Pocket 99s

[MrWookie47]

99 does great against 1-2 opponents, or against 5+ opponents. When you limp UTG, you have no idea how many opponents you'll get. When you raise, you increase the likelihood that you'll get fewer, which is good. Opponents at 1/2 tend to be tighter, so this chance is further increased.

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought about a bet for value, but with so many outs against me and the potential I was already well behind the pre-flop raiser or dead against a flush or STR8, do I really have any equity? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm guessing you have a lot more equity than you think you do. Somebody should run a simulation on this.

[shadow29]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand the rationale behind raising 99s and TTs from early position on these slightly tighter tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

At loose tables too.

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously we want fewer opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly.

[ QUOTE ]
However, very few of the cookie cutter pre flop charts suggest raising 99s and some don't even suggest raising TTs.

[/ QUOTE ]

These charts are for weak/tight sissys.

[ QUOTE ]
Even the chart from ITH (Hilger), which is more sensitive to how many callers there are prior to you and whether or not you are first in suggests just a call with 99s and TTs from EP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hilger's book is great. But you have to filter out some of the stuff that is wrong or weak/tight.

[ QUOTE ]
I guess my skill level is still suspect enough that I don't feel confident playing the middle pairs. I am reluctant to raise at this stage.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have to be a maestro to play these cards. You have a value raise against the field.

[ QUOTE ]
Would you also raise from EP with 88s?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't, but others do.

[ QUOTE ]
What about 88s, 99s, TTs if you are not first in?

[/ QUOTE ]

Limpers are pussies. Raise I raise 99 and TT after almost all limpers. 88 I just limp.

Against a raise I generally fold/cc 88, fold/cc/3-bet 99, cc/3-bet TT. It depends on the limpers before and the raiser.

[mojobluesman]

I think you are correct that I'm seeing monsters everywhere. It's probaly a result of my recent attempt to tighten up in situations that I am fairly certain I was leaking. It's probably an over-adjustment.

However, in this case I knew that the probabilities of the pre-flop raiser having a higher pair were lower than him having AK-AJ (48 combs) vs. AA-TT (30 combs) (assuming fairly tight standards) or the flush. That's still a lot of ways I am screwed not including all the flush and STR8 draws. So I was thinking about the possible overpairs in the grand scheme of things.

[shadow29]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You need to raise this pf. Especially at 1/2.


[/ QUOTE ]
Can you explain why? and why especially at 1/2? I almost always limp with 99 UTG in an attempt to encourage multiway action. I know there is an argument for raising for value, but I think that our edge is very thin, and I think there is usually more value in trying for a multiway pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

1/2 is tight. I'm more inclined to play more loosely in a tight game. Also, you'll get people to fold hands that you wouldn't want them ccing with since there are fewer ccs at 1/2. Also, the edge is not very thin. It is big enough to raise for value pf.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
You need to raise this pf. Especially at 1/2.

I think that the fold is fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding is weak here. You've got the best hand something like 70% of the time.

[mojobluesman]

Yes. Someone please run a simulation on this if possible!!

[shadow29]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You need to raise this pf. Especially at 1/2.

I think that the fold is fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding is weak here. You've got the best hand something like 70% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not often I get blasted for being weak. That made my day, Aaron. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

I read your previous post and I am forced to retract my first post in this thread. That's a good post (and it takes a very good post to get me to change my mind [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]).

[shadow29]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes. Someone please run a simulation on this if possible!!

[/ QUOTE ]

IIRC, there were no reads on the pfr.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

4,981,285 games 20.859 secs 238,807 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 40.8157 % [ 00.40 00.00 ] { 9s9d }
Hand 2: 39.8492 % [ 00.39 00.01 ] { AA-88, AKs-A6s, KQs-KTs, QJs-QTs, JTs, AKo-ATo, KQo-KTo, QJo-QTo, JTo, 98o }
Hand 3: 19.3351 % [ 00.19 00.01 ] { random }


---

[mojobluesman]

OK, here's the rest of the hand and the result.

Turn: (5.25 BB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
MP1 checks, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 bets</font>, MP1 calls.

River: (7.25 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
MP1 checks, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 bets</font>, MP1 calls.

Final Pot: 9.25 BB

MP1 had KK (no heart)
MP2 had A4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (trips on the turn)

My guess is that if I had bet the flop I would have been raised by the KK.

MP2 may or may not have folded. He had a pair of 4s (2 outs), 4 outs to a STR8 (which could split the pot), and an A overcard (1.5 outs?)

If I called the flop raise and I checked the turn, it would have been bet by either MP2 (if he was still in - presenting me with another problem) or by MP1 assuming MP2 folded.

I suspect I was destined to fold this hand, but I am still not sure it was right.