Re: Implied Odds?
[ QUOTE ]
My personal opinion gleaned from 2+2 is that playing the smaller sets 22-55 is questionable. Maybe a longterm (how long is that?) break-even prop. For every time you stack someone you'll get stacked with set over set. Fine for long-term, but the highest of highs and the lowest of lows the moment it happens. If there's really no plus EV to this then I limit their use to LP where I can at least play with position. Just personal taste. I really hate trying to play a difficult villain OOP, or an unknown. To me it always pays to know who I have position on, and who has position on me.
[/ QUOTE ]
In my opinion 22-55 need drastic implied odds to pay off for the 6 out of 7 times they aren't going to hit. Even then reverse implied odds drive them down a little more, that's why i posted this hand. So to make this play profitable you have to assume your i/o's are i$100 or greater.
77 has alot more value than 22-55 so I can see why this is an instant-call.
|