Pot limit, No limit poker hold'em quiz

In the book Pot limit and No limit poker by Bob Ciaffone one of his quiz problem in his book is as follow. You are in the big blind in a $5-$10 game and pick up two deuces in a 6 handed unraised pot. The flop is (8,5,2) with all different suit. The small blind bets $60 and you call and a player in middle position who is a solid player raise to $170. Everyone folds around to you. With you and the raiser with about a grand left Ciaffone in this examplesay that you should FOLD! In Harrington on Hold'em Volume2. Dan saided that if someone flop set over set on you then you are just unlucky by folding a set on the flop is just plain stupid and I fully agree with Harrington on this regard. If Harrington say he would not fold a set on the flop in tournament play then why would you fold during a cash game? So my question is if wheather Ciaffone's play here is right or wrong and why? Hope you guys can help

[lightw1thoutheat]

what hand do you put the solid pair. harrington also says that the hands that people tend to limp with are medium pairs. a solid player would undboubtably raise a big pair pf.

tournament play is different than cash games by a great deal. you dont have the time to wait around for another big hand. and with the blinds and antes escalating, you have to make money with your big hands or go home.

In cash games, the blinds are usually smaller compared to your stack, and you can afford to lay down a hand without the fear of being blinded away.

i hope this helps

[WhiteWolf]

I think the authors explained their logic in the quiz answer. Basically, you need to try to put the MP player on a range of hands that your set of two beats. Remember, he is solid, it's a multiway pot, he's just seen the SB bet the pot into a big field, and you as the BB (who could hold anything) smoothcall on a relatively drawless board.

Two pair: Would he call PF w/85, 82, or 52? Nope. These holdings are out.

Overpair: AA down to TT, he would almost certainly raise PF. These are definitely out. 99 - perhaps he would have limped this PF, but it's more likely he would have raised. Possible, but not likely.

Top pair - 98s? 78s? Maybe, although you would expect a solid player to not play these PF in MP. Also, would he raise two players showing strength w/just TPMK here? He is making it attractive for the SB and you to call - it doesn't look like he is worried about protecting his hand here. Not a likely holding.

Stone cold bluff - into a big field, and giving SB and you attractive calling odds? Nope.

So, in this situation, hand analysis leads us to believe that we are in one of those rare situations were our bottom set is beat by a top set. Harrington's rule is fine as a generalization which covers almost all times you flop a set, but this scenario it sure looks like we're beat. The comment from lightwithoutheat above also brings up some good points about why a tournament situation may lead you to a different analysis than you would in a cash game.

And, FWIW, I got this one wrong when I took the quiz too /images/graemlins/grin.gif

A cash game is definitely much different then a tourney, I kinda hate the small pocket pairs in a cash game, it's almost impossible to win a big all-in pot with bottom set, most players aren't going to put all the money in unless they have bottom set beaten.
I think a tourney is definitely different, you're under so much pressure to double up, if you're got under 20 big blinds, you can't really lay down a set.

[Kaeser]

I think the real thing here is that it's an unraised pot. Not only are you more likely to run into another set in an unraised pot due to players limping with small PP's, but there's nothing to fight over. I don't think you lose much by letting this go.

If the pots been raised then it's too likely the guys making a move with an overpair or a whiffed AKs. This applies more to cash games then tournaments. If it's anything but the first few levels of a major tournament then your just going broke set over set.

[trumpman84]

[ QUOTE ]
A cash game is definitely much different then a tourney, I kinda hate the small pocket pairs in a cash game, it's almost impossible to win a big all-in pot with bottom set, most players aren't going to put all the money in unless they have bottom set beaten.
I think a tourney is definitely different, you're under so much pressure to double up, if you're got under 20 big blinds, you can't really lay down a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see this argument used all the time with (insert strong hand here) and I think it's logic is flawed. By this reasoning, no pots would ever go past the flop unless someone held top or 2nd set, and this just isn't true. People bluff, people overplay hands, people bet and call with draws.

I see this all the time with "people won't put in a lot of money in if they cant beat top two pair" or if "they can't beat TPTK", but I see it all the time. It's true that good players might not pay off TPTK or two pair, but you shouldn't be playing at a table of good players. Even a pro is going to lose a lot of chips if he holds an 87s and is against bottom set on a 872 flop or an A87 and you hold A8s.

[csuf_gambler]

i would push here and lose all my money

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
i would push here and lose all my money

[/ QUOTE ]

[DavidC]

I'm pretty sure that he explains why he makes that move.

Why do you want us to repeat it?

I mean, I can't think of anything to say except what these guys have already said... and what Ciaffone said...

--Dave.