Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Small Stakes Hold'em
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-25-2005, 03:24 PM
cassady cassady is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Great White North
Posts: 111
Default Re: Reasonable shot at protection?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh boy. I don't know. That's a lot of opponents, and I doubt you have the best hand. I kind of doubt you even have Button beat.

But the pot's big, so the reward is substantial when Button doesn't have you beat and you scare away a pocket underpair or two and your potentially expensive play does work.

[/ QUOTE ]

This pretty much summed up my thoughts here. I think there's a good chance of folding hands that beat me, like 4x/5x/pocket pairs. There are also very few draws as it's a rainbow board and the only straight draw is with 2 low cards or A2/A3. I also have a really good chance of folding hands like JT which have 6 outs but will be very unlikely to call 2 with an overcard on the board.

I have a backdoor flush draw, really weak backdoor straight draw and an overcard which is actually cleaner than if there were no king on the board, but I think I will find out very quickly if the button has AA/KK/AK. My queen needs to be discounted heavily, although there's a decent chance the button has something like JJ/TT (or even AQ/AJ/ATs).

If the pot weren't 20SB I would go ahead and fold but I figured it was worth raising here. Since I have odds to call on my bdfd alone if I can clean up any outs with a raise it may be worth it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm on board with this.

Please post the rest of the hand in here at some point, as I'm interested to see how it played out.

Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Looking at this hand, I automatically think two things:

1). The odds of drawing dead against the button here in terms of making a pair and winning are high. AA, KK, AK, KQ would be ugly for us here.

2). There's a substantial amount of value in our backdoor draws. Assigning 1.5 outs to each of the nut flush, nut straight, and low-end straight, we get 4.5 outs. More than enough to peel.

Given that two of these backdoor draws are to the nuts, I think we want as many callers with us as possible.

I think the callers give us more value than the isolation play, which gives us probably a 50% chance of drawing near dead.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-25-2005, 04:35 PM
QTip QTip is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 31
Default Re: Reasonable shot at protection?

[ QUOTE ]
Given that two of these backdoor draws are to the nuts, I think we want as many callers with us as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree.

What if we could get something like 77 to fold and the turn and river were 7 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

What if we could get something like 8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]6 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] to fold and the turn and river were J [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]T [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] or maybe it comes a 2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].

There are plenty of scenarios that could be listed here. IMO, the equity we gain from getting other hands out cannot be outweighed by thinking that more people will actual stick around and pay us more when we hit a hand.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-25-2005, 04:36 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Reasonable shot at protection?

In addition to this the low nature of the second and third pairs make it less likely that
A) they are out and
B) They will stick around for two bets on the flop.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-25-2005, 05:50 PM
QTip QTip is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 31
Default Re: Reasonable shot at protection?

[ QUOTE ]
In addition to this the low nature of the second and third pairs make it less likely that
A) they are out and
B) They will stick around for two bets on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying you think it's unlikely that a small and/or mid pp is in the field? If so, why?

This would apply to any pp, which certainly could be out there. And that's why I'm saying raising could get them out. If we just c/c the flop, they can peel.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-25-2005, 06:03 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Reasonable shot at protection?

I am saying it is unlikely someone has a 4 or a 5 in their hole cards and it is also unlikely that IF they do have one they will stick around for two bets.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-25-2005, 07:41 PM
mterry mterry is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1
Default Re: Reasonable shot at protection?

I think it depends on your feel for your opponents response to your aggression. I've been in sshe games that are loose preflop and weak/tight postflop. These types of players often incorrectly fold to flop c/rs. In this particular 2/4 game,how loose are the player postflop?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-26-2005, 01:47 AM
MrDannimal MrDannimal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 385
Default Re: Reasonable shot at protection?

[ QUOTE ]
and it is also unlikely that IF they do have one they will stick around for two bets

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? If someone has a 4 or 5 here, they've got 5 outs to two pair or trips. The idea that they'd fold here getting 11:1 or better (even if they're totally unaware of odds, they're going to call with a pair in a huge pot at this level) is boggling.

Oy.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.