Clarification on trying to spike with pocket pairs

[Irishboy]

General wisdom is that you want 5 players to have implied odds good enough to try for a set with your small and medium pocket pairs.

Does "5 players" mean Me + 4 others or me + 5 others

[pudley4]

either.

3 (or even 2) is fine if you can get a couple of them to pay off to the river (especially if you can get a turn raise/checkraise in).

[scotnt73]

ive always heard 6-1 odds of spiking a set so that would be you+5 others.

[sfer]

Odds are 7.5 to 1 to flop a set. The probability is slightly under 12%.

[Gramps]

Yeah, 5 to 1 means you and 5 other players (if no raise). You're 7.5 to 1 (1 in 8.5) to spike trips on the flop and can make some good $$ post-flop when you do, but you will lose a % of the time that you do hit (to a straight, flush, higher set, two pair turning into a full house, etc.). So...you really want at least 5 to 1 on your money most of the time. At least that's the number S&M give. Seems pretty accurate from my experience.

It's a good situation to calcuate "pre-flop pot odds." If I'm playing Party $2/4, I'm in the SB, there's a limper, a raise and a coldcall, I know I have to pay $3 with $13 in the pot already (SB/BB, limper, raise, coldcall) with $2 more in there for almost sure (limper calling making it $15), and on average about $1 from the BB ($0 or $2), I'm seeing the flop with my small pair since I'm getting better than 5 to 1 on average (no rake $$ coming out until the pot hits $20).

Of course, there's fewer players to pay me off when I hit than if everyone limped, but I may have another aggressor to help get $$ in the pot...I usually keep it simple and go with the 5 to 1.

Personally, if you're unsure, I think it's best to let the hand go. IMO, the Party 2/4 and 3/6 games normally don't give you the odds to play these hands (say 66 and below), unless your in LP (or the blinds) and you KNOW you're getting those implied odds up front (or have a little added advantage being in LP). The game conditions stated in HEFAP required to play down to small pocket pairs up front just don't exist in the aforementioned online games IMO (Although they do in my LL B&M expierence).

Too often when I've tried to limp with a borderline hand (55/66) from EP or MP, it's ended up with only 1 other limper and the blinds seeing the flop. Or, the next VP$IP'er to my left raises and folds out everyone else, or everyone but the BB, leaving 2-4 to see the flop for my two bets (you almost always have the odds to call that raise once you're stuck in that predicament). The -EV from those situations adds up.

[Irishboy]

[ElSapo]

You don't need five or six players. What you need is a couple of the right players giving you good implied odds, and position.

El Sapo

[sthief09]

The problem with raising low pocket pairs, much like you would with small suited connectors, has to do with implied odds. If you are getting 5-1 and that's what you need, then you might think that it's worth raising. However, this 5-1 relies on future bets you will get. If everyone is putting 2 bets in the pot pre-flop, then any future bet you get will give you half as much implied odds as you would have gotten if the pot was unraised preflop.

Thought I'd throw that in there.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
It's a good situation to calcuate "pre-flop pot odds." If I'm playing Party $2/4, I'm in the SB, there's a limper, a raise and a coldcall, I know I have to pay $3 with $13 in the pot already (SB/BB, limper, raise, coldcall) with $2 more in there for almost sure (limper calling making it $15), and on average about $1 from the BB ($0 or $2), I'm seeing the flop with my small pair since I'm getting better than 5 to 1 on average (no rake $$ coming out until the pot hits $20).

[/ QUOTE ]

The S+M 5:1 number is based on how many players you need in there, on average, to play those hands for a profit in a tough mid limit game. Against bad players who "play too many hands and go too far with their hands (my italics)" you can get away with playing them with slightly worse preflop odds in an unraised pot, which is why S+M advocate limping small PPs from any position in very good games.

