Profitability of calling large raises with small pocket pairs?

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
But seriously... get better at poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey jim; I hope no one killed your dog recently or anything. simmer

[Big_Jim]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey jim; I hope no one killed your dog recently or anything. simmer

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps that comment was uncalled for...

Perhaps not.

<begin simmer>

[Woolygimp]

This reminded me of a hand I played yesterday. I raised to 12 with JJ with a deep stack and got called two ways.

Flop came down j 3 8 rainbow. All of us went all in, someone showed 33 and someone showed 88 for a massive pot. You guys are brushing off reverse implied odds like they are nothing. He's less likely to get stacked by your set with an overpair or a pair, than you are with your lower set to his higher should they both hit.

[yvesaint]

[ QUOTE ]
This reminded me of a hand I played yesterday. I raised to 12 with JJ with a deep stack and got called two ways.

Flop came down j 3 8 rainbow. All of us went all in, someone showed 33 and someone showed 88 for a massive pot. You guys are brushing off reverse implied odds like they are nothing. He's less likely to get stacked by your set with an overpair or a pair, than you are with your lower set to his higher should they both hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, man maybe i should fold low pockets??? i guess they arent profitable to raises??? can you post all your examples of set over set over set so i can compare them to my samples of set over set over set and see what im doing wrong???

[Woolygimp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This reminded me of a hand I played yesterday. I raised to 12 with JJ with a deep stack and got called two ways.

Flop came down j 3 8 rainbow. All of us went all in, someone showed 33 and someone showed 88 for a massive pot. You guys are brushing off reverse implied odds like they are nothing. He's less likely to get stacked by your set with an overpair or a pair, than you are with your lower set to his higher should they both hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, man maybe i should fold low pockets??? i guess they arent profitable to raises??? can you post all your examples of set over set over set so i can compare them to my samples of set over set over set and see what im doing wrong???

[/ QUOTE ]

Theres no need for your stupid ass sarcasm, as theres nothing wrong with discussing it.

Lets say you and villain are sitting on 10x buy-ins (2000) at a NL game and he raises 25x the BB preflop. According to your 5/10 rule this is an easy call.

I don't think it is...

[xorbie]

I think it is an easy call and with 10x buyins I can also fold a set postflop, I can take down a pot postflop with out improving and moreover villain is probably not just raising with AA and KK.

[Woolygimp]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is an easy call and with 10x buyins I can also fold a set postflop, I can take down a pot postflop with out improving and moreover villain is probably not just raising with AA and KK.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok so you plan on taking a 100bb ($200)pot down postflop w/o improving with 22. So i suppose you pot it or, after he pots it you raise to 800? commiting half your stack.

Get real this isn't going to happen and even if it did, its not profitable. This pot is FAR too large, and you lose almost no equity just mucking it.

Edit: You can't honestly beleive calling a 25x BB PFR with 22 is the correct play. Sorry I didn't catch on to your OBVIOUS sarcasm xorbie.

[yvesaint]

since it looks like no one can convince you that some of us can play post-flop poker that includes bluffs, why are you continuing to argue? i know ive stopped trying

[Woolygimp]

One of the fundamentals of NL is pot control, A 100bb pot on the flop is not something you want to mess around with bluffing etc. You lose 0.00001% equity folding and then you have a chance to lose half your stack [censored] around with someone who put in a MASSIVE pf raise.

[yvesaint]

1000 BBs behind, 25 BBs is not a massive pf raise at all....