Fold "under" full-house when player has tripps?

Let me first start by qualifying myself so no one thinks I'm an newbie/fool. I've been playing competitive/tournament poker for about 2 years now. I run my own poker league + play in another’s, play in tourneys, casinos etc. I've read both Harrington books, some by Sklansky, and Super System. I'd classify myself as a solid-aggressive player. All in all I feel I have a good idea about what’s going in No-Limit Texas Hold'em.

55 man poker league
about 1 hour in
blinds are current 2-4
I'm somewhat sort stacked already about 70-ish (start 110)
I'm 1 off the button for position
I have 2 limpers ahead of me
I look down and have pocket 4's
I flat call (sure I could've raised in this position, but I wanted to flop tripps and get action, if I miss on the flop, I check and throw my hand away to any bet after the flop)
Both blinds call, 5 total players

Flop comes 4-10-10 rainbow (I currently have a full house, 4’s full of 10’s)
Checked around to me, pot is 20 total
I bet 20, giving 2-1 on the pot odds, 3 players fold
Last player re-raises to 40 all-day, I immediately put him on tripp 10's (surely pocket 10’s would’ve pre-flopped raised I felt)
I re-raise all-in immediately, player thinks about it for a few seconds and then calls
Shows down 10-J suited
Turn blank
River J giving him a better full house

Normally, getting beat on the river would not bother me, that is poker. But this same scenario is happening to me now more often than not, losing to a better full house on the river, just different cards. Now I'm thinking I must be doing something fundamentally wrong i.e. playing an “under” full house incorrectly.

I’d like to know the odds on tripps (higher) improving to full house i.e. my 4's full of 10's will lose to tripp 10's (higher tripps) when they improve to full house X out of X times? Is there a standing rule of thumb I’m missing here?

Is the safer and or correct play to simply go all-in after the flop with the under full house to protect your hand? I understand I'll be sacrificing action just to avoid the turn/river bad beat. Or do you actually throw this hand away (under full house) when I correctly put my opponent on tripps knowing that if the board pairs or pairs his hole card I'm dead to the 1 case card (4 in this example) because the odds dictate that X out of X his hand will improve to beat my hand. Did I just type to fold a made full house?

Love to hear thoughts on how to play these under full houses versus tripps that can improve to beat you. Thank you.

Jason

[pudley4]

You played it fine.

[ QUOTE ]
I’d like to know the odds on tripps (higher) improving to full house i.e. my 4's full of 10's will lose to tripp 10's (higher tripps) when they improve to full house X out of X times? Is there a standing rule of thumb I’m missing here?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're about a 7-2 favorite here (check twodimes.net for the actual percentages).

[ QUOTE ]
Last player re-raises to 40 all-day,

[/ QUOTE ]

wtf does this mean?

My bet was 20, last player raise it 20 (doubled my bet of 20 to 40 total) in my circle of players, players will announce the current bet as "40 all day" instead of saying 40 total. I find the "all day" phrase strange as well. Hope that helps.

So play the under fulls fast I take it?

[Brash620]

[ QUOTE ]

I’d like to know the odds on tripps (higher) improving to full house i.e. my 4's full of 10's will lose to tripp 10's (higher tripps) when they improve to full house X out of X times? Is there a standing rule of thumb I’m missing here?


[/ QUOTE ]

On this board he has a 4 in 45 shot to improve on the turn and a 7 in 44 to improve on the river assuming he didn't improve on the turn. Which means he's getting just under 3 to 1 to win.

[benkahuna]

You're suffering from a bout of results-oriented thinking.

You shouldn't slowplay a flopped underfull with a dangerous board (this one qualifies). You got in as a huge favorite. There's nothing more you can do.

If you are consistently finding yourself rethinking this play, you need to take a break from poker and reread the books you've read. None of them even hint that you made a mistake here.

And you did protect your hand by making a pot-sized bet. Going all in w/ really strong hands (but not the nuts) to protect them is a good way to make less money and often only get called by a superior hand. That's bad poker.

If I understood you correctly, I played the hand correctly. I know poker is about making the best decisions consistently and HOPING for the best result. That is really all you can do. In this case, I felt I played the hand smartly, but the result was bad. Does that seem fair? Thanks,

Jason

You played fine. As you know, in tournaments you are going to have to win showdowns and you got your money all in with much better odds than him. That's all you can do.

[Black Aces 518]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me first start by qualifying myself so no one thinks I'm an newbie/fool. I've been playing competitive/tournament poker for about 2 years now. I run my own poker league + play in another’s, play in tourneys, casinos etc. I've read both Harrington books, some by Sklansky, and Super System. I'd classify myself as a solid-aggressive player. All in all I feel I have a good idea about what’s going in No-Limit Texas Hold'em.
...

Is the safer and or correct play to simply go all-in after the flop with the under full house to protect your hand? I understand I'll be sacrificing action just to avoid the turn/river bad beat. Or do you actually throw this hand away (under full house) when I correctly put my opponent on tripps knowing that if the board pairs or pairs his hole card I'm dead to the 1 case card (4 in this example) because the odds dictate that X out of X his hand will improve to beat my hand. Did I just type to fold a made full house?



[/ QUOTE ]

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things does not belong.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let me first start by qualifying myself so no one thinks I'm an newbie/fool. I've been playing competitive/tournament poker for about 2 years now. I run my own poker league + play in another’s, play in tourneys, casinos etc. I've read both Harrington books, some by Sklansky, and Super System. I'd classify myself as a solid-aggressive player. All in all I feel I have a good idea about what’s going in No-Limit Texas Hold'em.
...

Is the safer and or correct play to simply go all-in after the flop with the under full house to protect your hand? I understand I'll be sacrificing action just to avoid the turn/river bad beat. Or do you actually throw this hand away (under full house) when I correctly put my opponent on tripps knowing that if the board pairs or pairs his hole card I'm dead to the 1 case card (4 in this example) because the odds dictate that X out of X his hand will improve to beat my hand. Did I just type to fold a made full house?



[/ QUOTE ]

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things does not belong.

[/ QUOTE ]

vnh [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[neuroman]

[ QUOTE ]
In this case, I felt I played the hand smartly, but the result was bad. Does that seem fair?

[/ QUOTE ]
"Fair ain't got nothing to do with it."
-William Munny (Clint Eastwood)