Raise or Fold?

[poboys]

[ QUOTE ]
I am 7.5:1 to hit my set. The vast field of loose limpers is giving me 7:1. With implied odds, this is a +EV play. Plus on the off chance no overs come I am most likely good as well and can try a similar play to knock out hands with one (maybe even two) overcards to improve my chances of winning in the end.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, the flop will contain unders only 17% of the time (and that includes all xxy combinations that gives a potential loose limper trips).

With your opponents holding 14 cards (that they are willing to limp with), I think there's a very, very high probability that all 5 overs are in play.

I also think that your implied odds go up when you check, since most low limit players are terrible at reading sets and will pay you off when you hit your set.

Against an LP field, I'd rather check than raise out of blind here.

[cocked&locked]

Without reads on the other 3 players, I like your fold (heck, I'd need pretty solid reads to consider anything else). My reasons for folding:

1) Even though a Queen isn't a terribly bad overcard on the flop, you had 3 cold-callers on a mostly non-coordinated board. This indicates a potential slow play for trips, etc. There are a bunch of people that already held on for 2 cold still in the pot.

2)You didn't pick up anything on the turn and don't have the odds to draw to beat even top pair.

3) Another overcard fell on the turn. Even if you raise here, callers are getting 16:2 (and likely even a bit better because CO will come along for the ride) on their calls. This makes a lot of stuff (including gutshots with an overcard to your 9) correct to call (especially with the implied odds). As you described the table as loose, you probably are not folding anything better (flopped top pair or turned Jacks) than your hand at this point, especially if they cold called the flop. You might not even be able to clean up outs if they are really loose (not that it matters much if you are beat).

4) Calling or raising might expose you to a possible 3-bet from a slowplayed set. Even at a passive table, someone could wake up here.

So I think you can safely dump it. To raise, you'd have to be confident that CO is full of crap and that you could fold a bunch of hands that should stick around (middle pair, good draws, top pair, overcards).

I like going after big pots, but I just don't think this could be profitable in the long run. You gave it he11 on the flop - nothing else you can do here.

BTW I also liked your preflop raise (no brainer in my opinion) and your flop raise. Nice hand.

[cocked&locked]

When I spike my set - I want as much money in that pot as I possibly could have (given that I had a sufficient equity edge to push it as such preflop). I have a perfect oportunity to do that here. These are loose players and 99 is a good hand.

Not to be results oriented here, but our hero got plenty of action even after he made his preflop raise. Suppose that 7c on the flop was a 9h. Our hero could have raised the turn as well and probably still had everyone hanging on.

I see the argument for the implied odds, but you are investing 1 extra sb at the beginning to pad your edge from the Q8o's that stick around in these pots. I just think that you equity edge overrides the implied odds - I have been wrong before though. I'm interested in other opinions on this.

[QBert]

[ QUOTE ]
I also think that your implied odds go up when you check, since most low limit players are terrible at reading sets and will pay you off when you hit your set.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think the opposite is true. When the pot is bigger chasers tend to put more money in the pot when they are drawing dead (with one pair, for example).


[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, the flop will contain unders only 17% of the time (and that includes all xxy combinations that gives a potential loose limper trips).

[/ QUOTE ]

17% for unders plus ~12% for set = 29% chance I'll like the flop. I'll take those odds against 7 players.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
a couple of problems with the pokerstove #:

- these hands aren't random
- it assumes you're going to showdown. with 8 players in the pot it's very, very hard to make it to the showdown without flopping a set.

[/ QUOTE ]
With 7 limpers, they may as well be random. If, instead, they're all decent players then they'll be holding each other's outs and your actual equity will go up. If we say you're against 7 players all who hold 2 broadway cards, then your hot&cold equity shoots all the way up to 28%.

Also, I know you're not going to a showdown much of the time. That's why I said you'll realize less than the 19% equity that PS gives you PF. But I would guess you'll realize close to the 12.5% you need to make this a +EV raise.

For what it's worth, I don't personally raise here. I just think it's close between raising and calling.

[poboys]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the opposite is true. When the pot is bigger chasers tend to put more money in the pot when they are drawing dead (with one pair, for example).

[/ QUOTE ]

well, you were playing the hand not me, so I'll have to go with your read.. generally, when I raise players tend to fold quicker on the flop, but maybe that's because I am a boring, boring rock.

[ QUOTE ]
17% for unders plus ~12% for set = 29% chance I'll like the flop. I'll take those odds against 7 players.

[/ QUOTE ]

careful with that math. Like I said of that 17% there are plenty of combinations that have you beat (two pair, trips, even might give them a set).

Another reason I why don't like to raise here is b/c your are in a bad position, and find yourself against a non-preferable flop out of position. I like easy post-flop decisions (refer to the boring, boring rock statement).

[garion888]

May i quote from the bible...

"The ratio of the potential size of the final pot to your immediate investment(that is, your implied odds) is roughly double what it is outside the blinds. Doubling your implied odds turns many unprofitable hands into profitable ones." - SSH 92

While this quote applies in turning unprofitable hands into profitable ones...I think it also extends to turning checks into value raises when there are this many people in the pot.

Everyone else is paying 2 SB to see this flop while hero is only paying 1 SB. The blind would have been posted had hero liked his hand or not(i.e. this is not part of the immediate investment). Thus hero's implied odds are substantially higher than if he were not a blind.

[brettbrettr]

What are Hero's implied odds if he sees the flop for free?

[Sinnister]

Perfectly played (IMHO).

[garion888]

Infinite. The size of the investment is zero. But we are not about talking about maximizing implied odds. We are about maximizing EV, which is the "value" part of value raise.