Call any pair UTG?

[Tom Spec]

Who would play any pair UTG at your average $0.50-$1 table? I have been only playing 88 or higher, but it seems that's too tight.

[babigm]

Playing any pair UTG is probably too loose, but in most micro limit games you can probably lower your requirement. Depending on the passivity of the game, I would consider going down to 44, but that's just an educated guess. Abandon to any signifigant action after you. Almost an instant check/fold if you don't hit your set. What I like about the lower pairs is there aren't usually too many tough choices (in limit), it's either stop or full speed ahead.

If you believe the game is such that you can get in for a single bet it's usually worth seeing the flop, since when you do hit the set, you'll take the pot a good portion of the time. If it's raised once after you, the odds are still probably good enough to call depending on how many people are in.

I'm still learning though and pretty new myself, so I invite people to pick apart the post.

[RED_RAIN]

With over 25k hands at this level, over a 4 BB/100, and winning on every pocket pair except 2. My advice is to call any pocket pair UTG unless you believe almost for sure you will (A) get raised quickly behind you, (B) someone for sure will raise. Then I'd bring it up to pocket 8s and above. Usually at these game when you call UTG it encourages more people to call.

[Piers]

I think you need a passive game with over 50% seeing the flop to make it right to call with any pair UTG.

[RED_RAIN]

I just checked my stats on over 29k hands. I don't have as many pocket pairs to compare (often only got a certain pair like 5 times) UTG. I use to fold any pocket pairs under 7 but after a few weeks of playing I never folded a pocket pair. Notes of interest when looking at pocket 6s and below which I think the are the pocket pairs that people are considering folding (I think it's wrong for sure to not be calling 7s) is that only 4 of 17 had only 4 players to the flop and only 1 of 17 had only 3 players. The rest had 5 or more. When it was 4 or 3 it was usually because of a preflop raise close behind me. The way I play these are if I don't hit a set or a good straight draw I fold on the flop. But when I hit my set or straight on the flop I usually extract the most I can out of it. These low sets do great against people because they often don't see them coming. I know 17 pocket pairs isn't much to look at so perhaps if someone else has these more stats (please make sure it's UTG pockets only) it would be interesting to see. Overall I'm a good size winner on these pocket 6s and below and all the pockets included a easy to see winner. I go with my first statement that at "this level" you should call any pocket pair UTG then fold when you don't hit a monster flop unless my previous two statements are in play. Also the 50%+ players to flop I don't think is needed but overall it seems it's usually this way. At this level it seems people are mostly loose/passive preflop.

[sublime]

Yo kids-
I am mildly disturbed at the fact that folding PP's UTG is somewhat the norm among a few of you guys. Please read this thread by Obe'Won and pay critical attention to question 1.

Miller Time (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=smallholdem&Number=568 038&Forum=,,,,,,c2,,,,,,&Words=pre%20flop%20quiz&S earchpage=6&Limit=25&Main=565949&Search=true&where =bodysub&Name=43&daterange=1&newerval=3&newertype= m&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post568038)

One thing you guys need to remember is that your opposition is, on the norm, horrible. You have to open up your starting hand criteria to maximize your win rate.

[chief444]

I agree with you Sublime. I play any pair UTG at the average .5/1 table.

[afk]

If the game is loose and passive, play 'em. I think that not playing them in games like this is giving up too much.

[ZootMurph]

That Ed Miller post is excellent.

Anyway, there is another thread in the MicroLimits about this... I don't see how anyone can afford NOT to play small pairs, UTG or in any position. When you hit on these hands, the implied odds are HUGE because of the deceptive value of the hand.

[k000k]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing any pair UTG is probably too loose,

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, I cant beleive 1/2 the 2+2'ers will play any PP UTG. If you're reasonably certain you can get 5 limpers, but I suppose that IS typical for micro... Still seems too loose for me,

[ QUOTE ]

Depending on the passivity of the game, I would consider going down to 44, but that's just an educated guess.


[/ QUOTE ]
Are pocket 2's really that much worse than pocket 4's? If you're gonna play 44 I can't see not playing 22. Yes I realize 44 wins more than 22 but the difference is negligible IMO. 4's will just about always give you bottom pair/set/boat, while 2's will absolutely always give you bottom pair/set/boat. Either will stand up by themselves just barely above 0% of the time.

[ QUOTE ]

Abandon to any signifigant action after you.
Almost an instant check/fold if you don't hit your set.

[/ QUOTE ]
Damn straight.. Except one little thing, I'd change that 'Almost' to 'Absolutely', then I like it /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[k000k]

[ QUOTE ]
Yo kids-
I am mildly disturbed at the fact that folding PP's UTG is somewhat the norm among a few of you guys.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's kinda funny, I was thinking similarly, I was mildly disturbed that ppl are NOT folding low PP's UTG. Ima check out that post you speak of, I'm certainly not above improving my game.

[MicroBob]

i missed that Ed Miller quiz the first time around as i think i was travelling out of town. good ed miller stuff (as expected) so thanks for the link.


one guy in that thread commented that the game he described sounded like a party 2/4 game which i have to take exception to.

i don't even think the party .50/1 games have an average of 5-8 seeing every flop. it just doesn't happen.

consequently, when taking that quiz...keep the concept of 'number of players seeing flop' in mind. because i just don't think the party games are as loose as the games he describes....certainly not at the 2/4 level....i'm not positive about the .5/1 though.

i'm still looking forward to Ed's book....but more and more i am believing that the party 2/4 and especially the 3/6 games frequently behave a bit closer to an HEFAP game than they do a low-limit 5-8 to the flop Ed miller type game (and definately aren't even close to a Lee Jones described game which includes a lot to the flop with semi-frequent capping).

don't get me wrong....i see my share of fish at 2/4 and 3/6....but there aren't nearly as many bad players per table as the example table for Ed's quiz.

