22 in the BB

[Diplomat]

I've been reforming my game of late due to a bad run online, and one of the spots I think I'm leaking chips is from the blinds. What do you guys think of this hand? (it was played in a B+M, but is a suitable example)

30-60 full game. I am dealt 22 in the BB. Folded to an aggressive button who does not respect me at all, who raises. A predictable player folds the small blind, I call.

The flop is KK3. Check/check.

The turn is a 4. Bet/raise/call.

The river is a 7. Check/bet/call.

I lost to pocket nines. Anyone play it differently? All thoughts and comments are appriciated.

-Diplomat

[Vehn]

Nah.

[trillig]

I'd have folded to the pre-flop raise, 22 is a long shot.

-t

[Billy LTL]

[ QUOTE ]
I am dealt 22 in the BB. Folded to an aggressive button who does not respect me at all, who raises

[/ QUOTE ]

Been there, done that.

I'm a slow learner so it took me a couple of times to realize that I just hated trying to figure out how to play an unimproved 22 from my blind on the turn.

I just fold them preflop now. It makes life easier.

Billy

[rivaridge]

I would fold this unless there are enough callers (with a little implied odds factored in) to justify drawing for trips. 2-2 is a very weak hand and its even weaker out of position. (I know people are going to argue that their brilliant play postflop play will justfiy playing this hand but I dont buy these arguments especially out of position.)

[David Sklansky]

You should play 22 against a single raiser when you are in the big blind, if the other player is very aggressive or very passive. Otherwise fold. I'll let others elaborate.

[Vehn]

I'm not folding the 13th best heads up hand while getting 3.666666666:1. I'm very sorry its a difficult hand to play. Feel free to peddle the nuts if that's your thing, but I'm playing.

The only time I would even consider folding here is, well, against an opponent as described in the original post. But in general I play it and expect to make money with it.

[Diplomat]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd have folded to the pre-flop raise, 22 is a long shot.


[/ QUOTE ]

Against what? I actually thought about three-betting.

-Diplomat

[OrangeHeat]

Against a very aggressive player you have an excellent chance of collecting multiple bets when you hit your set.

Against a very passive player it may be cheap enough to hit your set or bet him out of the hand.

Right?

[Rushmore]

This is a bit of a catch-22 (I can't believe you missed this as the title of your post).

If you're going to play, and you get a good flop (as you did), here's the situation:

If you bet out on the flop, you'll get raised by a lot of hands that are behind yours, and some that are ahead. Play back? Call and check the turn? Call and bet the turn? None of these is particularly palatable.

If you check the flop, then what? Check raise? Check and call? Check and bet out on the turn if he checks behind on the flop (which you did)?

In other words, it's a tough spot.

That said, do you think this player is raising the turn with ace-high? If not, it's a fold on the turn.

Personally, I'd have bet out on the flop, called a raise, and then check-folded on the turn if he followed through. If he checks behind on the turn, I'm check-calling the river.

Although this might seem a bit weak, is it any weaker than folding to his raise on the flop? We've all seen this play a million times, and we're never surprised when the button check the turn. If he follows through on the turn with ace-high and we lay down, fine, you're outplayed by a player with better position. Move on to the next hand.

[gonores]

Against a single opponent, I don't think you're playing a small pair for set value. It just won't happen all that often.

Very aggressive opponents will pay you off with worse hands.

Very passive opponents are easy to read and will lay down often enough to a flop/turn bet/checkraise to make the play profitable. They also won't punish you enough when they have better hands.

That being said, I'd hate to bring 22 to a HU fight with a very agressive player who has position. If I had to call here, I think my gameplan would be to check-call the guy all the way to the river and hope he keeps betting his missed overcards.

Doug

[Sehr Gut]

If you had decided to call him down even if he should raise your turnbet, why not just checkcall him down all the way?
If he is aggressive and doesnt respect you at all he probably would not care if you call the flop and he held AQ, AJ, A10 or something like this. I think he would bet again and maybe check down the river in that case.

