![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the replies. I realize it's a rather broad question. It was prompted by my general observation that if you assume it's going to take the nuts to win (and, of course, it usually does in a loose game), and there's either
1) One or no low cards on the flop, or 2) You're not holding the nut low draw, then it seems to me that it's extremely difficult to have good enough pot odds to chase the full house. You only have 4 outs to make your boat, and the pot is rarely laying you such good odds (since you've only got what, a 9% chance of hitting your boat on each successive card?). Greg's comment about KQ in hand with KQ4 on board being a strong hand is actually a good illustration of what I'm talking about. It seems to me like I've invested more money in hands like that than I've gotten back, because by the river someone often has at least a set. In other words, even in the above example, your two-pair will never be the nuts. Anyone with a pocket pair on the board is beating you, so it then becomes a difficult situation. Namely: playing a non-nut hand in a game that is purportedly "all about the nuts." I'd be interested to hear comments/critiques on the issue. |
|
|