[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not quite sure of your reasoning here. You wouldn't go heads up with 7 7 against an assumed Q Q or better. Okay, four other people in the pot help the situation in the sense that you have better than one chance in six of beating the Q Q. The trouble is, some of those hands may beat both of you. Even someone betting on nothing can catch something on the board.

I also see your point that you can fold quick if you don't get a 7 on the flop; and that you might win big if you do. But you could also lose big. After the flop, suppose someone held two diamonds? Or an 8? Even a high-card/9 could be trouble for you. The 3H makes things look better and, of course, the river 6 clinches it. But you could have lost big just looking at the flop. And this was among the best flops for you, with only two cards that improved your hand.

I think this is losing poker in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aaron, I appreciate your advice, but first of all, you have 60 posts, which isn't a big deal. But, you really didn't explain yourself well at all.

It's not like I make this particular play all the time. In fact, I think this is the first time I've ever called a raise with an underpair KNOWING the raiser had an overpair. Nor do I think I ever would again. However, my original question was as I STATED, do the implied odds based on the table condition make the play feasible as this was the reason for my call of the raise.

It wasn't HU, so I don't even know why you would say that.


BTW, "losing poker" as you explained it sounds to me like being afraid of what can beat you, rather than looking at what you can win. I already knew I was behind, I was looking at the money I could win.

If someone offered you 10-1 on the fact a six-sided die might roll a 6 on one roll, shouldn't you take it? Sure, it could turn up 1,2,3,4 or 5, but the odds are better than the bet and you should take it(assuming you know the die is fair).