From the pages of HEFAP

[TaintedRogue]

6 players limp and I'm in the big blind with 88. I raise and everyone calls.
Flop: 7d, 2d, 9d
SB cks, I bet and get 3 callers. 3 down.
Turn: [7d,2d,9d] 3s
I bet and get 1 caller.
River: [7d,2d,9d,3s]6h
I bet and remaining opponent calls with Presto.
I take the pot.

[Kenshin]

[ QUOTE ]
6 players limp and I'm in the big blind with 88. I raise and everyone calls.
Flop: 7d, 2d, 9d
SB cks, I bet and get 3 callers. 3 down.
Turn: [7d,2d,9d] 3s
I bet and get 1 caller.
River: [7d,2d,9d,3s]6h
I bet and remaining opponent calls with Presto.
I take the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really dislike this play. I fully understand that the raise increases your pot odds and adds deception; however, I cannot imagine raising 88 from the blind constitutes a +EV decision.

[TaintedRogue]

What are you going to do if the flop comes with 2 overcards, with you in early position and 6 opponents?
Answer: fold.
What are you going to do if the flop gives you a set?
Answer: kick yourself in the butt for not raising preflop.
You are getting infinite odds if you don't raise, but you're getting 13:1 if you do, with odds of 7.5:1 of flopping a set that wins about 82% of the time.
Add to it, the times when you win unimproved......and I don't see the advantage of not raising.
Why would you not raise if you can get more money in the pot that will be giving you close to twice the odds of improving to a set?

[SoBeDude]

Why would you not raise if you can get more money in the pot that will be giving you close to twice the odds of improving to a set?

The amount of money in the pot has nothing to do with the odds of improving to a set.

-Scott

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
You are getting infinite odds if you don't raise, but you're getting 13:1 if you do, with odds of 7.5:1 of flopping a set that wins about 82% of the time.


[/ QUOTE ]

You don't get 13-1 on a raise, you are getting 6-1 assumng they all call.

It may or may not be EV just because the odds are close to you odds of ending up with the best hand, but I would certainly prefer to make this sort of play with position.

[Kenshin]

I have several comments:

1. By raising, you improve the limpers drawing odds. Thus, if you do catch your set, they might have sufficient odds to correctly chase down your set.
2. I dislike voluntarially putting money into a free play hand with which I have to frequently surrender on the flop.
3. Depending upon the game texture, your bb raise might put you at risk for a limp reraise. I have no particular desire to go to war with 88 in this or any situation.
4. Do you really wish to reduce infinite to 1 odds to 13-1? I certainly do not.

[MMMMMM]

The factor you are not considering: if the flop comes small you want to have the best chance of winning the pot. By raising a 6-way pot from the blind with 88 you make the pot so large that overcards will be encouraged to take a card off when you really won't want them to.

Hence raising large pairs in that spot is fine, and occasionally raising small pairs is OK too in order to tie people on to the pot if you hit a set. But raising middle pairs in that spot is not as good as either, because if your 88 is an overpair to the flop you would rather not have half a field of overcards chasing you.

[Schneids]

[TaintedRogue]

How can you say 6:1? There are six players limping in, plus your big blind = 7. If they all call your raise = 13:1.
Your big blind was part of the pot before the cards were dealt.
If you had been dealt 72os and someone raised preflop, you kiss the big blind goodbye.

[TaintedRogue]

Nice. An english major.

[TaintedRogue]

What you're not considering: With 14 small bets preflop, If I miss to a flop of J,6,2 rainbow or such and I ck and four people limp, I am getting 18:1 on a 22.5:1 draw to the turn, instead of 10:1, where I would have to fold.

[TaintedRogue]

1.Those six players need 29 collective outs to make my set a money underdog. They can chase my set all day long.
2.That's your preference.
3.One of the drawbacks to the play. If the next player re-raises and the very next caps its and the rest fold; I have to pay 2 more bets and am only getting 13:3 or 4.33:1 on my 7.5:1 draw. If I hit a set, the two opponents will need 20 collective outs to make me a money underdog.....and you know that with all that money in there, they are going to chase. That's the worse case scenario.
Of course.........this is not a wise play if you don't have a healthy bankroll to weather the swings.
4. 13:1 pot odds on a 7.5:1 draw........all day long.

[MMMMMM]

I still don't like the play. I feel that preserving your greater chances of winning on a neutral or low flop is more important.

[SoBeDude]

I really wasn't trying to be.

Actually I think I misread your post. I think you're referring to odds to chase on the flop here, which is fine.

And nice raise preflop. Anyone who tells you otherwise needs to read more.