There is a huge difference between playing small PPs for 1 small bet and for 2 small bets. In limit, the amount of money you can collect on later streets is, barring some sort of silly heads-up pissing contest, fixed. So your implied odds get cut down when you put more money into the pot preflop. This means that, if you're coming in for more than 1 SB, you need better preflop pot-odds than you usually would against those opponents to compensate you for the reduced implied odds.

scrub

[Gramps]

I agree that, post-flop action being the same in both situations, you definitely have worse implied odds if you put 1 1/2 bets in versus only 1 bet. It may be different in mid/high limits, but my experience in the PP 2/4 and 3/6 games has been that when you are calling 1 1/2 (or 1 2/3 bets in 3/6) from the SB with a small pocket pair (due to a raise), you generally get more action on the flop and Turn than you do when there's you + 5 limpers/blinds seeing the flop. The "post-flop passivity problem" of these games (at least 2/4) that works against playing PP's up front is now mitigated somewhat with the PFR'er (assuming the "autobet" (or raise overcards) mentality on the flop which is common in these games).

So...while your implied odds drop due to putting more money in on the first round, I believe it's compensated for by the increased $$ you can get into the pot post-flop (even with fewer players). The higher chance of post-flop action with a PF raiser makes the PP a better hand to play up front IME. Sucks when you hit trips and it gets into a check-fest post-flop.

When you hit trips from the SB against an "auto-aggressor," you have a # of options to play it, bet out and hope for some calls and a raise, go for the check raise right away, check-call the non-scary board and look to pop people on the Turn.

Plus, you're looking for a card that probably won't help anyone else...and people aren't likely to see a 4 or 5 on the board and think "ooohhhh, scare card!" If anyone else has a hand, you'll get paid off to the River.

Hence...I think it's safe to go with the 5 to 1 in the above described situation.

[scrub]

I was replying to the method you used more than to whether it was a good idea to call in the situation you described. My point was that you needed to be thinking about your actual implied odds given your opposition, the action so far in the hand, and the amount of money already in the pot, and your position, rather than adding up the dead money in the pot and seeing if what you had to call reached some "magic ratio."

scrub

[Gramps]

There's more to it than 5:1.

But it's more fun to argue points...of course that's the lawyer in me coming out...

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
Too often when I've tried to limp with a borderline hand (55/66) from EP or MP, it's ended up with only 1 other limper and the blinds seeing the flop. Or, the next VP$IP'er to my left raises and folds out everyone else, or everyone but the BB, leaving 2-4 to see the flop for my two bets (you almost always have the odds to call that raise once you're stuck in that predicament). The -EV from those situations adds up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I also bet that everytime you raise with AA UTG that you get called by five or six opponents who go all the way to the river and end up making "some crazy two pair".

Isn't that strange?

I play any pocket pair from any position for one bet before the flop. If the game isn't good enough to do that, then I'm leaving the game.

[Trix]

Small pocket pairs are about implied odds, how bad your opponents plays matters much more than how many they are.

Read this: majorkongs training wheels post (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=smallholdem&Number=495010& PHPSESSID=&fpart=1#Post495010Post495010)

[Styles]

Where is it written that you need 5:1?

With position (the button) you can have implied odds with as few as 3 (maybe even 2) opponents IMHO

part of this is because you will get action because your hand is concealed.

Anyone got a page number for this 5:1? It's not in the "playing pairs in the hole" section as far as I can tell pgs 125-127

[Gramps]

Page 82 in the 21st century edition of HEFAP. Only short mention of it, and factors affecting your decision (per discussion in this thread and other threads).

Page 24 (Early Position Hands) discusses the game conditions you need to play a hand like 33 up front as well (and how implied odds go down when you have to play 2 or three bets preflop).

[Styles]

[ QUOTE ]
Page 82 in the 21st century edition of HEFAP. Only short mention of it, and factors affecting your decision (per discussion in this thread and other threads).

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank You! I couldn't figure out where that was coming from /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Gramps]

When I'm unsure about whether I should play my small/medium pocket pair (based on game conditions), I "put my training wheels back on" and fall back on that 5 to 1 threshold. /images/graemlins/cool.gif Seems like a good default.