The Theory of Top Set

[JFB37]

These are some very interesting comments and rather confirm my thoughts on the hand.

[ QUOTE ]
Reads Reads Reads

[/ QUOTE ]

The pf raiser in the sb was a weak nut peddler who was probably giving up on the hand by checking. He either whiffed with AK or had something like JJ or TT. I had some hope that he would c/r with AA internet style but doubted it.

As to the other players, one was a chaser, one was liable to call with any piece and the third (on the button) was a very good Vic regular.

One other point that may be relevant to reads. I debated what, for me, was an unusally long time before calling the pf raise. I was thinking about how I wanted to play the pot and deciding between re-raising pf (which would plainly define my hand) and just calling to see if the pot could be built by the limpers trailing along, which it was. Someone, however, might have misinterpreted my hesitation for having a weak hand.

[ QUOTE ]
First, try and do whatever is consistent what you would do with a lesser hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

An excellent point. It's obvious, but I've never seen it reduced to a dictim quite this well.

Thanks to all. I'll wait a bit more before posting results.

[Guernica4000]

If this was my first hand and I had no reads on any of the players I would bet a tester bet maybe 1/2 the pot representing that you hit a piece of the flop and you want to know where everyone stands. If you are cold called, I would bet the pot on the turn regardless of what the next card is. (Well unless it is a Q). If a Q hits I would bet 1/2 the pot again.

If you are re-raised by any player I would re-raise the pot making this a two player show down with you going in with the best of it.

I would definitely not recommend c/r or just checking. c/r gives away to much information about your hand and checking doesn't help you gather information about your opponents’ hands.

[UATrewqaz]

I think this type of hand safely falls into the "so far ahead you can slowplay" category.

Usually in this situation your opponents are drawing dead or drawing very slim. Giving a few free/cheap cards in hopes of them improving a little is worth it.

Give someone with TT the chance to spike his "2 outter" and check raise you big, then when you push he quickly calls only to be sickened.

[cincy_kid24]

Hank Scorpio said in an earlier post to simply, flat-out trust your reads, which in a situation like this - where yu have the nuts barring any bizarre runner-runner possibilities - is an absolutely correct statement. the question is whether to lead out or check raise, i dont see you getting too creative and check-calling here (although i guess that argument could be made), the pot has been raised and is multi-way so you shouldnt feel too bad if you dont get any bites when you cast your line but of course w/ top set/rainbow flop it would be nice to get some more in there.
So it comes down to basically: passive table - bet the pot / aggressive table - check raise.
Also think about what kind of image youve had so far, how many hands hv yu shown down? were they strong hands? have you tried to steal-raise lately? If you're looking like a solid/tight player then maybe the check-calling argument could be made even stronger but if you've shown down some bad hands then go ahead and lead out and pray that you get raised.
Again, I dont think there is a unifying theory that could be applied to top set or any other strong/monster hand that puts you in a spot where your decisions are based on building a large pot. If you have a good lock on your opponents and your own table image then it shouldnt be a problem to get max value out of your monsters.

[binions]

[ QUOTE ]

The 3/3 PL HE game at the Vic: It is tournament week so it is busy but it is a pretty typical Vic table, a mix of solid regulers, donators and nut peddlers.

Three limpers to the sb who raises the pot. I have QQ in the bb and decide to smooth call.

Flop is a dream: Q 7 3 rainbow.

SB checks to me. I have the absolute best possible hand at the moment and there are only seven possible hands that can catch a card on the turn to beat me. Clearly, I'm a big favorite.

[/ QUOTE ]

7 possible hands can take the lead on the turn???

Assuming there is an A, K, 7, 3 left in the deck to hit the turn, there are

3 possible AA hands out
3 possible KK hands out
1 possible 77 hand
1 possible 33 hand

Plus the gutshot hands (which could easily be in play in a multiway, unraised pot):

16 possible 45 hands
16 possible 46 hands
16 possible 56 hands

[JFB37]

[ QUOTE ]
7 possible hands can take the lead on the turn???

Assuming there is an A, K, 7, 3 left in the deck to hit the turn, there are

3 possible AA hands out
3 possible KK hands out
1 possible 77 hand
1 possible 33 hand

Plus the gutshot hands (which could easily be in play in a multiway, unraised pot):

16 possible 45 hands
16 possible 46 hands
16 possible 56 hands

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, ok. So I should have said seven "holdings" to worry about? How does this change the analysis?

What happen to the small blind? Raises out of the SB with horrible posistion and a bunch of limpers... then checks the flop?

Did you assign him to a steal, a monster hand AA; KK looking for a check raise on the flop, or do you think he completely missed with AK.

I think this has a lot of bearing on how you play the hand.

[silkyslim]

[ QUOTE ]
I have the absolute best possible hand at the moment and there are only seven possible hands that can catch a card on the turn to beat me.

[/ QUOTE ]
What are the 7 hands?
Quick: <font color="white"> 33 77 65 54 64 KK AA </font>

I'm hoping the SB is attempting a check-raise in this spot. So I would bet, but much less than the pot to let him to go ahead and make his move. Low enough that he might be tempted to still see the turn if what he has is AK.