Simple preflop question. (Correct poll).

[Chaostracize]

This was inspired by a friend of mine who made a fold preflop that I thought was horrible, but I want to know if I'm wrong. It's one of the following hands. How do you play them. Assume it's a $215 sng with no reads and it's the first hand. I'm really more interested in 6+ tablers thoughts, but if you don't play that many and want to take a stab at what you'd do, go ahead.

[Chaostracize]

After you answer the poll, if you could give some thoughts that would be great. If everyone answers the poll and no one talks about it, we'll lose it quickly.

I'll give my thoughts in a bit. (Later today actually, I got 4 classes.)

[fnord_too]

I will limp with all of those. The only one I may not limp with is the 98s if I am doing something like trying to get tables open or heavily involved on other tables. The 66 is easy for set value, the KQs has nice position is a decent hand to play if you play well post flop (i.e. dont get stacked when you hit TPSK or such), and 89s is a fine multi-way hand from the button.

By far the worst fold is the 66, so I'm guessing that is what your friend did. The KQs is not a horrible fold, but I think it is passing up EV.

[Jman28]

I disagree.

I think that depending on the game, folding 66 first in may not be that bad. In games with skilled/agressive opponents, you can expect a raise behind you fairly often, and can expect not to get paid off hugely when you hit your set.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
I will limp with all of those. The only one I may not limp with is the 98s if I am doing something like trying to get tables open or heavily involved on other tables. The 66 is easy for set value, the KQs has nice position is a decent hand to play if you play well post flop (i.e. dont get stacked when you hit TPSK or such), and 89s is a fine multi-way hand from the button.

By far the worst fold is the 66, so I'm guessing that is what your friend did. The KQs is not a horrible fold, but I think it is passing up EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. I was going to make pretty much this exact post nearly word for word, good thing I read the replies first.

[Chaostracize]

In the first level I do not expect to get raised often. I expect to get raised by very good hands in the first level unless villain has a death wish.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
In the first level I do not expect to get raised often. I expect to get raised by very good hands in the first level unless villain has a death wish.

[/ QUOTE ]

So let's say you limp 66, next guy limps, and the CO raises to t90. Folded to you. Your play?

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree.

I think that depending on the game, folding 66 first in may not be that bad. In games with skilled/agressive opponents, you can expect a raise behind you fairly often, and can expect not to get paid off hugely when you hit your set.

[/ QUOTE ]

First level, you don't care if there is a raise behind you unless it is an overet because you will still have implied odds to call. As to not getting paid off, if you are not getting paid off on your sets with middle pairs (when the pot is raised behind) you should be stealing more pots. You will still usually make a post flop money even when it is an unraised pot, but the likelihood of stacking someone goes way down.

If people are really folding these speculative hands in unraised pots when the blinds are low, I think they are leaving a ton of equity on the table. These are low risk/high reward spots. I'm not saying play speculative hands OOP or first in necessarily (I certainly would not play 89s from ep/mp nor without limpers).

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I disagree.

I think that depending on the game, folding 66 first in may not be that bad. In games with skilled/agressive opponents, you can expect a raise behind you fairly often, and can expect not to get paid off hugely when you hit your set.

[/ QUOTE ]

First level, you don't care if there is a raise behind you unless it is an overet because you will still have implied odds to call. As to not getting paid off, if you are not getting paid off on your sets with middle pairs (when the pot is raised behind) you should be stealing more pots. You will still usually make a post flop money even when it is an unraised pot, but the likelihood of stacking someone goes way down.

If people are really folding these speculative hands in unraised pots when the blinds are low, I think they are leaving a ton of equity on the table. These are low risk/high reward spots. I'm not saying play speculative hands OOP or first in necessarily (I certainly would not play 89s from ep/mp nor without limpers).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not really disagreeing with you. I voted for limping 66. I guess I just don't think it's as bad of a fold as you do.

[bugstud]

I voted fold the 66 and limp the others for reasons already stated.

66 fold, because you to often you
a) need to lay down your hand preflop because of a raise or a sandwich,
b) you will play only against the blinds and not getting payed
c) you play against 3-4 players and not getting payed off (not talking about the very few times you are making your set and loose anyway).

KQs limp and hope for getting 5:1 odds watching the flop plus position.

89s I voted fold - mainly because of to many active players behind me and I for sure don't want to put anymore money in there before the flop.

May be to weak tight, though...

[2Fast2Furious]

raise K-Q suited on the button and then raise again on the flop - think that you have to at least limp with 6-6 in middle position

[Chaostracize]

Yes.