-Scott

[Kevin J]

There's nothing wrong with making a raise like this once in a while. You can also spice up the pot with a 98s here and there. However, if you raise 100% of the time with these hands, you will eventually create a very unpleasant variance in your game. Also, when people start noticing that you do this all the time, it will become almost impossible for you to win a pot like the one you just won here.

Btw- What would you have done with QQ?

[Kevin J]

"[ QUOTE ]
The amount of money in the pot has nothing to do with the odds of improving to a set.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't get it. Why not? Your odds of making a set won't go up or down, but getting 12 to 1 from the pot is certainly much better than getting say, 3 to 1. ??

[TaintedRogue]

No harm, no foul :-). I thought you were poking fun at my poor grammer. It did sound like I was saying that if there is more money in the pot, that it increases your chances of catching a set. Wouldn't that be nice........if it were true!

[TaintedRogue]

Your theory sounds good, however, it's wrong. Since you didn't give any evidence supporting your theory, I'll refrain from giving any evidence supporting mine.

[MMMMMM]

You are taking this way too personally.

[TaintedRogue]

LOL!! wrong again! I love a good debate :-) Give me some facts to support your theory & I'll give you some of mine.

[MMMMMM]

Sorry not interested anymore.

[GuyOnTilt]

How can you say 6:1? There are six players limping in, plus your big blind = 7. If they all call your raise = 13:1.

Nottom's right; you're getting 6:1 on your raise. The money already in the pot is irrelevent; it is completely unaffected by your raise. You raise 1 SB, and are called in 6 places, so you're getting 6:1 on your raise. The odds of flopping a set are 7.3:1, so you're not making money in terms of flopping a set.

GoT

PS. Mike Haven thought the same thing about getting pot odds on a raise several weeks ago if you want to search the archives. Another poster and I explained why that's not correct.

[GuyOnTilt]

4. Do you really wish to reduce infinite to 1 odds to 13-1? I certainly do not.

Don't give in to his faulty logic. There is no 13:1 to be found in a raise.

GoT

[Coilean]

Yep, GoT and Nottom are absolutely right. Getting 13:1 pot odds after the raise does not equal 13:1 odds on the raise itself, because 7 of the bets were already in the pot. However, since the raise could pretty easily net you 10 extra bets (6 immediately plus extra bets from increased postflop chasing) those times you flop a set, I don't think there is anything wrong with it regardless.

[LarsVegas]

I disagree. First of all, most of the value from the raise will come through flopping OR turning a set (about 5.5:1 if I am not mistaken?). Due to the preflop raise, he will be seeing the turn very frequently.

As for winning unimproved, well there is a far bigger pot to be won, so it SHOULD be a little bit harder. However, I actually doubt it is. The respect a preflop raise from big blind into a field like this will give you should see you get easily rid of hands such as KQ, KJ, QJ, QT, JT on a flop such as 9-6-2 or 7-4-4. This actually may not have been the case if the pot was unraised preflop. While good players might argue that they will fold in both instances, I actually reckon more bad or average players will call in the first scenario. It's at very least close.

There is also the "keep-them-tied-to-the-pot" argument which is valid. I would also stress the deception factor. In a multiway limper pot like this, small-to-medium pairs are very likely to be out there, almost always smaller than 88. Should you be so lucky to flop set-over-set (rare occurence, but this is one of the most likely situations) or set vs. two pair on a board which doesn't contain an Ace, King or Queen (dream flop of course being 8 high rainbow), you could be looking at almost unlimited action.

lars

[MMMMMM]

Raising AA KK and sometimes small pairs from the blind in multiway pots is better than raising 88 99 TT JJ (and possibly even QQ in this spot) due to postflop play considerations. You wouldn't want to raise a hand like AJ offsuit here either.

Also, I just noticed a thread on the General Theory forum which deals with this sort of situation. According to the poster, Barroninam, Mason Malmuth discusses a similar situation in Poker Essays II where he advocates raising AA, KK, and small pairs, but not QQ, from the blind in a family pot. So maybe you should visit that thread and/or read Mason's Poker Essays books in order to explore the concepts more fully.

[LarsVegas]

Indeed HPFAP suggests what you say, however, their excample actually cites <b>99</b> as an excample of a "low pair" where you can again revert back to valueraising into a big field, knowing you will have a set about once in six times by the turn, and perhaps, in the case of middle pairs such as 99 or 88, win unimproved or by rivering a set when it seems correct to proceed beyond the turn without one, perhaps an additional 5% of the time.

