|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 11/20/2009 10:49:55 PM PACIFIC |
 Pocket 3's in Holdem, Yeoda, 20. May 2003 13:34 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Playing 4-8 holdem and sitting 2 to the right of the button and I get pocket 3's, 3 call in front of me. On average, 4 are around to see the flop. Call or fold? If fold, what is the lowest pair would you call with? 8's? 9's? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, JunglingS, 20. May 2003 13:38 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| With a number of callers, I'd probabally call it. Then again, I wasn't there, but without a raise, you can probabally call the one bet to see the flop and get out if you don't make a set, or if something scary comes up. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, MozMan, 20. May 2003 13:46 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Some of the better players here can correct me if i'm wrong, but I don't think a call is really an option here. I think this is a raise or fold situation, as the hand is short-handed. You would raise if you think you can buy the pot right there or at least get it to heads-up... but be prepared to lay down if you don't flop the set. Another benefit is that will give you more infromation about what the other players have, depending if they call, fold, or check-raise (really "call-raise"). Mostly, you probably want to fold because with only 3 players, there are still too many overcards in people's hands that could pair up on the flop to beat you. Take a look at stdioh's response to my post in the "One of those nights" post. He addresses a very similar situation I experienced with 7s and puts this stuff much more clearly... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, Jav, 20. May 2003 13:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think that playing pocket 7's in a NL tourney and pocket 3's in a limit ring game really don't compare well. Basically I think he wants to call if he felt like he knew the table well and there wasn't much of a chance of it being raised behind him. You probably couldn't go wrong folding them right away, but if you know the table well and it's passive you could limp in and hope to flop a set. Again you would have to know the table well enough to think you would get enough action for it to pay off if you did hit your set. Personally I like to limp in with small pairs in good position if I think I can get away with it (without being raised). But it would depend a lot on the particular table and the players on the button and in the blinds. You might be able to make a case for a raise if you believed you wouldn't be re-raised and it might gain you position after the flop, but I probably wouldn't try it. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, MozMan, 20. May 2003 14:05 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Ya know, that really does make a lot of sense... and it's a much easier thought-process than the "raise or fold" ramblings in my post. I think that somewhere there may be some validity to rasie or fold, but the more I re-read the original situation and my post, the less I think this is the right place for it... the odds justify the call to see if you flop the set... if you don't flop the set, then you fold. very simple. jeeze I really gotta get back to K.I.S.S.... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, Jav, 20. May 2003 14:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Don't be too hard on yourself! I'm certainly not positive about my play either. But that's what this forum is for, discussing this type of stuff. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, noiseboy, 20. May 2003 15:10 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hello there, Usually, when someone talks about "short-handed" they mean that there are only 2 to 5 players at the table. Heads-up, for example, you might be aggressive with ANY pair, or ANY Ace. This is because with fewer cards out, a lot of times nobody flops anything, and a small pair or A-high will hold up. However, in a full ring, you usually don't want to be aggressive with the small pairs, except in certain situations. Usually, You just want to get in cheap, see if you flop a set, get out if you don't. Or if it's folded all the way to you on or next to the button, you might try a raise to force out the blinds, and win right there. Even if you don't succeed, if they don't flop anything and check to you, you can often pick up the pot with a bet, although you might think twice about the bluff if the player you are against is a frequent check raiser. Sometimes, if there are 6 or more limpers, you can raise with smaller pairs, because you are assured that you have the odds to do so, and it makes it likely people will misread your hand on this hand, and also get you more action when you are raising with premium hands in the future. This play, however, isn't really that useful in a low limit game where the deception isn't needed, here you should probably just call, and on the flop "no set, no bet". | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, shorn, 20. May 2003 13:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Since you are generally getting 5.5 to 1 (4 callers + blinds) preflop, it really depends on the action you can expect after the flop if you hit. If you know that you will get paid off when you flop the set, then you can call with these odds because your implied odds are actually 8 to 1. BUT, you must be pretty certain that there won't be a raise behind you and that the table is passive enough to pay you off. I wouldn't get carried away with this type of play (because it is a slightly -EV play), but if the conditions are right, then you can call and hope to flop your set. No set, no bet. