5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

Okay, first few orbits here. Did I let an AK escape too cheaply?

Stack sizes: Hero has 1000, Villian covers.

PREFLOP: UTG calls, hero calls with 2 : [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]:, 2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], folds around to SB who raises to 40. UTG folds, hero calls 30. <font color="green"> POT: $80 </font>

FLOP is [K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]]: SB bets 78, Hero raises to 168, Villian thinks and calls. <font color="green"> POT: $410 </font>

TURN is [K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]], [3 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]]: Villian checks, Hero bets $250. Villian thinks and folds.

Hmmmm. Flop raise is a must right? Turn bet size correct? I think maybe he had QQ with the Q [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] looking at that play. If he had AK, I let him off too cheaply.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

Make a real raise on the flop. Board is draw heavy as hell.

Pot sized raise = $320 Your raise gives every draw odds to call.

Your turn bet is also pretty weak, I'd again make it closer to pot. If I had made a real raise on the flop, I would just push.

If the board were a bit less drawy, I think your turn bet would be okay, but I would still lean more towards at least 3/4 the pot.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

That is a rather draw heavy board for a set there. I would raise the flop with real strength there to make a possible drawer pay. When u see the safe 3 card i would feel inclined to make a pot sized bet or might put my stack in.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

Obviousl this board is draw heavy and a big raise is needed. Heres my question / problem with it though.

He limped with 22. He called $30 more (obvious call)
He needs to make about $240 to break even since hes gonna have to fold almost every time he doesnt hit a set. Actually its probably closer to $300 to cover the times he gets set over setted.

He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money.

If he makes a bigger flop raise, the guy may fold and then he makes even less. I realize that if he doesnt raise, he takes a chance of losing a big pot, but it also makes it look likes OP is drawing if he just calls the flop. He can then raise a non flush card turn.

Im not saying that calling the flop on this draw heavy board is correct, necessarily. Im just wondering if anyone else thinks this way. In terms of EV, he wouldve been better folding to the preflop raise even thought the call was clearly correct at the time.

Does anyone else think like this?

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

You are looking at this the wrong way. His goal should not be to make 240 every time. His goal should be to make the most money out of each hand as possible, and in the long run that should add up to more than 240. Sometimes that will mean accepting a $40 loss, sometimes it means only making 200, and sometime it will mean making 1,000. You are not going to stack your opponent every time you hit a set, but in a good game it will happen often enough that calling 3bbs with any pocket pair is profitable.

Going in with the mindset that you need to make 240 is dangerous if it means that you give your opponent the correct odds to draw out on you.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

If you just call the flop he puts you on a draw or marginal hand and bets a lot on the turn.

If you raise big on the flop he wonders if you're bluffing or semi-bluffing and might get committed with a crushed hand.

If you raise small on the flop and bet a blank on the turn he knows you're strong and folds.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you just call the flop he puts you on a draw or marginal hand and bets a lot on the turn.

If you raise big on the flop he wonders if you're bluffing or semi-bluffing and might get committed with a crushed hand.

If you raise small on the flop and bet a blank on the turn he knows you're strong and folds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, thats why I might just call this flop. Odds are better that the caller is drawing than it is that the raiser / better is drawing. If you just call the flop, he'll probably pound the turn even if he has nothing. In those cases you make more than you do by raising because if he has nothing he'll fold to your raise. Its a risk of course

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]

Does anyone else think like this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty silly way to think of it.

He doesn't need to make up for the implied odds right now, on this specific hand. You aren't counting all the times when he does stack AK on a board like this, or an overpair on 235 etc.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

fold pre flop

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
fold pre flop

[/ QUOTE ]

this is bad

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

you sure?

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
you sure?

[/ QUOTE ]

100%

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

agreed, this is a pretty easy call preflop.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

i think original poster would come out better in the end by folding to this pre flop raise...of course this depends on a few factors that neither your nor I know.

i don't think it's a "100% you got the odds man" call as it may seem to some.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

b/c his hand is pretty transparent with the limp-call?
b/c 22 gets set over setted more often then others?
are you from georgia?