Their excample is something along the lines "raise AA and 99 against 7 limpers, but not QQ or JJ. The reason is because a large part of QQ or JJ's value in this spot comes from the times they hold up unimproved." Not so with 99 and 88.

Also note how particularly QQ is not very affected by many of the hands I list that will likely fold on a low flop if you raise preflop from the big blind (QJ, QT, JT). The hands that will chase you if you raise preflop with Queens here and hit a flop you like (low and not too connected) are those who have flopped a low pair, some kind of straight or flush draw and dry aces, reading you for KK-JJ because you raised preflop and they hold an ace. Pretty much the same hands that will chase 88. So whenever 88 flops an overpair in this spot (or is still good despite an overcard), it figures to have just about as few losing cards as QQ would on the same flop. The key cards that separates their strength on these flops, Q, J, T and 9 will usually get folded anyway.

For instance, say you limp in with QJo after three limpers. Two more limpers, the small blind completes and now the big blind, what you perceive as a tight and sane player, raises.

The flop comes 7-5-2 rainbow. The big blind bets. One limper call before you. Do you call with QJ here? No, seriously, do you?

Lars

[Kevin J]

[Al_Capone_Junior]

seems like more of a suicidal play than advice applied properly. The preflop raise is fine, but that's where you lost me. Betting into five players on a one suited flop, raised pot, with (at best) an eight high flush draw (didn't say what suits you had) and/or second pair ain't my idea of the perfect HPFAP play.

al

[DcifrThs]

Now that is quite a coincidence that i happen to pick this thread to read and it directly relates to the post i put up under "Barroniman." I also sent a private message to a very worldly poker poster from the origins of this forum to comment on it. Barroniman is no more (just needed a temp name or whatever)

anyway, onto the main points: i believe that there are valid arguments for raising 88 from the bb and a few were presented here but i don't know about 6 players...you would like to have a few more unless you KNEW these players to be the loose payoff kind who won't just release on the flop and will call down if they hit they're overcards when you flop your set. if you knew these characteristics then maybe its ok to raise 6 people w/ 88 from big blind. But as was pointed out, you don't want aj chasing you when you don't flop your set and being correct to do so when he would be more likely to fold incorrectly in the small pot vs. chase correctly in the big one. he's getting effective odds of a MINIMUM 4:1 for a 3.14:1 shot (assuming you and him are the only ones remaining in the pot and you DO NOT pay off on the river when he bets- so his real odds are likely even better, maybe 6:1-9:1 depending on the other callers.) Since you want him to FOLD on the flop where he is getting correct odds to chase rather than CALL on the flop where he is also getting correct odds to chase (except the difference is in the big pot he KNOWS its a big pot and is more likely to chase vs. only 7 small bets in the pot) it is probably a little better to just check the bb something around 70-85% of the time and reserve the raises for 7-9 people in the pot.

Further, for the record it is clearly not 13:1 on your raise from the bb. Mason's essay in Poker Essays II called "raising before the flop" was the subject of my post that i referenced earlier. SITUATION: you are in bb with qq and 9 players call. whats your move? he says to always raise with aa, raise with the smaller pairs that you can easily release when no set flops since its 9:1 on the call for a 7.3:1 shot of flopping a set or better, BUT to just call with qq b/c it is not worth doubling the size of the pot AND giving your hand away when qq can win unimproved if you don't do those things. That was Mason's point and it is a good one to consider. So like i said before, 6 people i just don't know how good of an idea the raise is with the MIDDLE pairs in ONLY 6 people. thats kinda the opposite of what you want to do but rarely doing something like this to mix it up would be ok.

and please do check out the discussion on the GENERAL POKER forum under POKER THEORY. i think i called the thread, "HELP WITH QQ IN BB- DISCUSSION OF ESSAY FROM POKER ESSAYS II"


i hope this is some evidence to consider.

comments?
-Barron

[TaintedRogue]

If that's the way you look at it, then you're not getting infinite odds when you ck in the big blind.

[TaintedRogue]

I had the 8d, but that is not why I bet. If someone flopped a flush, chances are it is not to the ace and so they will want to make the Ad pay if it's out there and raise me. I then fold.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

And no one could raise you with Adx, thus making you fold the best hand? No one would raise with top pair? No one would slow play a made flush? or the nut flush? wait for the turn? It's just got too many ways to backfire, thus I still don't like it.

al

[SA125]

I think most of the thumbs down response came because you called it HPFAP.

From the standpoint of just good, old fashioned, instinct and guts poker playing -

You made a move on the BB, didn't get badly overcarded on the flop, stuck with it and took it down. Who doesn't do that sometimes?

Good hand.