66 flopped set, reraised by set miner

swolfe · #1 08-06-2005, 08:06 PM

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $ BB (10 handed) converter

UTG ($2725.50)
Hero ($2722.50)
MP3 ($2384)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. SB posts a blind of $10.
UTG calls $20, 2 folds, Hero calls $20, 1 fold, MP3 calls $20, CO calls $20, 1 fold, SB (poster) completes, BB checks.

Flop: ($120) 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (6 players)
SB checks, BB checks, UTG bets $100, Hero raises to $300, MP3 raises to $800, CO folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG folds, Hero ???

UTG seems like a pretty bad LAG, and MP3 is a generic 16/5 set miner. since i know he's just a set miner (and i doubt he'd reraise two pair or TPTK), this is an easy fold, right?

flawless_victory · #2 08-06-2005, 08:09 PM

i suppose he absolutely must have 77 here. i think this is a V good fold.

mgsimpleton · #3 08-06-2005, 08:12 PM

i agree this is probably a fold, but what makes you doubt he would reraise 2 pair?

someguy123 · #4 08-06-2005, 08:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i suppose he absolutely must have 77 here. i think this is a V good fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

agree. if he is that tight i would fold. Unless you think he his reading you as maniac or that you overplay hands like AK. he can have A7s but i think its more likely he have 77.

spino1i · #5 08-06-2005, 08:40 PM

I dont care about the fact he's a set miner, I'd still reraise him. I dont think you can fold bottom set when one of the higher sets can defintely be eliminated from being possible (AA, which we know he doesnt have since he didnt raise pre-flop). I mean its possible he has 77 in the same way its possibly someone could have quads when you have an overfull on a paired board, but I dont think you could lay your hand down.

someguy123 · #6 08-06-2005, 08:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I dont care about the fact he's a set miner, I'd still reraise him. I dont think you can fold bottom set when one of the higher sets can defintely be eliminated from being possible (AA, which we know he doesnt have since he didnt raise pre-flop). I mean its possible he has 77 in the same way its possibly someone could have quads when you have an overfull on a paired board, but I dont think you could lay your hand down.

[/ QUOTE ]

No cause if he is a set miner he woul seldom reraise flop 800 in an unraised pot with only two pair. Everyone who have read Pot-limit and no-limit or super system. Knows you dont lose your stack with bottom set in an unraised pot. If i was villian playing that tight i would think long time and then it would be close between either lay down A7s or raise it. I would certainly not play 67s or A6s here.

spino1i · #7 08-06-2005, 08:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont care about the fact he's a set miner, I'd still reraise him. I dont think you can fold bottom set when one of the higher sets can defintely be eliminated from being possible (AA, which we know he doesnt have since he didnt raise pre-flop). I mean its possible he has 77 in the same way its possibly someone could have quads when you have an overfull on a paired board, but I dont think you could lay your hand down.

[/ QUOTE ]

No cause if he is a set miner he woul seldom reraise flop 800 in an unraised pot with only two pair. Everyone who have read Pot-limit and no-limit or super system. Knows you dont lose your stack with bottom set in an unraised pot. If i was villian playing that tight i would think long time and then it would be close between either lay down A7s or raise it. I would certainly not play 67s or A6s here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well thats not how I play, I dont make a habit folding sets on unpaired boards with no straights and flushes possible unless it seems quite plausible that villain could have either higher set. Its just too improbable. I mean a read is great, but people do suprising things.

And I dont read those books because I think experience is the greatest teacher, and experience has taught me that sets rarely lose on those sorts of flops.

amoeba · #8 08-06-2005, 08:51 PM

I don't think you can eliminate AA here as he is UTG at fullring table.

spino1i · #9 08-06-2005, 08:53 PM

no its MP3 thats the villain here, not UTG, look at the hand.. UTG folds after the reraise.

someguy123 · #10 08-06-2005, 08:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont care about the fact he's a set miner, I'd still reraise him. I dont think you can fold bottom set when one of the higher sets can defintely be eliminated from being possible (AA, which we know he doesnt have since he didnt raise pre-flop). I mean its possible he has 77 in the same way its possibly someone could have quads when you have an overfull on a paired board, but I dont think you could lay your hand down.

[/ QUOTE ]

No cause if he is a set miner he woul seldom reraise flop 800 in an unraised pot with only two pair. Everyone who have read Pot-limit and no-limit or super system. Knows you dont lose your stack with bottom set in an unraised pot. If i was villian playing that tight i would think long time and then it would be close between either lay down A7s or raise it. I would certainly not play 67s or A6s here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well thats not how I play, I dont make a habit folding sets on unpaired boards with no straights and flushes possible unless it seems quite plausible that villain could have either higher set. Its just too improbable. I mean a read is great, but people do suprising things.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okey lets say you decide to play. you said push him on flop ? terrible idea. He will get out with A7s but call with 77. You wont see him folding often enough to make this play profitable...

Just call the flop will show much strenght too because the pot is unraised. I dont think he will pay you off enough when he have A7s. when he have 77 he will get your money. again i dont think you will see A7s enough to make this play profitable.

Push flop is not profitable and calling and milk it is what i think. Marginal.