|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 10/15/2008 3:41:09 PM PACIFIC |
 Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, NiceFella, 19. May 2003 21:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Today I was grinding it away in my local weak, passive 4/8 game when a very peculiar hand developed. UTG opens with a raise. It's unusual for anyone at this table besides me to be opening with a raise, so I peg him with a big pair. The next player reraises. This is an extremely strong statement at our table, and there's no doubt in my mind this uncreative player has the aces. A solid, careful middle player, who probably read these players the same way I have, calls the three bets. I put him on AK, AQ, or a middling pair like TT. Now it's to me. I have 88. I think about calling, but I know I have the fourth best hand at this point and estimate that I'm an 8:1 dog -- I need to flop a set or muck. I suspect there's more raising to come before the flop, and I'm not convinced I can drag enough money on later rounds to make up for the up-front betting. I decide to live to fight another day and just muck. The woman after me, an off-duty dealer, thinks for a long time and makes one of those "gosh I wish I could call but I can't" faces and finally mucks. Of course the board comes 8-2-8-9-2 and I miss out on quads. The players show KK, AA, and JJ, as suspected. AA drags the pot. Immediately after the hand is over the woman cries out about having dumped her pocket 22. Yes, we missed out on quads over quads, which pays a bad beat jackpot. I spilled the beans about mucking my 88 before the flop, and all hell breaks loose. They all want to know why in the world I mucked my pocket pair. All day long I had to listen to them tell me I misplayed my hand. Well, I don't know. I'd quickly call just one raise with 88. But not three bets cold when I've (correctly) read my opponents to have KK and AA. I'm not a "results" player. I trust in math and pot odds. But I admit this did get under my skin, and I tilted a bit, and finally had to leave. I'm still very much a student of this game and I'm curious what others have to say. Comments? NiceFella | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, Big_Slick, 19. May 2003 22:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| If you're into making money rather than playing the lottery, you did the right thing. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, Andrew Wells, 20. May 2003 05:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You did everything right except keep your mouth shut. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, Brent, 20. May 2003 05:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| With everyone telling you that you misplayed the hand, sounds like a table you want to be at. While I agree that I wouldn't have said anything myself, you probably have a tight image now. When you stay or raise your opponents should think that you have strength. Mucking was the right call. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, shorn, 20. May 2003 05:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Don't think twice about your play. You must muck 88 to 3 bets, especially with the reads that you had. You were only getting 2 to1 to call, nowhere near enough. Stick to your guns and fold that over and over and over and over again. Over the long run, you will save much more $$ than the bad beat jackpot would have paid you if you continue to muck in this spot. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, chasepoker, 20. May 2003 07:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| And also your 8-1 shot aint so great if you put the others on big pocket pairs as any ( in this case J,K or A ) big cards on the flop could make trips for someone else. As Andrew said not telling them would have the best thing to do and maybe join in with the fish chorus about how unlucky the woman with 22 was etc etc she might then play them next time ! 7 High's Chasepoker | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, NiceFella, 20. May 2003 15:26 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks for the 88 feedback folks! Yes, I'm confident in hindsight that I made the right decision to muck those 88s. The one-two punch of missing the quads and then having to listen to the whiners telling me I misplayed them all afternoon had me looking here for reassurance. I normally don't tell anyone what I had after mucking, but I just couldn't resist the urge in this case. Brent really hit it on the head with "sounds like a table you want to be at." Hehe, yes, indeed I do. I just have to remember not to start learning by example. :-) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| it depends on the size of the jackpot, Player X, 20. May 2003 08:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Chances are that the jackpot isn't big enough to make calling the correct play, but if it was big enough then it could make the slightly negative EV play of calling preflop correct. -X Writer www.pokerev.com | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: it depends on the size of the jackpot, shorn, 20. May 2003 08:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I disagree here X. That's like saying once the slot jackpot gets to a certain point, it only makes sense to sit down and keep playing until you hit it. Again, especially withe the read that he had on the players before him, his 22 was dead meat unless he flopped a set. I think calling 3 bets cold given all of that is a highly -EV play. One bet....different story. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: it depends on the size of the jackpot, chasepoker, 20. May 2003 08:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I am sure someone will do the maths on it but to me Bad beat Jackpots are to be ignored as far as serious play is concerned. The odds of you hitting a BBJackpot is so slim as not to be a factor. Stdioh or someone can you do the maths for my tiny brain ? 7 High's Chasepoker | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: it depends on the size of the jackpot, shorn, 20. May 2003 09:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| No math needed. It is intuitive and I agree 100%. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: it depends on the size of the jackpot, stdioh, 20. May 2003 11:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Generally speaking, jackpots are not worth thinking about until you are *well* into the hand. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, noiseboy, 20. May 2003 10:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| That's really stupid of them to criticize your play, don't listen. 