a smaller one.

[siegfriedandroy]

You guys did well to explain why a fold here is good. But you didn't answer Sea Eagle's question: what is different about the example in SSHE? Why is it okay to continue there?

[Harv72b]

I thought of another example while I was "working" today.

Let's say that you're dealt AA UTG. You raise, as you should. And are promptly called by all 9 opponents at the table.

On the surface, this would seem to be beneficial to you. Individually, every one of your opponents have made a mistake by calling your raise, as none of them would have the proper equity against you heads up to call your preflop raise. However, as a group, these players have significantly lowered your preflop equity in the pot. Further, while it would be incorrect for the BB to call your raise with, say 89s, if it were folded to him, it becomes correct for him to call with that hand when there are 8 coldcallers before him, and he is getting 19:1 to call. In fact, it would be correct for him to call with 72o!

When you initially raised the pot, your pot equity was 100% of the pot at that time (3.5 SBs). It was 100% because no one player would be justified in calling your raise with the pot odds being offered, not even the big blind (note: this is not entirely true; in the unlikely case that another player has AA, then he would of course be justified in joining the pot). As soon as 1 player enters the pot behind you, regardless of what cards he holds, your pot equity goes down because it cannot be 100% any longer. How much it goes down depends on the hole cards of the coldcaller, but you will still hold a sizeable edge with AA vs. everything but another AA.

When 9 players call your raise, your pot equity drops considerably, again irregardless of what their individual hole cards are. It becomes much more likely, even probable, that someone will draw out on your rockets in the hand. However, your preflop raise is still correct because you do still hold much more than a 10% equity vs. 9 opponents, so even if your raise did not limit the field, it was for value.

On the other hand, in a situation like this where Hero has a very, very small positive equity in the pot (if he even does have a positive equity), a raise on the flop is not correct. A call is likewise not correct, because we are assuming that Hero likely does not have the best hand at this time and will need to improve at some point to win the pot (actually, to call a turn bet); in a larger pot, even with Hero's highly questionable "outs", it becomes correct to call because Hero is getting the proper odds to chase his potentially counterfeited outs. Anyway, back to why the raise is not correct.

Even if Hero does have the best hand on the flop, and even if nobody else in the hand has a strong enough draw on Hero to properly call the raise, on 2/4 Party it is highly likely that someone will. While that 1 person is making a mistake by calling the raise, his coldcall could then give someone else with a fairly weak draw the correct odds to call. As each player calls, the next player is correct to call with an even weaker hand. And, as a group, they are then heavily favored to beat Hero's TPNK. In fact, because of how weak Hero's hand is, it is likely that he would end up with a negative equity in the pot, unlike a more robust hand like the AA above.

This is the point that we've been trying to make in this thread. I do not have my copy of SSH within reach at this time to review the hand in there, but if memory serves Hero's hand in that case was slightly stronger (higher pair), the draw potential was slighly weaker, and the pot was a bit bigger. All of those factors combined can swing the decision in the other direction, because it is close. Likewise, if the field were smaller here, then it would be correct for Hero to raise because, A) it is less likely that someone has a strong enough draw to be favored over Hero's hand, B) it is extremely unlikely that the pot size will swell to a point where it would be correct for any non-flush, non-OESD to call, C) it is less likely that the pot will be re-raised behind him, and D) it is comparitively more likely that Hero's hand is in fact best at this juncture.

[callmedonnie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I raise.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm drunk, but I'm shocked at the response. Educate me.

[/ QUOTE ]

reverse implied odds, fool.

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought of another example while I was "working" today.

Let's say that you're dealt AA UTG. You raise, as you should. And are promptly called by all 9 opponents at the table.

On the surface, this would seem to be beneficial to you. Individually, every one of your opponents have made a mistake by calling your raise, as none of them would have the proper equity against you heads up to call your preflop raise. However, as a group, these players have significantly lowered your preflop equity in the pot. Further, while it would be incorrect for the BB to call your raise with, say 89s, if it were folded to him, it becomes correct for him to call with that hand when there are 8 coldcallers before him, and he is getting 19:1 to call. In fact, it would be correct for him to call with 72o!

When you initially raised the pot, your pot equity was 100% of the pot at that time (3.5 SBs). It was 100% because no one player would be justified in calling your raise with the pot odds being offered, not even the big blind (note: this is not entirely true; in the unlikely case that another player has AA, then he would of course be justified in joining the pot). As soon as 1 player enters the pot behind you, regardless of what cards he holds, your pot equity goes down because it cannot be 100% any longer. How much it goes down depends on the hole cards of the coldcaller, but you will still hold a sizeable edge with AA vs. everything but another AA.

