Of what use are small pocket pairs?

I'm having trouble understanding how small pocket pairs are supposed to be profitable to play in most situations shorthanded at low stakes tables.

In full ring games, I have read that you need 4 or 5 players seeing the flop with you in order to make it profitable to see the flop with your small pocket pair, because you're going to fold to any bet unless you hit your set, and the chance of hitting the set is low enough that you need that many players in to be profitable.

Of course, you won't have this many players in on the flop with you at 6max, so it makes me wonder how you are supposed to make money with these things when you will only hit the flop 11% of the time.

At the low limit 6max tables I play at, you can guarantee at least 2 other players to the flop with you no matter what sort of raising goes on preflop. In addition, the tables are full of players who are not going to fold on the flop or afterwards if they have any pair, any draw, overcards, etc, and there are lots of loose aggressives who will bet at any flop.

Since you won't be able to bluff your way to the pot, as someone is sure to see you to a showdown most of the time, what are you supposed to do with your small pocket pair which has missed the flop? Keep calling all the bets to the river and hope no one else hit a pair? Keep betting and raising in the slight chance everyone will fold?

Against a bunch of loose players who dump way too much money onto the pot with marginal hands, generally the strategy is fold until you actually have something good, then bet and they will all call or raise you with their garbage hands. It's all betting for value, that's your edge. So where's the value in your low pocket pairs?

[scotty34]

Small pocket pairs' value seems to work on a U-Shaped curve (think of a graph with number of players on x axis, and value on y axis). They are very valuable heads up, and their value decreases as you add more players. It is probably at it's lowest point with 4 players, and then starts increasing once again.

But the question is, are they worth playing against 2 players who are not likely to fold after the flop?

[marsvolta619]

small pocket pairs need to be played aggressively, especially as you move up. their value lies in the wa/wb area, where you can hopefully get away from them on the flop/turn but when you hit a set you can make out like a bandit

[scotty34]

[ QUOTE ]
But the question is, are they worth playing against 2 players who are not likely to fold after the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. That's a pretty damn broad scenario you listed.

Of course this doesn't tell the story, but here are some basic equity calculations for low PP's.

200,416,571,585 games 471.000 secs 425,512,890 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 34.3187 % [ 00.33 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 2: 35.4250 % [ 00.34 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 30.2563 % [ 00.30 00.00 ] { 2d2c }



100,346,046,570 games 320.063 secs 313,519,671 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 29.8628 % [ 00.29 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 2: 27.5522 % [ 00.27 00.01 ] { random }
Hand 3: 42.5850 % [ 00.42 00.00 ] { 6d6c

[DMBFan23]

[ QUOTE ]
But the question is, are they worth playing against 2 players who are not likely to fold after the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

for a raise? as a limp? from the BB?

I overlimp with most pocket pairs in most situations, and I play them for a raise with 2 players in if I'm in the BB. so the generic answer to your question is yes

So pocket 6's are worth playing against 2 opponents with a VPIP of 100%. That doesn't sound very promising for low pocket pairs.

[ QUOTE ]
small pocket pairs need to be played aggressively, especially as you move up. their value lies in the wa/wb area, where you can hopefully get away from them on the flop/turn but when you hit a set you can make out like a bandit

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm looking at this from the perspective of low limit tables with bad, loose opponents. Playing aggressively would mean betting and raising with no real way of knowing whether anyone had you beat or not since these players don't play in a logical fashion.

If one of the normally passive opponents raises, ok, I know I'm in trouble. But half the players at the table are loose aggressives, it's not too likely I'm gonna have any idea what they have, between their bluffing and their overbetting.

[Crimson]

With PP, i fold 22-44 UTG, and raise 5's+. An argument could be made however for 5's and 6's, but 7's+ are an easy raise for me UTG. I generally add 1 or 2 levels per/position, but i still fold Duces and treys from the Button, unless 3 people limped i might call behind hoping for the set.

A little aggresion can win you alot more pots as you move up stakes, but i'm currently playing .5/1 and 1/2 and understand what you mean. It depends on your table, put the Lag's to your right, and it will make it easier to play.

Other peoples thoughts? I've been thinking about this lately.