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, MozMan, 20. May 2003 13:53 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This is a perfect example of how I sometimes think too much (ref. "Thoughts on thinkng") Compare my post in this thread to that of JunglingS and shorn: they are keeping it simple and using common sense... I still seem to be stuck thinking too much about it and trying to get too fancy. ugh... I think maybe I need a break from the reading and I need to spend some time just getting back to playing, having fun and relaxing a little at the table... -Moz | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, JunglingS, 20. May 2003 14:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| From what I've read of your postings, I'm not sure you're over-thinking things as much as you think. (Ouch, that's an ugly sentence.) At this point, you need to be careful of FPS, but mostly what you are referring to is simply keeping everything in mind. It's a lot of new information, and can get rather convoluted in your head, but it's important. Once you become more familiar with the concepts, etc. you are referring to, you will notice that you don't play them as often as you do right now. That's because they aren't something you are conciously practicing anymore, and so you aren't forcing yourself to use them all the time. Honestly, I did the exact same thing for quite a while, and it all settled down in time as I got used to the concepts. Just be patient. BTW, although my post (and others I have made in the past) suggest to play this as a no-set no-bet situation, I've been at tables where a raise here would be my best play. Usually these are tables of tight-passive (weak) players who think they know all there is to know about the game, and are appalled by my looser-aggressive play. After I've done well for some time, they get intimidated, and I can usually steal the pot by quickly raising pre-flop and then again on the flop - No matter what flops, and regardless of what they're holding. This doesn't happen very often, and I usually get "un-invited" to home games like this, but it's really fun when it does happen. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, noiseboy, 20. May 2003 14:28 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| It depends on a couple of things. How aggressive are these players behind you? If they raise, it reduces your implied odds and you have to be aware of that. Also, how much will these people pay me off after the flop? If these are players that tend to tighten up after the flop if it doesn't hit them, I might fold. If these are players who play too many hands AND go too far with them, I would be inclined to call. Sometimes I like to raise with these small pairs before the flop, however, you need more callers and better odds for that to be worth it. With 6 limpers, I would raise sometimes, sometimes call depending on how likely I thought it was that someone was limping intending to reraise. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, stdioh, 20. May 2003 16:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| A call there is good. You have the big blind's money already in the pot and the small blind will have odds to come in with anything that isn't terrible. That's 6 runners and certainly gives you odds to try to hit your set. Now if you get a raise from the button, you still have 5 players in the hand even if both blinds fold off, and you have dead money from them that is worth almost one player to boot. There's enough money there that if you hit your set you should be able to extract a lot from the big hand who raised and a lot of people will be married to the pot with fairly marginal holdings. Also, if you hit your set and somebody makes a straight or a flush you've got odds to chase your tight at a 1/3 chance of filling. So I would call there in general, though a fold isn't the end of the world. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, Yeoda, 20. May 2003 16:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks for all the input. Now that I look back, calling the limpers would have been a good idea. The guys sitting behind me were passive, but I doubt I'd get more than 1 to fold if I raised. BTW, I folded and the flop hit 8-3-3. I guess I thought, pre-flop, since I was ahead I didn't want to "waste" my winnings gambling on low pair. I haven't got enough low pairs in later position with enough limpers to really think about it before. Thanks for the input everyone. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, stdioh, 21. May 2003 09:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Since you bring up small quads on the flop, let me tell you how I like to play them. A flop of 833 can make a lot of money, but I like to bet it. Nobody will put you on a three if you are out of the blinds and by betting out they will then really think that you're not on a three since if you were, you would be sandbagging it. So they will probably put you on A8, K8, or some nonsense and call with their overcards. Now if one hits an overcard then you really have them screwed because they think they are the best and you have them drawing dead. When somebody holds an 8 and an overcard and hits you can often get huge money from them. People who slowplay end up telling the table that they have a 3 and that kills their implied odds. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, shorn, 21. May 2003 09:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Also, when the overcard comes on the turn and you bet out, they are likely to raise you so you can get three bets from them and a likely call on the river too. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, Yeoda, 21. May 2003 11:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'll be in AC this Friday, so hopefully I'll be able to try that out. Tks. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Pocket 3's in Holdem, Wren, 21. May 2003 06:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I will almost always call here with my good position and 3 limpers already in, and then follow the "no set, no bet" strategy on the flop. I think this is a marginally better call if the game is passive, but if it's aggressive things aren't so bad either - yes, you might have to pay two bets to see the flop, but if you hit your set and it holds up, you're in for a much bigger payout. | ||
| 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 | Find Vancouver Businesses |
|