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

I would raise the flop to $300 and then shove the turn.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
b/c his hand is pretty transparent with the limp-call?

[/ QUOTE ]

to me, yes; to villian, i'm not sure...if he can win pots without flopping sets vs the villian then obviously this is a call...but if that's the case he doesn't really need a hand anyways, right?

[ QUOTE ]
b/c 22 gets set over setted more often then others?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah...if he puts villian on a pocket pair with his preflop raise then that's definitely a factor to consider...also how far will villian go with a pair after the flop if he too doesn't flop a set. All points that need to be considered

It really comes down to what is hero going to do the 7/8 times he doesn't flop a set? If he's playing the "no set no bet" type of poker then he is better off just folding in my opinion with 22...

He's got to get a ton of action when does flop a set and his set has to be good...i think hero overestimated how much he may get when he flops a set...i think a lot of people do that with hands like 22, 33, and 44

Anyways just my thoughts...could be wrong.

P.S.

[ QUOTE ]
are you from georgia?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, sophomore at UGA

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
i don't think it's a "100% you got the odds man" call as it may seem to some.

[/ QUOTE ]

I call here 100% of the time. I'm not on the set over set bandwagon so PF is standard.

My default line is to raise the flop. 1)It's draw heavy 2)AA and AK are good possibilities 3)Nobody ever folds and you have a good hand, build the pot.

Pot it on the turn.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
He's got to get a ton of action when does flop a set and his set has to be good...i think hero overestimated how much he may get when he flops a set...i think a lot of people do that with hands like 22, 33, and 44

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll venture a guess and say that most of the above is incorrect. Everyone check their PT stats for set over set for pairs &lt; 5 5 and also what your EV is for 44-22. I doubt it's -EV.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not on the set over set bandwagon so PF is standard.


[/ QUOTE ]

i don't know what that means.

please elaborate.

thanks in advance.

holla.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone check their PT stats

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm laughing out loud.

TREVOR
 

all of my analysis of this hand is specefic to THIS PARTICULAR HAND...i believe that calling a pf raiser who is in the SB heads up with 22 is not a winning play for this particular player...this is my guess...again a ton depends on what range of hands he puts the villian on and what he does when he doesn't flop a set.

but, yeah, rush to PT for all your answers...

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
b/c 22 gets set over setted more often then others?

[/ QUOTE ] Yeah...if he puts villian on a pocket pair with his preflop raise then that's definitely a factor to consider...also how far will villian go with a pair after the flop if he too doesn't flop a set. All points that need to be considered

[/ QUOTE ]

I have 203 22-44 hands that saw a flop. I have ONE instance of set over set. You're right, cleary a PF fold.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
but, yeah, rush to PT for all your answers...

[/ QUOTE ]

Numbers don't lie. Thanks for playing [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: TREVOR
 

[ QUOTE ]
all of my analysis of this hand is specefic to THIS PARTICULAR HAND...i believe that calling a pf raiser who is in the SB heads up with 22 is not a winning play for this particular player...this is my guess...again a ton depends on what range of hands he puts the villian on and what he does when he doesn't flop a set.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is a great situation. PP vs guy in the sb who is raising like he has a big pair.

A decent leak for a lot of people is defending their sb with 22-44 vs a solid lag who is stealing on the button.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have 203 22-44 hands that saw a flop. I have ONE instance of set over set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trevor, you are leaving something out of this statistic. I'll let you think about then once you tell me we can start rushing to conclusions.

[ QUOTE ]
You're right, cleary a PF fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said it was "clear" fold. But, yes, I am right for this hand.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have 203 22-44 hands that saw a flop. I have ONE instance of set over set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trevor, you are leaving something out of this statistic. I'll let you think about then once you tell me we can start rushing to conclusions.

[ QUOTE ]
You're right, cleary a PF fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said it was "clear" fold. But, yes, I am right for this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

No PF raise I assume is the arguement. The line has to be drawn somewhere. Quit being a metaphysical [censored]. Tis the season!

Re: TREVOR
 

[ QUOTE ]
all of my analysis of this hand is specefic to THIS PARTICULAR HAND...i believe that calling a pf raiser who is in the SB heads up with 22 is not a winning play for this particular player...this is my guess...again a ton depends on what range of hands he puts the villian on and what he does when he doesn't flop a set.

but, yeah, rush to PT for all your answers...

