|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 10/6/2008 4:53:13 PM PACIFIC |
 Middle and low PP's, iceman5, 5. Dec 2003 16:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| To play a low to middle PP, how many players do you normally need to have the correct odds to try to hit your set? Is it 5 total players? or 5 plus you? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, Schuster, 5. Dec 2003 16:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Depends very much on the game texture! Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, Palinya, 5. Dec 2003 16:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| you're 7.5-1 to flop the set I think... so if you know you can get 10 bets in the pot on any hand then I'd say play it to see the flop This doesn't mean you need those bets on the flop, you just have to be pretty sure you can get them in the pot by the river | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, iceman5, 5. Dec 2003 17:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Schuster , how about an average table (loose passive) with 4-5 seeing the flop. You are on the button or cutoff. How many limpers/ and or total players would you want to play a low to middle PP? Since the odds of hitting the set are 7.5-1, Ive heard the general rule is that you want 5 seeing the flop. I was wondering if this "general rule" refers to 5 plus you or 5 total? The reason I ask is that today I was the cutoff with 22. There were 3 limpers to me. The blinds probably wouldve played but may not have if it got raised behind me so I figured it was 50/50 to call or fold. The flop was 282 with 2 clubs. A 2rd club came and the betting war started and I wanted to pull my hair out. Obviously, this great flop has no bearing on whether I call in that situation next time, but that is the reason I asked the question. Palinya..I have to disagree. I dont think knowing you can get 10 bets into a pot at some later time should be a determining factor. First of all, are you talking small bets or big bets? Secondly, if you dont flop a set you will fold in most cases so how can future bets on the turn or river be used to decide? The way I understand it is this: the odds of a set are 7.5-1. If you get 5 or so players you are getting 5-1 on your money which is an underlay, but if you hit the set you will win a big pot so the implied odds are there. In other words you lose 1 bet 6.5 times, but that time that you hit the set you win much more than the enough bets to cover those losses. If you had 33 7 times and called each time with only 3 players. The one time you hit the set you wouldnt win enough back from your 2 opponents to cover you the bets the other times that you lost (unless one of them had 2 pair or something). Of course if you were heads up that would be ok too. Its when you have too few or not enough players that causes the problem. Im thinking the answer is: 5 or more total players is best with low PP's. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, jaustin, 5. Dec 2003 17:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > Palinya..I have to disagree. I dont think knowing you can get 10 bets into a pot at some > later time should be a determining factor. First of all, are you talking small bets or > big bets? Secondly, if you dont flop a set you will fold in most cases so how can future > bets on the turn or river be used to decide? Knowing how many bets you can get in the pot is the most important thing in determining whether to play your small pair. You want to win big pots when you hit to make up for the long odds of making trips. This goes to what Schuster means by table texture. 3 calling stations are enough limpers to see the flop, while 4 players who'll get out if they don't hit may not be. If the final expected pot is 10 small bets (+ your bets) or more you're getting 9:1 money on your 7.5:1 draw. This is probabaly about break even as you'll lose every now and then even when you make trips. So if the final pot is expected to be bigger than that, you should call, smaller and it's probably a fold. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, iceman5, 5. Dec 2003 17:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I understand what youre saying, but I think its hard to predict betting action on future rounds. It will be easier after you see the flop but it may be too late by then. How about this. You sit down at the table and have never seen these guys before. The first hand you get anything from 33 to 77 in the cutoff. How many limpers would you want before you would call? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, Palinya, 5. Dec 2003 18:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You will almost never get 7.5-1 just on the flop. You would have to have 8 people in the pot other than yourself. That's the whole idea behind implied odds... if you hit it on the flop and bet you have to know that there will be a couple people at least that put in a bet on the flop and another on the turn and most of the time someone with top pair will see you to the river. So in a loose game with 3-4 limpers you should be getting the odds you need by the time you hit the river. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, jajo, 11. Dec 2003 15:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| you make it sound as if a small pair is a "trapping hand" where you hope to hit the set and trap your opponent who hits top pair for many bets. I don't think that is the sole value of a small pair. True that 22 and 33 will have a tough time winning unimproved. But they actually will do so many times in heads up action. The 22 and 33 therefore have value on their own as a legit hand that can win the showdown unimproved IF it remains heads up. Therefore, when I play a 22 and 33 I'd rather play it heads up hoping to win unimproved then playing in a bulti-way pot and hoping to flop a set which will rarely happen. I like to be realistic. It's hard to flop a set. My primary goal is winning unimproved. Therefore, if there's only one limper and I think that if I riase with my 33 I have a good chance of getting everyone to fold, then I will by all means do so AND hope not to get called. Realize that the roocks behind me are probably folding the likes of KTo A8o etc.. these are hands they might play for one bet. When I raise they are afraid that even if they hit, their kicker might not be any good. If they had known that all I had was puny three's they would probably play and rightfully so since they have two overcards. I don't want them in the pot because they can beat me so easilly. I am therefore rooting for them to respect my raise and fold. If I don't think I can get that respect or if it's a loose game, then the best action in early position is to simply fold. In late position it's correct o call only if there are many limpers, hoping to flop a set. If you have a medium pair such as 6 or 7 you can be much looser since many players will be in there with only one over card such as A3, K5s 54s etc.. These hands have to be significantly more luckier to beat your sixes than a hand containing two overcards. They will often hit the small pair only and you will win with sixes unimproved. