Willing to go broke?

[curtains]

I dunno what the blind structures are or anything, but most of the time they won't have a set here.

[wray]

[ QUOTE ]
your question is really terribly posed, and sort of entirely information free, but i'm trying to figure out if you pulled it straight from supersystem 2 or not. you make a decision on your opponent's cards, and then you play. if you don't think it's possible anyone has a 44 or JJ enough of the time, you call.

why is there a question every 2 days about "would you fold KK on the first day of the wsop" or someting like that?

in this situation, it's unlikely either 44 or JJ would have played the hand like that, but if there's people left ot act behind you, any of them could easily have 44 in the unraised pot.

so my question is, in what way is this question *remarkably* different from the "it's the first hand of the wsop and you're dealt KK in the bb. folded to the sb, who pushes, what do you do?" answer, it's really not. don't post stupid crap.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

You sure seem to come across bitter. I realize there's many kids on here posting silly questions. I'm not one of them I'm a 34 y/o trying to learn more about poker. The reason I said early in the tournament was if I didn't there would be many peoples responses who said something like "what kind of players were in there". So early in the tournament = no read. The reason I said something like the main event of a WPT was if I just said "in a tournament" then some people who mainly play in 50$ entry fee tournaments would play much looser and not think a second thought.

Hopefully you see my logic a bit more and you can come across a little less brash.

[wray]

To answer.... yes this did come from Super System 2. Doyle's response of saying he'd fold the majority of the time really surprised me. So I decided to post it here w/o saying who it came from to hear everyone's responses.

I'll never be world class I guess cause I'm callin.

[RiverTheNuts]

I call, and its not even close... Doyle is getting up there in the years and doesnt play that well anymore, he should call too

[freemont]

As hard as it is to fold a set, and last I checked I don't think I've ever done it to an all-in on the flop, I think you have to here. I'm assuming the flop was a rainbow which means it's not someone way overplaying a flushdraw. Ok, if it's an online tournament I probably call in a heartbeat and expect to get shown slowplayed aces or something like that... But really, at the 25-50 level of a deep stack (10k to start) tournament what kinds of hands is someone going to bet something in the neighborhood of 35 times the pot with??? In this situation it seems like (to me) he probably has 44. Two pair seems really unlikely J4? J2? 42? and jacks he probably would have raised preflop...

Granted this player has horribly misplayed his hand no matter what he has, but this reminds me of something Paul Phillips once said on here about facing a massive all-in overbet, and how his experience has taught him it usually means the guy has the nuts. I believe he was refering preflop to giving his opponent credit for aces, but it seems to apply here.

A number of things could change my opinion from call to fold, but this situation existing in the vacuum of little to no information you've tried to create I think I muck. I'm all about pushing my edges early, but here it seems that the majority of the time you're drawing to one out...

[asofel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Call. My philosophy is you're there to place first, so going out 350th or 117th doesn't make much of a difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't disagree with the philosophy or decision, but I question the analysis. It doesn't make sense to CALL what I assume to be an enormous overbet without first determining whether you think you are ahead in the hand. I would call because I would think it quite likely that my set was a strong favorite. You can't stick with level I thinking and say "I got a set, I have to play it, because if I don't, what else would I be willing to call with?" Clearly Rushmore feels that there will very likely be better opportunities to risk chips on other hands. I'm sure he thinks there is a decent chance he has the best hand, but it's not worth playing considering the risk. You can't win a tournament early, but you can lose it mentality. This thought process is not inconsistent with playing for first place.

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh no, that's not what I meant to be interpreted. I always take the situation into greater context and try to narrow down the range of hands of my opponents. In that specific situation, with the little information available [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img], I would call with my set of 2's. If I know from my gut, I'm not up against a higher set I call instantly. Now having a situation like this come up would be rare if not ludacris.

[/ QUOTE ]

how did this turn into a rap discussion?

[Easy E]

If they're THAT stupid then I'd be glad I folded so I could identify their play

[wray]

"If you flopped a set in an unraised pot and it was a raggedy flop, you'd have to play the hand quite differently. Depending on what set you flopped, you might not even play it at all. You'll see what I mean in a minute. But the concept you should understand is this: In no-limit play, you must be very careful you don't lose all your chips in an unraised pot, unless you have the nuts at the point you go all-in.

Here's what I mean: let's say you and six other players got in for the absolute minimum, that is, you all limped in for a 50$ force, the blind bet. Everbody just called. Nobody raised-so the field wasn't weeded out at all. Now, a J-4-2 flops. You flop 3 deuces. In a previous situation-with this same flop-you should lead right into the raiser with your set. He's probably got an overpair and will raise as expected. But in the present situation, you must plaay it carefully. Very carefully. You flopped a hand that's easy to go broke with. There's nothing in the pot, and you don't want to go broke in a nothing pot.

The 6 people in the pot with you tried to flop the nuts for free. And one of them might have the nuts, or close to it. So if 1 of the other players commits all his money when there's only a few hundred dollars in the pot, you better watch out. Your three dueces probably aren't any good.

You could be up against 3 jacks, but that's not as likely as 3 4's, since there was no raise befoere the flop. That's the hand you should be afraid of.

I'm not saying you shouldn't play the hand. I'm just saying that you have to play it carefully. Since nobody showed any early strength, you're not likely to be up against a big pair, but you could be facing another set. Nevertheless, if it's checked to you, you've got to bet it.

But you don't want to get broke with the hand because it was a nothing pot to begin with. If you get raised, your own judgement in the particular situation will have to prevail. With the third set,dueces, you might want to go on with the hand, but then you might not. With the second set,fours, you can't get away from it. Someone's going to have to show you three jacks. That's all there is to it."

[Paluka]

I'd just like to point out that I actually folded a set to an all-in on hand #3 of the WSOP this year.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
Often you can just look at a person and tell if he is intelligent or not. You can often tell if he is aggressive or passive. This is before the cards are even dealt.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't be serious.