[/ QUOTE ]

You've got position on him and only have to call 3bbs. This is a 100% autocall and you can take that to the bank, literally. Trevor, if you even have to think about this you are playing way too tight.

Re: TREVOR
 

[ QUOTE ]
You've got position on him and only have to call 3bbs. This is a 100% autocall and you can take that to the bank, literally. Trevor, if you even have to think about this you are playing way too tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm the one advocating calling WTF!

Re: TREVOR
 

[ QUOTE ]
Trevor, if you even have to think about this you are playing way too tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm the one that wants to fold not Trevor, but I don't have to think about it.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Obviousl this board is draw heavy and a big raise is needed. Heres my question / problem with it though.

He limped with 22. He called $30 more (obvious call)
He needs to make about $240 to break even since hes gonna have to fold almost every time he doesnt hit a set. Actually its probably closer to $300 to cover the times he gets set over setted.

He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money.

If he makes a bigger flop raise, the guy may fold and then he makes even less. I realize that if he doesnt raise, he takes a chance of losing a big pot, but it also makes it look likes OP is drawing if he just calls the flop. He can then raise a non flush card turn.

Im not saying that calling the flop on this draw heavy board is correct, necessarily. Im just wondering if anyone else thinks this way. In terms of EV, he wouldve been better folding to the preflop raise even thought the call was clearly correct at the time.

Does anyone else think like this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha. So on average if we win $300, and in this instance we only made $200, needing $240 to break even, should we fold in the future?

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

In all seriousness I really do advocate folding pre flop.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

wow are you serious

bet pot, raise pot, reraise pot, push, every street.

100bb stacks auto allin dont loose sleep AK call all day on party

Enjoy!

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

Ironically I just lost set over set with 22s twice in the span of about 2 hours.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

You should have folded pre-flop [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have 203 22-44 hands that saw a flop. I have ONE instance of set over set. You're right, cleary a PF fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn! 203?! The long run ain't so long after all.

PF is easy call, btw. Whether he should have open limped it in the first place is up for debate, but definately works out fine against many donks, in my experience.

Edit: oops, wasn't an open limp.... uh.. easy call, then.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed, we must on average extract $240+ when we hit.
But that doesn't mean that in each individual case we hit we must make $240+.

I guess my point is that the EV of calling the raise preflop shouldn't be viewed in the vacuum of this hand.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

TD, I'm not sure why you advocate folding this hand preflop. I dont have much to add, so I'm not going to throw around the same statement, ("I'd call preflop") but you've tailored your comment to this situation independantly. So, either I'm missing something in general, you know something I dont know about the players, or my original statement is correct.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Obviousl this board is draw heavy and a big raise is needed. Heres my question / problem with it though.

He limped with 22. He called $30 more (obvious call)
He needs to make about $240 to break even since hes gonna have to fold almost every time he doesnt hit a set. Actually its probably closer to $300 to cover the times he gets set over setted.

He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money.

If he makes a bigger flop raise, the guy may fold and then he makes even less. I realize that if he doesnt raise, he takes a chance of losing a big pot, but it also makes it look likes OP is drawing if he just calls the flop. He can then raise a non flush card turn.

Im not saying that calling the flop on this draw heavy board is correct, necessarily. Im just wondering if anyone else thinks this way. In terms of EV, he wouldve been better folding to the preflop raise even thought the call was clearly correct at the time.

Does anyone else think like this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha. So on average if we win $300, and in this instance we only made $200, needing $240 to break even, should we fold in the future?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I say you should fold in the future. No, I said it was an obvious call. I bolded it for you since you didnt see it.

Re: 5/10 NL: Set of Ducks on a scary flop.
 

You wrote: "He only made about $200 on this hand so in terms of EV, you could say he actually lost money."

That might be true, except for the word "expected" in "expected value." Rinse/repeat for the last full paragraph.

If the question is whether you on average make enough to make this call +EV, there's only one good way to tell, and that's statistics baby!