I think this was a good fold

[Roland]

Anyone disagree?


7 Card Stud High ($5/$10), Ante $0.50, Bring-In $2 (hand converter (http://www.geocities.com/greenage22/7StudConverter.hta.txt))

3rd Street - (0.80 SB)

Seat 1: xx xx T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif___folds
Hero: Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif 7/images/graemlins/club.gif Q/images/graemlins/club.gif___folds
Seat 3: xx xx K/images/graemlins/club.gif
Seat 4: xx xx Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif
Seat 5: xx xx 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif
Seat 6: xx xx A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif
Seat 7: xx xx J/images/graemlins/club.gif
Seat 8: xx xx 6/images/graemlins/spade.gif___brings-in

[grb137]

it was a good fold, although depending on how well I knew my opponents I might be tempted to limp. I'm quite the fish ya know

[BeerMoney]

I fold it even without the other Q out i think.

BTW, why are your posts always about "Big Folds"?

why fold at this point. at worst put in the $2 call. a wimpy fold to me. what is your logic for folding here?

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]

I fold it even without the other Q out i think.


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you serious?

How is this not a limp?

[jon_1van]

why are you folding this?

Are you insta-folding this...or do you just not feel like playing it this time?

Why do you think folding is better than limping

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
why are you folding this?

Are you insta-folding this...or do you just not feel like playing it this time?

Why do you think folding is better than limping

[/ QUOTE ]

2 over cards remaining to act, he has a dead Q, and his clubs are not that live.

[BTirish]

I agree with the fold. This is one of those "gee, I wish I'd raised" situations--after the fact. (edit: misread it the first time... thought you showed the full results and that everyone folded to the BI. So ignore that comment) You have to fold to a raise or reraise from the A or K, especially with the dead Q. I think this is a fold that saves you money long term.

I don't think this is a 100% obvious fold, but it's a marginal situation where folding is probably better.

I still don't understand this one. You have the bring in and next person folding with you to act. I say either raise and fold if get reraised or just limp in for $2 and fold if getting reraised, but to fold before there is any action in the hand yet other than the bring in is like playing poker with the trembles. Perhaps a tranqulizer would help. Folding does not look to be warranted at this point in the hand. And at the level that you are playing in, you need to get in and play more hands. Not all hand situations are going to be perfectf rom start with all cards live and only looking at small door cards ahead. Take a chance - it's poker.

[lstream]

[ QUOTE ]
playing poker with the trembles. Perhaps a tranqulizer would help

[/ QUOTE ]
What charm school did you go to man? Better demand a refund.

[blumpkin22]

[ QUOTE ]
And at the level that you are playing in, you need to get in and play more hands... Take a chance - it's poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? The antes are small; playing only premium hands is the way beat a game with this structure. I'm not saying the fold in this spot is necessarily correct, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

[frappeboy]

I'd definitely play this hand on partypoker 5-10 and would probably raise. I think you are playing a little too tight for the ante structure if you're folding this. On the partypoker 20-40 I would fold though since the structure is so much tighter and the players are better.

Playing super tight like this is not going to produce optimum money. You have to be willing to mix it up a little at this level. The overall looseness and weakness of many players warrants that you get a little wd40 and loosen up that tightness a little, becasue i can here you squeaking all the way over here.

Good folds are good. And tehy will help turn you into a great player. But this is not one of those instances.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
warrants that you get a little wd40 and loosen up that tightness a little, becasue i can here you squeaking all the way over here.


[/ QUOTE ]

This kinda made me laugh. Roland is WAY tight.

Don't you think responding 3 times to the same thread, constituting 25% of your posts is a little overboard? Especially when all 3 posts make the same point?

[frappeboy]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd definitely play this hand on partypoker 5-10 and would probably raise. I think you are playing a little too tight for the ante structure if you're folding this. On the partypoker 20-40 I would fold though since the structure is so much tighter and the players are better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I want to clarify my post a little bit.. I'd be more inclined to fold if the guys who hold the ace and king are Loose aggressive type players. The problem with these guys is they could re-raise without aces of kings here and you'd be forced to fold because of the dead queen. If the players who hold the ace and king are loose passive or tight passive/aggressive, you don't have to worry about this.

Also, this is only a close call on tight ante structures.. On a looser structure you'd be making a big mistake folding here. I still think under most conditions you would make a profit by playing this hand even in a tight structure though.

I prefer to raise here because it knocks out players, and also defines your opponent's hands more. An ace with pocket 5s is less likely to get fancy when facing a raise. If you limp he might raise and you'd be forced to fold, but if you raise yourself he might fold the hand.

Also the better the players are at the table with the cards lower than queens, the more inclined you should be to fold, since you probably won't get much action from them which is where your profit comes from. But if the players are strong you'd be better off finding another table.

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
and his clubs are not that live.


[/ QUOTE ]

The liveness of the clubs makes very little difference here.

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
You have to be willing to mix it up a little at this level

[/ QUOTE ]

No, if there is a level where you can play uber tight (while not getting anted to death) and still get action it is 5/10 and 2/4

While this isn't a "bad" fold...I think it is a tad too tight.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and his clubs are not that live.


