Villian with obvious set - Page 3

-Skeme- · #21 06-09-2005, 02:43 AM

If it's so obvious he has the set, why would you push? To get him to fold bottom set and think you have TT?

piki · #22 06-09-2005, 09:00 AM

He wanted to gamble. I dont mind the push for a number of reasons only 1 of which is winning the hand. You also set a nice table image if you continue to play for a while.

Like mentioned above, this is not an obvious fold.

mmmarkus · #23 06-09-2005, 11:02 AM

I like the call, not the push. If no diamond comes on turn, and he goes All In, you can then get away from hand. If he checks turn, you get another shot. BUT assuming you could play this hand again, after three diamonds fall on flop, does it make sense to take a passive approach and check the flop, and smooth calling a bet?

n1bd · #24 06-09-2005, 12:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I dont like calling at all

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? What is wrong with the "you have 11 nut outs, are getting slightly better than 3:1 pot odds, and have implied odds if you hit an A" argument that others have given?

More exactly: You have seen 7 cards from the deck (since Kirderf's cards are "obvious"). There are 45 unseen cards. Your EV from a flop call, considering only immediate pot odds, is 11/45 * 1090 - 270 = -$3.56.

So you need to get paid off to the tune of 45/2 * -3.56 = $80.1 if you turn a set. Are you saying that Kirderf doesn't pay you $81 on either the turn or river in an $1100 pot if you turn an A? I'll all for giving respect to good players, especially when out of position, but that seems impossible.

If you think he sometimes has a flush (so you're not sure where you're at when you hit a set), then you could maybe make an argument for folding. As the problem is posed, folding is awful and calling seems best.

Why are so many people immediately dismissing calling? Am I missing something?

fnord_too · #25 06-09-2005, 12:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
What cero_z said. I think it's funny that there is always so much discussion about implied odds that people forget about real odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I usually think strictly in terms of real odds when I am on an obvious draw now. Removing the illusion (delusion may be the better term) of implied odds has improved my game greatly I think.

Popinjay · #26 06-09-2005, 01:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He might as well flip up his cards because its obvious he has a set. Its folded back to me. What do you do?

[/ QUOTE ]

If this opponent can only have a set with this play, then you can fold, or call and draw. You are going to get his money eventually anyway. So never push.

[/ QUOTE ]

How am I getting his money eventually anyway?
For those of you who dont know Kirderf, he is the winningest player at Party $5/$10NL since they increased the stakes that high. I dont know about total winnings, but his win rate is the highest of everyone in my buddies database and he has 25K hands with him.
This hand was at Prima though.

I pushed in, he called with his set of 3's and I missed my 11 outs. I think it was very close between a fold and a push, but I dont like calling at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I missing something here? Did you think you had fold equity or something? If not then a push is absolutely horrible in my mind.

-Skeme- · #27 06-09-2005, 03:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He wanted to gamble.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't this be the exact thing a good player wants to avoid? Wanting to gamble? That's retarded. If he knows he has no folding equity, pushing seems blatantly idiotic. Doing this for table image seems like a poor excuse. Surely you can find less costly situations to advertise being stubborn.

piki · #28 06-09-2005, 03:16 PM

I guess I dont have a problem with pushing my chips in with a strong hand and outs, one to the NUTS flsh. Im not saying this is his only opportunity, but unless he shows you his cards ... you are always "gambling".

Or do you only push with the NUTS?

-Skeme- · #29 06-09-2005, 03:22 PM

No. Original poster said that it was obvious to him Kirderf had a set. That means he knows he is behind in the hand. He has no folding equity. So pushing is essentially the same as calling an all in. Either way, your chips are going in the middle, and you are behind in the hand. Anybody who is willing to do this cannot be a good player.

That's the same as someone asking to deal a flop 50 times for $100 each with your hole cards staying the same. Only you get KQo and he gets AJo. This is a losing bet, why would you take it just to gamble?

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I dont have a problem with pushing my chips in with a strong hand and outs, one to the NUTS flsh.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not the matter at hand. Hero is behind and he knows it. If you have no problem getting your chips in the middle as an underdog, you cannot be a very good player.

Dr. StrangeloveX · #30 06-09-2005, 07:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What cero_z said. I think it's funny that there is always so much discussion about implied odds that people forget about real odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I usually think strictly in terms of real odds when I am on an obvious draw now. Removing the illusion (delusion may be the better term) of implied odds has improved my game greatly I think.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's up your ass? What I said was in response to people who were recommending FOLDING (no implied odds, your draw is so obvious etc.), before I had done the math, when I was under the impression that calling was +ev WITH NO IMPLIED ODDS.