Do you lay this down?

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
...in this cardroom it's not uncommon to see set over set.

[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] .... Stop playing poker, today. If for some reason you don't take this advice.... don't play small pocket pairs if you are going to fold when someone pushes on a draw-heavy board and you have a set. Good luck.

-tpir

[King_J]

... I entered the Casino in Barcelona 4 months ago and for the first time in my life I played live. The 2nd day I saw set over set over set in one hand, its true!

and the hand you played, easy call on the turn. But I dont play live No limit.

[BeavisChrist]

I guess after years of reading RGP and other Poker discussion groups I shouldn't be surprised by the condescending nature with which most questions are answered.

I guess I'm a "bad player" and as a "bad player" some of your advice for me is to "quit playing poker now". Correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't it logical for you to WANT "bad players" playing?

To understand why this was a more difficult decision for me than most it might have helped if I mentioned that I come from a tournament background - my first four or five years playing poker was strictly tournament play. Adjusting to a pure cash game will probably result in making several mistakes like this.

I'm sure we would have all quit poker long ago if we were judged by a single hand. I know you all realize this already, it just always makes me chuckle to see the barage of "you should quit" and "this is the worst play I've ever seen" posts that seem to clutter otherwise decent advice and discussion.

Okay, rant over.

[tpir90036]

The problem is not the play of the hand per se. Have we all made tough laydowns of sets and been right/wrong? Sure. The problem is that you are posting in a "High Stakes" forum where most of the posters/responders are people who have a lot of experience and poker knowledge. And while I am not judging you as a bad player based on one hand...when you uncork sweet science like this:

[ QUOTE ]
...in this cardroom it's not uncommon to see set over set

[/ QUOTE ]
It becomes clear that your do not have the capacity to think about the game logically or to think logically at all. Which is not to say that you are dumb... just that you should probably not expect to get much love when posting stuff like this in a high stakes forum.

The "barage" you speak of takes place in all parts of the forum. The same question posted in Mid-High Limit and Micro-Limit will get two very diffent responses if it is more of a "beginner" question. So, try posting some hands in the Small-Stakes part of the NL forum.

Good luck,
-tpir

[BeavisChrist]

How is my statement about set over set not logical? I was responding to the person who said something to the effect of "in all my years of playing I've only seen set over set once." I see it all the time... especially in a room with a gigantic bad beat jackpot. It makes a lot of sense to me that there would be a high frequency of set over set. My statement was more like "I don't know where you've been playing for years without seeing set over set, but in my card room it's quite common." Not logical?

As far as posting in the correct forum - I've read dozens of posts here regarding PStars NLHE games which would have to all be considered low stakes by your definition. This is "mid to high stakes" - in my game there are usually several stacks that are $800-$1200. The max buy in at Stars is $1000.

I'm sorry if I infringed on your little world of "experience and poker knowledge" - in my mind this was more of an advanced question - I had no idea it was such a simple calling situation. If I had already known the answer to my question, I would have also known it was simple, yes?

[ QUOTE ]
It becomes clear that your do not have the capacity to think about the game logically or to think logically at all. Which is not to say that you are dumb...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, software developers usually aren't known for being very logical. I'm just happy you could get your point across without being condescending [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[tpir90036]

I never claimed to be experienced or knowledgable. I said that the other people who posted here (for the most part) were. I also don't know what the true definition of "High" or "Low" stakes is. My point was that your question might be better suited for the smaller of the forums. Maybe it isn't... I was just making a suggestion.

I hope you were joking when you said the following:
[ QUOTE ]
I see it [set-over-set] all the time... especially in a room with a gigantic bad beat jackpot.

[/ QUOTE ]
So you are using a ridiculous statement to back up the idea that your original statement was logical?!? Interesting.

1) The idea that one cardroom has more set-over-set than another is far from logical.
2) The idea that having a jackpot somehow affects it is also absurd.
3) Playing a hand with the hopes of flopping a set only to fear set-over-set might not be illogical but it is certainly irrational.

If anything.... just think about #3 and consider this "conversation" over.

Software developer, ay? You must do networking or web development because your math/probablity skills are clearly lacking if you think that being inside of one building vs. another affects card distribution.

Set sail....
-tpir

[BeavisChrist]

I wasn't implying that being in one building or another affects the hands. I'm saying that in a card room (such as this) with a huge bad beat jackpot, players will play any pair for almost any raise. At a NLHE table with blinds at 3-5 it's not uncommon for a raise of $40 to be called by three or four people with small pairs. Given that just about anyone with a pocket pair is going to call (which is not the case in some places), the frequency of more people hitting a set will also go up, and thus the frequency of two people hitting a set on the same hand will go up. That's all I was saying.

[ QUOTE ]
3) Playing a hand with the hopes of flopping a set only to fear set-over-set might not be illogical but it is certainly irrational.

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain something to me... what if three hearts flopped, and a fourth on the turn. How would it be illogical or irrational to fold to a huge reraise all in? If you flop a nut flush but the final board reads KKQQJ do you call just because you hit your flush? I shouldn't make my decision about how I'll play the turn before I've seen his action, which was my big mistake.

At the time I was playing the bottom set cautiously, trying to put my opponent on a hand. After some thought I put him on a better set and folded. Was it a mistake? Absolutely... but I don't think it was irrational to put him on a better set given the situation.

I think the main point I'm taking away from the discussion is that even if I'm 99% sure he's got a better set a call is still the correct play here. That's all I really wanted to know.

[SpeakEasy]

[ QUOTE ]
Usually when someone looks right at you after making a bet they are bluffing... Of course, this is different for new players (they are often showing how strong their hand is). If you can't close your eyes and call off your stack with a set in this spot, playing small pairs might be a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Beavis, this quote above the best advice to your post.

(1) Staring right at you, from my experience, is a tell of weakness. Looking away or avoiding eye contact is a sign of strength. Contrary to what srblan added, I find this to be especially true for new players. The only way this player is acting the reverse of the normal tell is (a) he is aware of the difference between staring and looking away, as a tell, and (b) he thinks that YOU are aware of the normal tells and wants to "act" the opposite tell to throw you off. From your description of the player, this is all highly unlikely, and his tell was, in fact, indicative of a weaker hand.

(2) I've been through the dilemma with a small pocket pair, and you've got to tell yourself during the hand (not after) "This is why I play 55. I will not be spooked by the possible flush and the possible higher set. Play it strong."

Finally, don't worry about how people respond to your posts. Just take what good advice you can from the responses and move on. You asked a fair question with your post; learn from your mistakes to become a better player.

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
Explain something to me... what if three hearts flopped, and a fourth on the turn. How would it be illogical or irrational to fold to a huge reraise all in? If you flop a nut flush but the final board reads KKQQJ do you call just because you hit your flush?

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon man. Give me a break. Obviously, the texture of the board affects how you play and some/most/all of the decisisons that you make. I hope that these are rhetorical questions.

Let's just forget all of the other crap and stick with the advice of 1) not seeing monsters under the bed and 2) not being afraid to put your money in if you think you are in a good spot more often than not and thus +EV on the hand if we ran it an infinite number of times v. this opponent v. this board v. the action thus far v. his range of hands.

Without a read that says "this opponent is the tightest player ever" you are most likely anywhere from a significant favorite to a mile ahead of his likely holdings. I will leave the set-over-set math out of this.... there are lots of old threads about it in the "Probability" forum if you are interested.

Take care,
-tpir

[B Dids]

Something else just to keep in mind- is that while this board can be very sarcastic, it's not often mean. Grow a thicker skin, and understand that most people are trying to help you, even if they get a joke it at your expense.

And yeah- you can't fold there.