[/ QUOTE ]

The liveness of the clubs makes very little difference here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jon, i thought folding pairs with two higher upcards and you have no overcard kicker was standard? What am I missing? In particular, who wants to play with a semi dead hand?

[BTirish]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, this is only a close call on tight ante structures.. On a looser structure you'd be making a big mistake folding here. I still think under most conditions you would make a profit by playing this hand even in a tight structure though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that it's a close decision, and it mostly comes down to the temperament of the game and the quality of the opponents. My main point is that you aren't looking to play the hand against the overcards. Obviously the best case scenario is that you are called by a weaker pair, and not by the A or K. Other than that, the best you're hoping for is an ante steal. I agree that it's a close decision, but I like folding in spots like this.

If you hold a pair and you see two unduplicated overcards behind you yet to act, you're going to be up against a higher pair almost 30% of the time. (each has 3 "outs" to pair up, and 2 hole cards to do it in. 42 unseen cards: (3/42+3/41) * 2 = 29% ... multiplying by 2 is a rough way of doing it.) This doesn't take into account the various other hands (3 flushes, underpairs, etc.) which the A or K villians could play and/or reraise. Since it's generally good policy to fold to reraises by overcards (and to avoid playing pots against them in general) in a relatively tight structure, and you can expect said raise pretty often... it follows that raising into the two overcards isn't such an obviously great move.

(I claim no expertise in the math involved. Others here are way better at it than me, and I invite any and all corrections.)

[vintage_sara]

This is an excellent fold Roland. You have the makings for a Vegas pro! I used to make these folds. Lately, I've been raising with this hand...LOL...I've gotten a little off my game lately.

Seriously, if the game is really, really tight. I raise with this hand and fold for the reraise. If it is averge to aggressive, I fold with it. I do not limp unless the game is super, super, super passive and nobody is punishing me. Well maybe I don't limp...I am not a limper, I am a raiser. Nah, no limping for me.

[arod15]

it depends really on the table on a tight table live i may complete here and go for a steal. But again its all table dependent.

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and his clubs are not that live.


[/ QUOTE ]

The liveness of the clubs makes very little difference here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jon, i thought folding pairs with two higher upcards and you have no overcard kicker was standard? What am I missing? In particular, who wants to play with a semi dead hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

True, to a point. The higher your pair the less this matter, because there is a smaller chance that an opponent has a hidden pair higher than your pair.

For each opponent with an unduplicated upcard behind you there is a 7% chance that opponent has a pair.

So there is roughly a 14% chance that the queens aren't best.


I don't hate the fold, but I'd probably try to see if the A or K comes along when I limp. And I probably fold this if I was in another hand at the time.

I limp here because ::
1. I don't mind limp/folding (to a completion from the A or K)
2. I don't want to build a pot

I know limping may let more opponents in, but I really want to play a cheap pot here.


Big edit below ---

So I saw another post that did some math. And it turns out that each the A and the K have roughly a 14.25% chance of having a split pair. I used to think that each unduplicated upcard had a 7% chance of being paired. So now I'm starting to really rethink playing this hand.

Ok, but I still stand by limping because you want to play against a hand you have an edge against. And if you raise you could very well shutout the hands you have an edge against (the hands that will play to the river while being behind, anyway)

[MRBAA]

My instinctive response is that this fold is too tight. If the game is so tight that no with a worse hand will call a completion here, I probably need to find a new game. At most 5-10 tables I've sat at (live), the jack, a dead ten, flush draws and the like will all call. My hand's only semi-dead, so I complete and see what happens. Against a very tight and predictable player I can fold if the K or A reraises. Against most, though, I'll see fourth.

I'm interested that so many disagree -- the times I win $6 (antes/bring in), the times I get called by inferior hands, to me at least make up for the times I lose $10 or $15 by getting reraised by kings or aces.

In general, I tend to err on the side of mixing it up with marginal hands (which I agree this is) because even if I only break even on them, they give me cover for good hands.

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone disagree?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not me.

[Quicksilvre]

If I knew that both seats 3 and 6 were sub-average players, or if I didn't have a read on them, or if the ante was $1 instead of $.50, I'd limp. Otherwise, I think your fold is at least justifiable.

[MRBAA]

I am definitely a recreational player. For me, the money is more a way of keeping score than a significant source of income.

Would someone who is playing for a living -- or for whom poker income is a significant extra source of income -- be more prone to avoid these situations, since they are low in extra profit potential and can greatly increase variance?

[Jeffage]

If the ante was $1, you should be raising.

Jeff

[berya]

Can someone come up with any math to show it's a fold?

I would always raise here and expect to get played with or take the antes down. I think chances are high I'm getting called by lower upcards which have no business calling me or K, A, and Q with some garbage that they like to give me action with. This outweighs the negatives for me as far as playing the hand. Two queens is too big a hand to give up here IMO. There is just too many junk hands that can call me here that I would not mind action from at all.