Playing marginal hands in late position with multiple players posting

[lonn19]

Playing O8 1/2 on Party last night. Get dealt 9h 9c 4c 2h on the button. I see that in addition to the two blinds, three other people had to post either because they were new or had been sitting out. Besides them, one other player calls by the time it gets to me. I like my hand against random hands so I call after considering the pot odds and the fact Im on the button. The flop comes Q 9 2 rainbow. Couldn't have been much better. I actually made my set. The SB bets and everyone calls up to me. I raise and everyone calls my raise. No one reraised so i rule out anyone having trip queens. Turn is an ace, putting a second spade on the board. It gets checked to me. I bet and just two people call. River is Jc. Again it is checked to me, I bet and the two players both fold. I win without showing. Obviously they were on a draw. Well played or did I just luck out? Do you guys take into consideration players besides the SB and BB posting blinds when deciding to play a hand from late position?

[sy_or_bust]

Don't get into the habit of playing trash like 9942. You can loosen up in LP, but you want to do it with good scooping hands, not weak two-way junk. I'd consider taking a shot with KTT9, KQJ9, or even JJTT, but the weak-low/weak-high hands are going to kill you when you don't flop perfect - and you don't flop perfect enough to hold a profit.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd consider taking a shot with KTT9, KQJ9, or even JJTT

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Sy - You don't mention suitedness which, in my humble opinion, is very, very important.

If these are all non-suited starting hands (rainbows), JJTTn is easily the best of them (rather than the least), in my humble opinion.

Buzz

[bodie]

"Well played or did I just luck out?"

In my opinion, you lucked out, but you also played it well after the flop. However, looking at the hand:

a) it was a very weak starting hand. The only reason I would play that hand under any conditions is if I was the BB and the pot is unraised, or if there's a hefty jackpot available that pays for quad 9's beaten.
b) the flop is good for you, I think you played it well, there was nothing more that you could do but raise there. Everyone calls so you still don't know what they're after. And realize that your meager low possibility has been counterfeited by the flopped "2".
c) The turn is another overcard and a spade flush possibility, and hopes for a low, again you played it well - there are still 2 callers, but you've shown yourself as strong all through the hand.
d) the river brings a straight possibility, but the low is gone - and both players fold to your bet. I wonder if they were going for low..or the spade flush.
e) I think when the limits are this low, it's a little harder to see things as clearly as far as players staying in until the river chasing after a hand

[lonn19]

I know it was a weak hand, and I will definitely not get into a habit of playing cards like that(even on the button). But I thought I'd take a shot considering the additional 3 guys who posted a blind.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
a) it was a very weak starting hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Bodie - Weak, but maybe not "very" weak. (I guess it's all relative).

Perhaps interestingly, 2499d actually simulates better than some pure high hands you might generally like to play. For example, it actually simulates a bit better than TTJKn, TTQKn, TJJKn, or TJQKn. But I'll admit it's probably not as easy to play (or fold) as any of those four rainbow hands.

Please don't misunderstand. I'm certainly not advising you (or anybody) to play it. It's just that I don't think of it as "very" weak.

What's "very" weak? In my humble opinion 278Qn is an example of a very weak hand. (And 222Qn is obviously even weaker).

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone calls so you still don't know what they're after.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you give them any credit, they're all on some sort of draw. They shouldn't be drawing purely for low after this one-low-card flop, but they might be.

You'd probably voluntarily see the flop with A3TJs or KQJTs, and you'd still be hanging around after this flop. Since there were several blind posters and no pre-flop raise, it's very difficult to tell what they might be holding. Could be some sort of uncoordinated hand that caught a piece of the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder if they were going for low..or the spade flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe both. Whatever it was they missed.
And nobody turned out to have the right cards (king-ten-X-Y or ten-eight-X-Y) for the straight.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[FeliciaLee]

I agree with the other replies that this is just too weak to play even with all of the dead money in the pot.

You flop a dream and you still don't know where you are. You pretty much have to play the entire hand blind. Being lost in a hand isn't the best way to make money in LO8. This could easily have gone sour for you in many ways.

