Re: I think this was a good fold
 

it depends really on the table on a tight table live i may complete here and go for a steal. But again its all table dependent.

Re: I think this was a good fold
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
and his clubs are not that live.


[/ QUOTE ]

The liveness of the clubs makes very little difference here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jon, i thought folding pairs with two higher upcards and you have no overcard kicker was standard? What am I missing? In particular, who wants to play with a semi dead hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

True, to a point. The higher your pair the less this matter, because there is a smaller chance that an opponent has a hidden pair higher than your pair.

For each opponent with an unduplicated upcard behind you there is a 7% chance that opponent has a pair.

So there is roughly a 14% chance that the queens aren't best.


I don't hate the fold, but I'd probably try to see if the A or K comes along when I limp. And I probably fold this if I was in another hand at the time.

I limp here because ::
1. I don't mind limp/folding (to a completion from the A or K)
2. I don't want to build a pot

I know limping may let more opponents in, but I really want to play a cheap pot here.


Big edit below ---

So I saw another post that did some math. And it turns out that each the A and the K have roughly a 14.25% chance of having a split pair. I used to think that each unduplicated upcard had a 7% chance of being paired. So now I'm starting to really rethink playing this hand.

Ok, but I still stand by limping because you want to play against a hand you have an edge against. And if you raise you could very well shutout the hands you have an edge against (the hands that will play to the river while being behind, anyway)

Re: I think this was a good fold
 

My instinctive response is that this fold is too tight. If the game is so tight that no with a worse hand will call a completion here, I probably need to find a new game. At most 5-10 tables I've sat at (live), the jack, a dead ten, flush draws and the like will all call. My hand's only semi-dead, so I complete and see what happens. Against a very tight and predictable player I can fold if the K or A reraises. Against most, though, I'll see fourth.

I'm interested that so many disagree -- the times I win $6 (antes/bring in), the times I get called by inferior hands, to me at least make up for the times I lose $10 or $15 by getting reraised by kings or aces.

In general, I tend to err on the side of mixing it up with marginal hands (which I agree this is) because even if I only break even on them, they give me cover for good hands.

Re: I think this was a good fold
 

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone disagree?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not me.

Re: I think this was a good fold
 

If I knew that both seats 3 and 6 were sub-average players, or if I didn't have a read on them, or if the ante was $1 instead of $.50, I'd limp. Otherwise, I think your fold is at least justifiable.

I play for fun more than money -- does this factor in?
 

I am definitely a recreational player. For me, the money is more a way of keeping score than a significant source of income.

Would someone who is playing for a living -- or for whom poker income is a significant extra source of income -- be more prone to avoid these situations, since they are low in extra profit potential and can greatly increase variance?

Re: I think this was a good fold
 

If the ante was $1, you should be raising.

Jeff

Re: I think this was a good fold
 

Can someone come up with any math to show it's a fold?

I would always raise here and expect to get played with or take the antes down. I think chances are high I'm getting called by lower upcards which have no business calling me or K, A, and Q with some garbage that they like to give me action with. This outweighs the negatives for me as far as playing the hand. Two queens is too big a hand to give up here IMO. There is just too many junk hands that can call me here that I would not mind action from at all.