[HajiShirazu]

I don't think you need a massive number of limpers, if the pot is being played 5-way for one bet, that's enough to play these profitably.

[afk]

I agree in that more realistic micro online games probably seen an average of 4 or 5 seeing the flop, nevertheless I think Ed's quiz is an excellent way to illustrate the underlying theory behind preflop play in a loose game. His example may be exaggerated when you compare it two an average online game but I don't think that diminishes it's importance.

[T0asty]

Almost all the games on pacific have these games upto 3/6. The trouble is that the site is the pits, no multi-tabling and no HHs.

I think the reason a lot of 2+2ers fold small PPs UTG is because everything they read points in that direction.

[sublime]

I think the reason a lot of 2+2ers fold small PPs UTG is because everything they read points in that direction

Not on these forums they dont

[Joe Tall]

I limped w/22 in a loose-passive 10/20 at Foxwoods last night.

If you are at the right table limping w/PPs is a not brainer.

Peace,
Joe Tall

[Clarkmeister]

Yes, for .50-1.00 (poor playing opponents, somewhat passive game, many see each flop) you can play any pair UTG.

You can also play any two suited cards Ten and higher and any suited ace. If you are first learning, you may want to tighten up a little until you have proven that you can beat the games, but once you know you can win, that's a decent guideline.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, for .50-1.00 (poor playing opponents, somewhat passive game, many see each flop) you can play any pair UTG.

You can also play any two suited cards Ten and higher and any suited ace. If you are first learning, you may want to tighten up a little until you have proven that you can beat the games, but once you know you can win, that's a decent guideline.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not totally disagreeing. I'll play JTs, ATs, but I don't call KTs or QTs here. I also call only A8s and up and sometimes A7s. Unless you are pretty sure (80%) you can get to the flop without a raise and at least 5 players (90%) to the flop, do these other hands really warrant play?

[bicyclekick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, for .50-1.00 (poor playing opponents, somewhat passive game, many see each flop) you can play any pair UTG.

You can also play any two suited cards Ten and higher and any suited ace. If you are first learning, you may want to tighten up a little until you have proven that you can beat the games, but once you know you can win, that's a decent guideline.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not totally disagreeing. I'll play JTs, ATs, but I don't call KTs or QTs here. I also call only A8s and up and sometimes A7s. Unless you are pretty sure (80%) you can get to the flop without a raise and at least 5 players (90%) to the flop, do these other hands really warrant play?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you can play any AXs utg in those games. I did when I played back then and it seemed to work well.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, for .50-1.00 (poor playing opponents, somewhat passive game, many see each flop) you can play any pair UTG.

You can also play any two suited cards Ten and higher and any suited ace. If you are first learning, you may want to tighten up a little until you have proven that you can beat the games, but once you know you can win, that's a decent guideline.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not totally disagreeing. I'll play JTs, ATs, but I don't call KTs or QTs here. I also call only A8s and up and sometimes A7s. Unless you are pretty sure (80%) you can get to the flop without a raise and at least 5 players (90%) to the flop, do these other hands really warrant play?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you can play any AXs utg in those games. I did when I played back then and it seemed to work well.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have the discipline to lay down a pair of aces when you know you are out kicked sure (A6s-A2s especially). Post flop play would be important when you didn't get your 2 pair or flush draw I believe.

[RcrdBoy]

[ QUOTE ]

You can also play any two suited cards Ten and higher

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I reading this correctly? Any two suited, Ten high? I dump all suited cards not connected by at least 3 gaps under K high outside the blinds.


-Mike

[Joe Tall]

but I don't call KTs or QTs here

In loose-passive microlimit games.....WHAT!?!?!?

Why wouldn't you want to play KTs when your opponents are limping w/J7o, 76o, etc? As long as there are no raises preflop?

Peace,
Joe Tall

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
but I don't call KTs or QTs here

In loose-passive microlimit games.....WHAT!?!?!?

Why wouldn't you want to play KTs when your opponents are limping w/J7o, 76o, etc? As long as there are no raises preflop?

Peace,
Joe Tall

[/ QUOTE ]

Aren't we going to run into kicker problems when hitting these hands?

[Brain]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You can also play any two suited cards Ten and higher

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I reading this correctly? Any two suited, Ten high? I dump all suited cards not connected by at least 3 gaps under K high outside the blinds.
-Mike

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you're not. Suited ten and higher means aces, face cards, and tens, not ten-high.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, for .50-1.00 (poor playing opponents, somewhat passive game, many see each flop) you can play any pair UTG.

You can also play any two suited cards Ten and higher and any suited ace. If you are first learning, you may want to tighten up a little until you have proven that you can beat the games, but once you know you can win, that's a decent guideline.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not totally disagreeing. I'll play JTs, ATs, but I don't call KTs or QTs here. I also call only A8s and up and sometimes A7s. Unless you are pretty sure (80%) you can get to the flop without a raise and at least 5 players (90%) to the flop, do these other hands really warrant play?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they really do. They are easy easy plays in any .50-1.00 game on the face of the planet. If you are to ditch one, make it JTs, but KTs and QTs are clear winners. A7s is a reasonable cutoff, but you can definitely get away with any suited ace as your postflop skill increases.

For reference, at Pokerroom:

EV in BB's:

UTG:
ATs +.28
KJs +.13
KTs +.11
QJs +.15
QTs +.04
JTs -.04

UTG+1
ATs +.24
KJs +.27
KTs +.19
QJs +.11
QTs +.12
JTs +.09

[RED_RAIN]

Thanks this is what I was looking for.

[RcrdBoy]

Yeah, AND does mean something different than OR, doesn't it? /images/graemlins/smile.gif