Yes, I definitely play more hands when there are many players posting at a table. But I don't play the very worst hands, even on the button. While we can win a pot with a few extra blinds, we can also lose a big pot that we shouldn't have been involved in, in the first place.

Felicia [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[DOMIT]

[ QUOTE ]
You flop a dream and you still don't know where you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to beat a dead a horse.. but this is why playing pairs like 99 sucks so badly. You never really have the nuts.

If the board is 9-high, it brings a low and you're mostly likely splitting the pot--unless someone makes a low straight, which will happen often enough.

Should the board come as it did without a low draw, you don't have the nuts because there's at least one overcard.

Low limit O8, you want to play the nuts; you'll usually not have them playing medium to low pairs. (Should you have something like A22x, definitely playable..and should you end up flopping trip ducks..you have to play carefully. Many a time I've wished I just mucked my set on the flop.)

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to beat a dead a horse.

[/ QUOTE ]

DOMIT - It's not going to win the Kentucky derby, but it's not a dead horse either.

[ QUOTE ]
but this is why playing pairs like 99 sucks so badly. You never really have the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously you always like to have the nuts. But you don't always need the nuts.

[ QUOTE ]
If the board is 9-high, it brings a low and you're mostly likely splitting the pot--unless someone makes a low straight, which will happen often enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't just have a pair of nines here. You also have two wheel cards. And the hand is double suited. And you're on the button with things looking like you'll get to see the flop cheaply. Yes, if the flop comes 9-high, low will likely be possible - but you might be the one winning for low - and with a nine on the flop, you might be scooping.

But it's certainly not bad advice, especially to a beginner, to fold the hand.

[ QUOTE ]
Should the board come as it did without a low draw, you don't have the nuts because there's at least one overcard.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. But if the game stopped right after the flop, Hero is about a nine to one favorite to have the winner. Never a guarantee about my math, but that's how I have it figured.

[ QUOTE ]
Low limit O8, you want to play the nuts;

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course. But that's true in any game. You want to play the nuts. And in low limit O8 you can wait for the nuts. And that's a style of play that is very good advice for beginners because it's relatively very safe.

But yeesh... after just a short while, playing like a rock becomes a very boring way to play this game, at least at low limits. You win, but not much. And if you have weak or mistake-prone opponents, you're giving up lots of profit. I certainly don't mean to imply you should play every hand, or even most of them. But you have to be in the hand to profit from an opponent's mistakes.

For example, against a pair of chasers (possibly as here), you should want to be in the hand, even sometimes when you don't have the nuts.

[ QUOTE ]
you'll usually not have them playing medium to low pairs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree with you. You won't usually have the nuts playing medium to low pairs. I think one should tend to avoid starting hands with low pairs, and in general, to also avoid starting hands with medium cards, paired or not.

2499d is marginal at best as a starting hand. But if you're ever going to play that hand (and I'm not recommending that you do), this is the time and place.

[ QUOTE ]
Should you have something like A22x, definitely playable..and should you end up flopping trip ducks..you have to play carefully.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

[ QUOTE ]
Many a time I've wished I just mucked my set on the flop.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd rather have the board pair below my flopped set than above it. At least with nines there's generally a better chance of the board pairing beneath a flopped set than above it.

(After this particular flop, that's not true. Since Hero holds a deuce and there is a deuce and queen on the flop, there's actually a better chance of the board pairing above Hero's nines than below them. Then after the turn, it's even more true that the board, if it pairs, will pair above Hero's nines.)

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[Buzz]

Hi Felicia - Congratulations on your becoming moderator. (And good luck).

I can certainly see not playing the hand. I can't find my copy of Zee right now, but as I recall, Ray writes, "but you don't play a pair of nines in this game." I'm probably taking Ray out of context and I'm not sure I'm quoting him exactly, but I don't disagree with avoiding playing 99XY hands, even double suited, and even on the button. Thus I'll agree that folding 2499d has merit.

[ QUOTE ]
But I don't play the very worst hands, even on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me neither. However, this is not one of the very worst hands. Not by a long shot.

Just my opinion.

Buzz