[Chaostracize]

For those saying that a fold is in order with the 66 hand, I think you're highly underestimating the power of the big stack later in the game. You will lose very little if you give up on the flop; but what you gain by doubling up early is very, very important for a mutlitabling 109 and 215 player. I don't even think it's close.

This, obviously, is the hand in question.

I limp all three hands. Raising KQs is suicide.

Limping with 98s is only good if you're able to pay attention enough with 8 tables going.

Eh, that's it for now.

Haaaaate folding the 66. I call with 55 there, sometimes 44, definitely not 33 or 22.

[the_joker]

[ QUOTE ]
Haaaaate folding the 66. I call with 55 there, sometimes 44, definitely not 33 or 22.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see what the difference between 66 and 22 is. You're not likely to get an overpair with 66, and set over set doesn't happen enough to be worried about (or does it?).

[Chaostracize]

You can never be on the "good end" of set over set with 22. The lower the PP the more I hate the action. Better chance of hitting some kind of OESD with mid-PPs (although I'm kind of stretching here).

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
You can never be on the "good end" of set over set with 22.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll take my chances with a set of 2s. SNGs are too fast to worry about set over set. If I think I can sneak into a pot in level one without facing a large raise, I'll limp with any PP from any position. The likelihood of having the pot raised behind me is the only thing that would make me consider folding pre-flop, not worrying about the slim chance that I will lose to a higher set if I hit my hand.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]

I'll take my chances with a set of 2s. SNGs are too fast to worry about set over set. If I think I can sneak into a pot in level one without facing a large raise, I'll limp with any PP from any position. The likelihood of having the pot raised behind me is the only thing that would make me consider folding pre-flop, not worrying about the slim chance that I will lose to a higher set if I hit my hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Chaostracize]

No, no. Believe me, I don't worry about it. I just felt I had to defend limping with a pocket pair.

I should have said this, instead: If the game is passive preflop I'll limp with any PP in any position. I don't worry about raises behind me and I can win a lot more than I can lose.

But remember this is the first hand, so there's a lot more grey area.

So, 45 and durron... do YOU limp 22 UTG, first hand, in a 215, while 8-tabling?

[Chaostracize]

Wow. 98s is exactly half and half. Would some people mind weighing in on that, too?

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. 98s is exactly half and half. Would some people mind weighing in on that, too?

[/ QUOTE ]

I voted fold. I think it's probably a small profitable call if you are a good player, but I 8-table and would rather have more time to think elsewhere than take the minor +EV that calling may bring.

[hobbes9324]

The problem with 98s is that you need to be disciplined more than in the other two hands. It's easy to get into a bad spot with 98s - bottom end of a straight, top (lousy)
pair, mediocre flush draw.

I'm sure that I'm giving up some value - I'm just not sure that i'm a good enough player to extract that value on a consistant basis - I'll wait for another spot.

But then, I'm a donk......

[jdl22]

I don't play the 215s how often do pots get raised at level 1? Are there a lot of pots with several people seeing the flop in an unraised pot (thinking 5 or so including blinds)?

[jdl22]

[ QUOTE ]

The problem with 98s is that you need to be disciplined more than in the other two hands. It's easy to get into a bad spot with 98s - bottom end of a straight, top (lousy)
pair, mediocre flush draw.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think position makes up for these shortcomings and then some. I think 98s is a lot harder to get stacked off with than say KQ as well because when you make a second best hand it is better in the latter case. If you get a flop of Q85 for example it's easy to make a huge mistake (either folding a winner, not value bettting enough when ahead, or overplaying your hand) with a flop of 962 is easier to play.

[Chaostracize]

There are rarely 5 or more people seeing a flop more the minimum bet in the 215s. The aggression level in level 1 isn't that high, as well. (Anyone can correct me if they see fit.)

[Chaostracize]

I agree. It's a point everyone seems to be forgetting (that is, you're acting last on all future rounds).

EDIT: I think a large part of this debate is the ability to play strong, but solid postflop poker, which I feel like a large part of the multi-tabling SNG community is lacking.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]

So, 45 and durron... do YOU limp 22 UTG, first hand, in a 215, while 8-tabling?

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither of us play 215s.... thus I have no idea of the chance it getting staying unraised.

An idea I've been toying with is making a tiny raise (like to 40) with the idea that people are more likely to raise a limper than they will a small raiser?

[Chaostracize]

Flynn (I think) had a great post about min-raising to see cheap flops a while ago in MHS. Don't know if I'd be able to find it.