When's the limit to hold on to your low pp?

[Potowame]

[ QUOTE ]


I take Doyle's stance on PP's if the raise represents around 10-15% of my stack and other people/raiser has a nice stack to pay off with I will play them.

No set on flop = fold

In this hand, I'd be down exactly what you were: call the first raise and fold back around preflop



[/ QUOTE ]

First Doyle's advice is for cash games, where you can reach in your pocket and reload.

Second if you think there is going to be a reraise that you will have to fold to, even a slight chance say 25% of the time. This makes the call even worse.

Action:

You call

25% of the time you fold preflop to reraise

75% of the time you see the flop you are folding roughly 88% of the time.

and 11.76% of the time you are hitting your set, and being paid off about 75-80% of the time.

still look like a winner? you add in that in the next two hands you are going into the blinds to subtract another 1500 from your stack to take you down to 11bb, this is just a flat bad call.

[number5858]

The gap concept and sandwich concept apply here. To call a raise, you must have a better hand then you would open with. There was already a raiser in front of you. You need to toss your pocket 4s right there unless you are really short stacked or short handed. You have to strongly consider the fact that there would be many to act after you. If they raise, you just waisted your call because you will be sandwiched.

[Mike Gallo]

Do not be so results oriented. You made the correct fold.

[familyteeth]

Harrington talks about this situation.
You've no business in the hand, error one,
Then "correct the situation" by throwing away the hand.
Harrington:"Don't fall into this trap, every subsequent decision has to be determined by your hand, the pot odds, and the total table situation"

I don't think this is an auto muck.
T19100 and T4100 to call, 4.7 to 1

Harrington's example is KJo from utg+1 and villain is in the blinds, hero has position in his example. pot odds of 5 to 1, and a slightly bigger dog than your situation to AA.

Here you don't have position, so although it's a bad spot for you, I don't consider this an auto fold

[Dave D]

Just so I'm clear, it's an auto fold for me for the first raise, but once I've called it, I should have called the next raise?

[familyteeth]

fold to first raise yes.
now that you're in the action,
second decision is a lot closer to call than fold,
you won't have position, but you're playing this hand for set value.
in Harrington's example KJo is looking to play with position.
Your stack to bb is almost exactly the same as in the Harrington example.
You do have life when the set doesn't come, but you'll have a monster stack when it does.

[Dave D]

You realize you're contradicting bascially everyone else who's commented on this right? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

The set/implied odds was exactly what I was thinking about with the original call. More specifically I keep thinking about this as a "gamble that wins tourneys", or at least helps me place higher. Obviously I would have no idea of the action that happened, but I knew that I'd be in great shape w/ a set. I'm trying to win the tourney, not just place etc etc mentality. Do you consider that at all?

[familyteeth]

I wouldn't have made the original call for set value with 44, in early position with lots of potential for action behind you.
Now that you are in the hand, I'm suggesting you rethink your situation when the action is back to you.
Harrington's book is where i was challenged to rethink my auto muck mentallity when i had made a mistake early in a hand