When 9 players call your raise, your pot equity drops considerably, again irregardless of what their individual hole cards are. It becomes much more likely, even probable, that someone will draw out on your rockets in the hand. However, your preflop raise is still correct because you do still hold much more than a 10% equity vs. 9 opponents, so even if your raise did not limit the field, it was for value.

On the other hand, in a situation like this where Hero has a very, very small positive equity in the pot (if he even does have a positive equity), a raise on the flop is not correct. A call is likewise not correct, because we are assuming that Hero likely does not have the best hand at this time and will need to improve at some point to win the pot (actually, to call a turn bet); in a larger pot, even with Hero's highly questionable "outs", it becomes correct to call because Hero is getting the proper odds to chase his potentially counterfeited outs. Anyway, back to why the raise is not correct.

Even if Hero does have the best hand on the flop, and even if nobody else in the hand has a strong enough draw on Hero to properly call the raise, on 2/4 Party it is highly likely that someone will. While that 1 person is making a mistake by calling the raise, his coldcall could then give someone else with a fairly weak draw the correct odds to call. As each player calls, the next player is correct to call with an even weaker hand. And, as a group, they are then heavily favored to beat Hero's TPNK. In fact, because of how weak Hero's hand is, it is likely that he would end up with a negative equity in the pot, unlike a more robust hand like the AA above.

This is the point that we've been trying to make in this thread. I do not have my copy of SSH within reach at this time to review the hand in there, but if memory serves Hero's hand in that case was slightly stronger (higher pair), the draw potential was slighly weaker, and the pot was a bit bigger. All of those factors combined can swing the decision in the other direction, because it is close. Likewise, if the field were smaller here, then it would be correct for Hero to raise because, A) it is less likely that someone has a strong enough draw to be favored over Hero's hand, B) it is extremely unlikely that the pot size will swell to a point where it would be correct for any non-flush, non-OESD to call, C) it is less likely that the pot will be re-raised behind him, and D) it is comparitively more likely that Hero's hand is in fact best at this juncture.

[/ QUOTE ]

Steve Badger calls this schooling.

Lee Jones refered to it as implict collusion.

[SeaEagle]

I see this thread made Jake's digest, so I'd like to add some comments.

[ QUOTE ]
Let's say that you're dealt AA UTG. You raise, as you should. And are promptly called by all 9 opponents at the table.
...
When you initially raised the pot, your pot equity was 100% of the pot at that time (3.5 SBs). It was 100% because no one player would be justified in calling your raise with the pot odds being offered, not even the big blind ... As soon as 1 player enters the pot behind you, regardless of what cards he holds, your pot equity goes down because it cannot be 100% any longer....
When 9 players call your raise, your pot equity drops considerably, again irregardless of what their individual hole cards are. It becomes much more likely, even probable, that someone will draw out on your rockets in the hand.


[/ QUOTE ]
(ellipses added for conciseness)
Harv, maybe you just chose a bad example. But "Pot Equity Percent" and "Pot Equity" are two very different things and you seem to be mixing them in this example. In the case where 9 people call your AA raise, your Pot Equity Percent will fall from 100% (if no one called) all the way down to about 30%. However, your Pot Equity would jump from 3.5sbs to 6sbs. Of course your variance would go through the roof but, if you're only looking at long-term EV, I don't think there's very many legitimate raising hands that lose value because 9 people call them.

[ QUOTE ]
I do not have my copy of SSH within reach at this time to review the hand in there, but if memory serves Hero's hand in that case was slightly stronger (higher pair), the draw potential was slighly weaker, and the pot was a bit bigger.

[/ QUOTE ]
In the SSH example, Hero's hand was substantially weaker (2nd pair, no kicker), the draw potential was almost identical, and the pot was substantially bigger. It appears to me that you are arguing that a raise would be even less correct in a larger pot, since draws will be less likely to fold.

So I resubmit my original question: Given that the pot in this example is too small to contest, at what point does the pot get large enough (if ever) where a raise is correct?

[PokerBob]

I can live with this

[Dylan Wade]

god, i love your avatar

[Buckmulligan]

Ya, i fold here.

[oreogod]

Well to me, the biggest problem in this hand (besides the pot being small, or the general coordinated nature of the board -- which in themselves are significant problems to the OP)...is the simple fact that your top pair is probably no good. A lot of players limp with hands like T8, T9, JT, QT, KT...so combined with the small pot, flush draw, and the fact that u can hit a 6 and lose or hit your gut shot (which are not full outs by the way) and still lose...playing this hand past the flop is pretty bad IMO.

I looked at it for about a minute before posting and tried to come up with reasons to continue, but all I could see was a muck.