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, Palinya, 11. Dec 2003 16:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You're right. I'm mostly used to low limit games where you are more likely to get odds to make your set than you are to get a heads up situation :) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, Schuster, 5. Dec 2003 17:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| In my opinion, the way to play one of these small to medium pairs, both before and after the flop, is one of the biggest "it depends" things in hold 'em, which makes it pretty hard to give a really comprehensive answer. So, the following is just some things to think about. Once you discover the reasoning behind it, you'll be able to apply it to your own thinking while you're at the tables. First off, sets like fast action on the flop. A small pair usually a drawing hand, but it's a one shot deal most of the time. Either you flop a set or you don't, and then you're done with it. As such, if you're in a game where people aren't afraid to raise it up on the flop, the value of your small pair goes up. You want to confront the field with multiple bets. If I have good confidence that I can lead out with my set and get popped by someone with top pair most of the time, I add value to my small pair before the flop because I can make it 3 bets on the flop. This play is especially valuable if there are a few callers for 1 bet between you and the raiser. Contrast this to suited connectors. You like to see slow action on the flop with these hands because you aren't there yet, and you'd like to get there as cheap as possible most of the time. You want people to just call if they have just top pair. Loose passive is great here. If you're in that type of game, your small pair loses some value because it will be more difficult to thin the field out. Calling stations are great to pay you off, but you'd rather have one or 2 people put in 3 bets each than have a field play for one. Now think about the types of players in your pot. If only weak tight Willy has limped in the pot before you and some rocks are behind you, you might raise it up with a small pair and try to get it heads up, because you can probably take the pot down on the flop. There's no sense trying to keep the rocks in the pot if they will be reluctant to put bets in the pot if you do hit your set, so lose them! Maybe you've got "pays everything off" Pete in the pot, who won't let anyone buy a pot no matter what. Your small pair has gained some value because when you do make your set, you can count on Pete to keep putting money in the pot. On the other hand, if you're heads up with Pete, things just got a lot tougher, because if you don't flop a set, it will be tough to protect your hand. Pete sometimes checks and calls with top pair, but often pays it off on the river with almost no chance of winning at all, just to see what the other guy had. Sometimes if he thinks you don't have a hand, he'll bluff at the pot. You'll be very hardpressed to figure out if you're ahead or behind, and just one player isn't enough to give you odds to flop a set. I wish I could type more, but I gotta run out. I hope this helps, iceman, let me know if there's anything else. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, Blade, 5. Dec 2003 18:07 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I went to dinner with Willy last night he said to tell you "hey." That Pete is a real jerk though. Great post, I have started to be very selective in my game choice and I think if you follow the above advice middle and low PP's can be profitable from any position. IMO, it is not that hard to make a good assessment of future action if you understand the table. I strive to find very loose passive tables and will play low pp from EP. Sure enough without fail I get 5-6 callers to justify my call. Conversly, if the table tightens up, I will throw away from EP and look to get heads up or steal from late with low PP's. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Middle and low PP's, Aisthesis, 10. Dec 2003 09:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Schuster's already said most of the important things. Mainly, it's a question not of pot odds (which are almost never there on low pairs) but of implied odds. The question is basically whether you're going to be able to get someone all-in or close to it in the case of making your set (which usually doesn't happen). One other scenario that may make a little money: A low pair also plays well heads-up if the flop misses your opponent(s) entirely. So, if you're in position and get a low card flop, you can sometimes pick up a little pot on the flop with the low pair--of course, this needs to be played cautiously. In my opinion, you can sometimes even cold-call a moderate pre-flop raise if you're going to get at least 3 opponents in the hand (preferably 4 or more, but again depends on their stack sizes and how they play). And you can limp even to just one opponent. I'd probably raise them on the button if everyone had folded to me. But I'd pretty much always just fold to a lone EP or MP raiser. I think the main things are just not to get very much money in pre-flop and then generally to throw them away immediately if you miss your set. | ||
| 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 |
|