Sehr Gut

[adrianus]

If you need a set (less than 1:7 on the flop) to continue then DON'T PLAY IT against 1 opponent.

If you bet into a passive player and get action you can easily fold, otherwise you win the pot.

Your 22 is favorite over any non-pair (even AK). Your hand is probably a favorite against an extreme aggressive player who will pay you off.

[Inthacup]

I'll let others elaborate.


Hahaha. YES! David, you made my day.

[Ed Miller]

I usually fold 22 from the BB against a single raiser in the 15-30 game at the Bellagio. I made an exception a couple of days ago because I thought I had good control over my opponent.

Open-raise from tight, predictable player. Folded to me in the BB with 22 and I call. Flop is J /images/graemlins/club.gif5 /images/graemlins/heart.gif3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif. I check and she checks. Turn is 8 /images/graemlins/heart.gif. I bet and she calls. River is 3 /images/graemlins/club.gif. I bet and she calls. Treys up good! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

The problem with deuces is when you play against an opponent against whom it is difficult to tell whether the raiser has a pair or overcards. At that point, you are usually a big underdog or a moderate favorite in a small pot and out of position.

[Michael J. Sykes]

In this situation, I check-call all the way against the disrespectful LAG. I make this decision before I call his preflop raise, regardless of what cards hit the board (unless I improve).

-MJS

[nykenny]

i'd probably check called the turn and river. but i like ur opponent's play for some reason. it's quite powerful and unconventional. i am a big fan of taking some risk for some reward. i know it sounds strange, maybe even stupid. but this feels very much like the Farha move on WSOP 2003...

Kenny

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
Against a very aggressive player you have an excellent chance of collecting multiple bets when you hit your set.


[/ QUOTE ]
no. against a very aggressive player, he will bet flop and turn (sometimes river) with just over cards. since he is more likely to have over cards (non-paired) than he is to have over pair than yours, and with over cards he is going to miss more than he hits, you can some times play passively and get paid because he will bet for you. you can sometimes check-call to river, or check-call, check-call and bet river.

[ QUOTE ]
Against a very passive player it may be cheap enough to hit your set or bet him out of the hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

against a VERY passive player, it's almost profitable to play anything for 3.5:1 odds.

Kenny

so, where do i find these full-of-exploitable-mistakes-players?

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not folding the 13th best heads up hand while getting 3.666666666:1

[/ QUOTE ]
in fact, you should point out that 22 is the 13th nuts on 2nd street /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[nykenny]

3 betting is best against HYPER-aggressive trash player, IMO. but i would also consider that as one of the options in your situation.

[OrangeHeat]

Ok I agree on your description of the benefits of an aggressive player but you will also collect more bets from the aggressive player when you hit.

[AceHigh]

I think you should play because against an aggressive or passive player because there is less chance of being outplayed. So you are now playing showdown poker.

Against an aggressive player you can check/call knowing a bet will go in on the flop and turn and probably the river whether you are ahead or not.

Against a passive player you can bet the flop, turn and river knowing you can fold if you get raised and you don't have a set.

[trillig]

Unless you flop a 2, you are in trouble from the start, I have lately come to hate small pairs, learning to dump them is hard, but getting easier.

Take a look at this:

http://www.twodimes.net/poker/?g=h&b=&d=&h=2h+2s%0D%0AJd+Tc%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A

JT offsuite is actually a favorite over 22.

Figure this simple logic too:

His 2 cards, if paired, you are beat if no 2 hits, and still could be if his does. (unless he is in there with the other 2's LOL)

If 5 different cards hit the board and he has 2 different cards...

6 outs with 5 cards to come... on average he will hit one of them how often?

You get a str8 with your 2? well 6 would also...

Problem solved for me, easy fold. I'd rather play 87s then 22, any day.

2's make for lousy bet fellows, I save my bets for better op fare, 2 outs stinks at least for me...

-t

[Buckshot]

I think I might lead out on the flop and turn. If he raises the turn then I would fold.

If I played it your way I would probably fold to the raise.

~stephen

[skp]

A terse but devilishly informative statement.