88's is just not a 3-bet hand usually. Plus, you can't anticipate enough callers to make it worth trying to spike the set in this case. Drag about the bad beat j-pot, however, there was no way that the 22's should be calling 3 bets regardless of what your hand was. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, Don Quixote, 20. May 2003 10:43 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Just for sake of discussion/argument, I would like to look at this from another angle. BTW, the odds were 3 to 1 not 2 to 1, right? The MP player called also. Would you have called just one bet? How about two? If so, why not call the three? The odds remain the same, right? Also, couldn't the raiser and reraiser have had the same hand, AA, KK, or whatever? Maybe the MP had AK; and if the first two players had AA, KK respectively, there would be only one of each left to flop, thus reducing the chances of set over set if you hit. I have 3-bet on AK, but you were there and had a read. Well, anyway, I may have called; but not sure. What do you all think? Don Quixote on 19. May 2003 21:57 NiceFella wrote: > Today I was grinding it away in my local weak, passive 4/8 game when a very > peculiar hand developed. > > UTG opens with a raise. It's unusual for anyone at this table besides me to be > opening with a raise, so I peg him with a big pair. > > The next player reraises. This is an extremely strong statement at our table, > and there's no doubt in my mind this uncreative player has the aces. > > A solid, careful middle player, who probably read these players the same way I > have, calls the three bets. I put him on AK, AQ, or a middling pair like TT. > > Now it's to me. I have 88. I think about calling, but I know I have the fourth > best hand at this point and estimate that I'm an 8:1 dog -- I need to flop a set > or muck. I suspect there's more raising to come before the flop, and I'm not > convinced I can drag enough money on later rounds to make up for the up-front > betting. I decide to live to fight another day and just muck. > > The woman after me, an off-duty dealer, thinks for a long time and makes one of > those "gosh I wish I could call but I can't" faces and finally mucks. > > Of course the board comes 8-2-8-9-2 and I miss out on quads. > > The players show KK, AA, and JJ, as suspected. AA drags the pot. > > Immediately after the hand is over the woman cries out about having dumped her > pocket 22. > > Yes, we missed out on quads over quads, which pays a bad beat jackpot. > > I spilled the beans about mucking my 88 before the flop, and all hell breaks > loose. They all want to know why in the world I mucked my pocket pair. All day > long I had to listen to them tell me I misplayed my hand. > > Well, I don't know. I'd quickly call just one raise with 88. But not three bets > cold when I've (correctly) read my opponents to have KK and AA. > > I'm not a "results" player. I trust in math and pot odds. But I admit this did > get under my skin, and I tilted a bit, and finally had to leave. I'm still very > much a student of this game and I'm curious what others have to say. > > Comments? > NiceFella > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, shorn, 20. May 2003 10:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Good catch on the odds....I had forgotten about the MP player. However, it is not just that the odds to consider. It is also where your hand stands NOW relative to the others. So, if there were 3 limpers in stead of a raise, re-raise and flat call, you would be getting 4.5 to 1 to call and your hand is more likely to no be behind all three opponents. I am not saying that you are in the lead...rather, you COULD be in the lead with three limpers whereas with the raising that has gone on you are certainly not. Finally, you want to see the flop cheaply in terms of # of BB's with a hand like this. That way, you don't lose as much when you don't hit. Think of it this way...would you rather get to call 4 times with 22 against 4 other players, or flat call a preflop cap? Same amount of $$, but I would rather have the first option. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, NiceFella, 21. May 2003 17:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| OK, for the sake of discussion, here's my thinking on the pot odds of this situation, where it is three-bet to you with 88. You need to flop a set or fold, that much is clear. The question boils down to how much money we stand to make if we hit our set. Hitting a set while no other player makes one also is about an 8:1 long shot. There are three other players in the pot already, so you're getting 3:1 on the preflop call. This means that if we hit our set, we need to be able to get the other 5 parts into the pot after the flop. In a 4/8 game, that means we have to get 5x12 = $60 from our opponents after the flop. If all three of them call all the way to the river, that will just barely get the money. However, that might be a little unlikely as at least one of them figures to give up before the river. Sure, the pot might get raised, but even then, that just might encourage another player to abort early. So I think it will be hard to collect the necessary pot odds after hitting the set. Note that it's clear that at least one and maybe two opponents have big pocket pairs, so if any aces or faces come on the board it will be very hard to know if any of them have also made a set. It gets even worse if the preflop bet gets reraised behind you. Now you've paid $16 to see the flop, and you'll need to collect $80 after the flop. That will be nearly impossible. Using this same reasoning, you can see that calling two bets would be okay. Now you've only paid $8, so you need to collect only $40 after the flop. That is doable wih with three opponents. What about with more preflop callers? With a few more callers, you're getting more of your pot odds up front, and don't need to collect as much later when you hit your set. So with two more callers, you could easily see 88 for 3 bets. NiceFella | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Mucking 88 instead of 3 bets cold, stdioh, 20. May 2003 11:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Good fold. If you've put in no money, don't bother playing with this kind of domination. You could argue that there is enough action for you to see a flop and try to hit a set, but when the flop then comes AK8 you have no idea where you stand and you are married to the hand. This is a textbook fold and I'm glad that you are there. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|