Folded 5 of a kind

I have pp 5. Five players including me call to the flop. Flop is 3, 4, 5 rainbow.

First player bets, second calls, I raise, other two players fold and the first two call.

Turn is 2 (suit unimportant). First player bets

second raises, I figure they both have straights and since there are only a couple of cards to improve my hand I fold.


River is my fourth five. Both other players indeed have straights.

Any commends on my fold (I still feel it was the right thing to do) or on the rest of the play?


Thanks,


Peter

Hi Peter,


By your narrative, you are currently getting 4.25 to 1 on a call, albeit with the risk of it getting raised again behind you.


On the other hand, given that you have top set, things are actually better on the turn than you seem to think. You have 10 outs to a full house or better on the river. (1 five, 3 fours, 3 threes, and 3 deuces.) There are 46 remaining unknown cards. In fact, if you are "sure" that both opponents have straights, this means there are only 44 "unknown" cards. It is therefore a 3.6 to 1 (3.4 to 1) shot to hit, so you are getting the correct price to call.


Now, if you didn't hit on the river, and were certain in your read, folding there is very likely correct. However, you can call on the turn given that you are getting proper odds to call, and the risk of getting raised behind again is more than offset by the extra bets you will collect on the river when you hit.


Don't sweat it though, you may have folded incorrectly here, but the ability to release a good hand is a skill that will come in useful in your career.


Cheers,


Dave

Your numbers are off- if they have straights, some of your pair cards may be missing (unless everyone called with an Ace or 6)

Sure. Which is why the 3.6 to 1 is the number I'd use. It makes the fewest assumptions.


In the absolute worst case scenario, up to 6 of his outs could be killed (set over set over set). However, in that case, he has the best hand, so it still would be clearly worth at least a call.

ii would never fold this....you have 10 outs to the nuts....in fact if there were 2-3 more players id be jamming it...


figure they both have an A and caught their str8...big deal...i like letting em bet it up here....then if ya miss the river...fold....


not on the turn......never!!!


b

Don't sweat it though, you may have folded incorrectly here, but the ability to release a good hand is a skill that will come in useful in your career.


The "ability" to release a hand which has so many outs is a "skill" which will cost any player enormous amounts of money.


This was a ridiculously bad fold.

Yes Dynasty, he made a large mistake, and a painful one at that, too.


On the other hand, lets say he calls on the turn, and now on the river a blank falls. A lot of players will talk themselves into another call with top set, based on "the pot is large enough, small percentage of the time, etc." This can cost a player a lot of money if done indiscriminately.


The point I was trying to make, albeit badly (given your snarky response) was that he has the opposite of the common problem. Most players play good hands (AA, top two, set, etc.) as if they're attached to their hands with crazy glue. Peter seems to be playing as if the cards were 150 degrees ... looking for any reason to release them.


Both extremes are bad for the overall EV, but, in some ways, it is good that he has already developed the hand reading skills and willingness to release a hand which he considers probably to be second best. Now we just have to educate him on draws and odds, so that he only makes correct folds. For the average player, the former is a more difficult skill to learn than the latter, so in that regard, he's in good shape.


In my teaching experience, it has always been my policy to clearly explain the student's mistake, but also to point out whatever positive aspects can be drawn from the learning experience. This seems to work better than simply calling my students incompetent and stupid whenever they make an error.


Just my two cents, anyways.


Dave

Thanks for your kind response.


Peter