[grjr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's because I don't think position is nearly as important on a weak passive table.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is something you may want to consider reviewing. Position is the most important aspect in this game, regardless of the game's texture.

That said, I understand your desire to play hands like this, and this is a good choice for a hand that is right on the cusp here. But would you play T7s? T8s?

Your hand is good multiway but in any game -- even a passive game -- is helped MUCH by the benefit of position.

3 limpers limp behind you, SB completes, BB checks. 7 to the flop for 7SB. Flop comes J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. SB checks, BB checks, UTG bets. Now what's the right play here?

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

I call planning to raise a non-heart non-ace turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know that raising TPNK is going to be profitable in general when you're getting led into on the flop by a noted passive player. Yeah, there's a chance he's betting a flush draw, but is the chance of that greater than something like QJ, JT, etc? This is one of those situations where reverse implied odds comes into play, where raising sucks but so does calling, and folding isn't right either.

That's why I don't like being out of position with these hands. There's probably a sample size issue, but I honestly doubt they're profitable for most good players in the first couple of seats.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if you don't want to play that flop then you can play it like 22 and fold. I think I'd rather stick around but I'm stubborn that way.

John