5/10 Stud Hand

[pianist]

If you're routinely folding a pair of Nines just because there are a couple of over-cards behind you, I think that you're leaving money on the table in a typical $5/10 game.

In the original problem, the bring-in has a ten, so there are three higher overcards out against him, not two. The bring-in counts because so many players automatically bring-in for the minimum no matter what. Having three overcards out against you is considerably more dangerous than two.

In a 4-handed game you should limp in with 995 because you will often have the only pair, but if it turns out you don't, you saved money by limping. With the antes, you're usually getting correct immediate odds to limp but not to raise.

In an 8-handed game, 995 should probably be folded if there are three overcards behind you. (A9)9 with a live ace would be a different matter, because now you have a chance to make the best two pair, and your aces would be split.

[Andy B]

I wasn't talking about this hand, but the Ten wasn't the bring-in. Chris Daddy was (9 < 10), and he brought it in for the full bet. I probably would have brought it in for the minimum myself, but I would have done so with the intention of calling a completion. I have no problem with Daddy's having brought it in for a full bet with what was likely the best hand.

I was responding to your assertion that if it were a full game, he would have folded. Laying aside the fact that this wasn't an option in this case, I'm saying that there is no reason to fold decent pairs for the bring-in in a full game with passive opponents, which your typical $5/10 players are. Even if there are over-cards behind you, two Nines is going to be the best hand around the table more often than not. In your typical $5/10 game, you will get to see fifth and even sixth street for your initial $2 investment. Many $5/10 players will pay you off the whole way if you catch another Nine, and this is the primary reason that I say that if you're routinely folding in this spot, you're leaving money on the table.

If I'm reading your last sentence right, if you had (99)A you'd advocate folding if there were a couple of face cards to act behind you because if you hit your Ace the pair will be exposed? I'd need a damned good reason to fold this hand on third street, and that would have to come in the form of a raise or two. I raise myself with this hand more often than not. It's nice when you make Aces-up and you show no pair, but it's even nicer when you make a set of Nines and show no pair.

[pianist]

I wasn't talking about this hand, but the Ten wasn't the bring-in. Chris Daddy was (9 < 10), and he brought it in for the full bet. I probably would have brought it in for the minimum myself, but I would have done so with the intention of calling a completion.

I apparently misread the original post, but it's not that important whether he's bringing it in or calling. We're in basic agreement that he should put in the minimum in either case, and call a complettion.

I have no problem with Daddy's having brought it in for a full bet with what was likely the best hand.

Having the best pair on 3rd street does not necessarily mean you have the hand with the best chance of winning at the showdown. It's not hard to construct situations where no one else can has a larger pair but your 995 is no better than break-even against the field. When you add in the possibility that you are already behind and may get raised by a bigger pair, then bringing-in for the full amount, or raising the bring-in, is usually not mathematically sound play. It might be right for tactical reasons vs timid opponents, but it's usually not right in terms of odds and EV.

I'm saying that there is no reason to fold decent pairs for the bring-in in a full game with passive opponents, which your typical $5/10 players are.

I won't go so far as to say that you should always fold 995 here, but I'll maintain that in normal conditions, you're probably just running up your variance without making any real profit. If the 5 is suited and the suit is live, then that tips the scales towards calling.

If I'm reading your last sentence right, if you had (99)A you'd advocate folding

No, I'm saying you should raise with this hand. My wording could have been clearer.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

[ QUOTE ]
Having the best pair on 3rd street does not necessarily mean you have the hand with the best chance of winning at the showdown. It's not hard to construct situations where no one else can has a larger pair but your 995 is no better than break-even against the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

But if I have any chance at all to knock out overcards on 3rd street, that would greatly increase the chances of me winning a showdown, no? Thus, I completed.

[Andy B]

[ QUOTE ]
Having the best pair on 3rd street does not necessarily mean you have the hand with the best chance of winning at the showdown. It's not hard to construct situations where no one else can has a larger pair but your 995 is no better than break-even against the field. When you add in the possibility that you are already behind and may get raised by a bigger pair, then bringing-in for the full amount, or raising the bring-in, is usually not mathematically sound play. It might be right for tactical reasons vs timid opponents, but it's usually not right in terms of odds and EV.


[/ QUOTE ]
If everyone calls, then yes, your two Nines just might be a dog to the field, even if it is the "best" hand on third street. By bringing it in for a full bet on third street, however, it is somewhat likely that it will go heads-up immediately, and you will (probably) have position with the best hand. There is some chance that he'll win the antes as well, and I consider this a good result whenever I have a pair of Nines. Chris Daddy has to put at least $2 into the pot. For only $3 more, he has the chance to steal the $4 already in there, or to set up the hand so that he can maybe buy the pot later.

[ QUOTE ]
I won't go so far as to say that you should always fold 995 here, but I'll maintain that in normal conditions, you're probably just running up your variance without making any real profit.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like to gamble. You should try it some time. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]