I just can't ever figure this situation out... |
|
Posted Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:55 pm GMT by daycri
Maybe this is better for pot odds, but any help would be appreciated.
Villian 1 UTG 40.00 in chips
Villian 2 middle 24.00 in chips
I am on the button with 26.00
I call a 2.00 raise and go to the flop with these two players, I am holding 2  2  Flop comes down Q  8 2 , giving me bottom set. UTG raises 10.00, all-in push from next player... I am assuming at least one flush here, and based on the players I am ruling out a set other then 8's (action was higher to get heads up value of pocket Q's) Now, assuming my boat should be good, and that the UTG will probably call, do I call? and what are my odds?
Now obviously, I have the other deuce, 3 8's, and 3 q's, for a boat... that's only seven outs, but how do I factor in the next card on my boat chances? Do I automaticly assume that if that card isin't already my boat, that I then have an additional 3 outs to pair it up? It's not the first time, I have had the set against made flush scenario, and am just not much of a pot odds wiz, please help!
Anyways, I called, UTG had A A  for a nut draw and overplayed aces (like we all do), and Middle position had the K high flush. I caught an 8 on the river for the boat and my portion of the pot. Was it a good call?
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:24 pm GMT by MJJ
you were betting $24 to win $78, or 3.25:1
Your odds of hitting a 2, 8, or Q (assuming they were all live) with 2 cards to come was ~28% + you could go runner runner for pair (add 4%) so you had ~ 33% to hit your boat (3.1:1)
You have the odds to call, but may want to wait for a better spot.
Posted Mon Dec 04, 2006 4:40 pm GMT by shorn7
Assuming that you think that the UTG player will call, you should call yes. IF you think he will muck then a call is dubious.
Basically you are roughly a 2-1 against a made flush if you get to see the river. Again, assuming UTG calls, you are right on the number.
Bottom line, in a raise pot, if you never folded a set, you wouldn't be making much of a mistake.
Posted Mon Dec 04, 2006 4:45 pm GMT by Dave B
Outs of a boat w/ the set:
7 on the turn (QQQ 888 dont forget the quad 2) or 14%
10 on the river (QQQ 888 2 + the turn card) or 20%
Total of a boat is around 33-34%
Posted Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:17 pm GMT by Gunslinger
| MJJ wrote: | | you were betting $24 to win $78, or 3.25:1. |
Actually, you are betting $24 to win $54, so the pot is laying you 2.25:1 odds, IF the UTG player makes the call. Since you have about a 33% of making a full house or better, this means you need 2:1 odds to call, so you are priced in to call only if you KNOW UTG will join the pot.
Posted Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:14 pm GMT by daycri
Was pretty sure he'd call, he's a loose player, and if he makes a 10.00 bet he's gonna call the rest everytime, especially since he opened for a ten dollar bet, against our stacks, he's committing himself. Heck, the ten dollar bet doesn't even make sense does it? But that's neither here nor there. Thanks for the input.. My biggest problem with this situation, is knowing that my outs will automaticly improve to 10 on the river (if I don't put it away on the turn), is how to calculate 7 outs on the turn, then 10 on the river. Again not the greatest with the odds. Thanks Dave for showing how you calculated it.
Posted Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:12 am GMT by Geno
Interesting scenario and answers. I would probably not think this through properly at the table, make the 'wrong' move and fold most times 
Posted Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:38 am GMT by tame_deuces
How about we just make a generalized rule of thumb not to fold sets? They are surprisingly often ahead and most of the time when you are beat, you'll have a fair chance of winning anyway (if not on the river).
Iow. if one made a rule of thumb to never fold a set outside very deepstacked scenarios against nutpeddlers...ever...this would in the grand scheme of things probably be one of the smallest leaks in your game (if it was a leak at all), ever.
It's like when people think they can beat poker by not getting married to overpairs, when the sad grand truth is that getting married to an overpair might be unprofitable, but it isn't horribly unprofitable in normally stacked games, simply by the account of how odds and implied odds work. Playing by the 'better safe than sorry' idea in mind and folding them too often would probably be a much, much bigger leak in one's game.
And this is even truer for sets.
Posted Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:47 am GMT by aaronw
| tame_deuces wrote: | How about we just make a generalized rule of thumb not to fold sets? They are surprisingly often ahead and most of the time when you are beat, you'll have a fair chance of winning anyway (if not on the river).
Iow. if one made a rule of thumb to never fold a set outside very deepstacked scenarios against nutpeddlers...ever...this would in the grand scheme of things probably be one of the smallest leaks in your game (if it was a leak at all), ever.
It's like when people think they can beat poker by not getting married to overpairs, when the sad grand truth is that getting married to an overpair might be unprofitable, but it isn't horribly unprofitable in normally stacked games, simply by the account of how odds and implied odds work. Playing by the 'better safe than sorry' idea in mind and folding them too often would probably be a much, much bigger leak in one's game.
And this is even truer for sets. |
I think thats an even better rule in limit than no limit. I think it is absolutely horrid to fold a set in limit because of the odds you are getting to make a call. Also, it is still possible that you have the best hand.
Posted Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:38 pm GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
Even in No Limit, I would say that the vast majority of the time, folding a set is probably bad.
As for the pot in the OP, I think it was played more or less correctly, especially considering we got the pot multi-way. I'm not folding even bottom set there unless I have a very, very good reason to do so.
Posted Tue Dec 05, 2006 10:04 pm GMT by suitedaces84
It sounds like this game is not deep stacked. And it's incorrect to assume someone has a flush. It would be more reasonable to say someone has a flush ~50% of the time. And when they do you'll win ~33% of the time. When they don't you'll win ~70% of the time. This gives you an overall equity > 50%, so it should be an easy call.
Obviously these #s vary depending on your opponents. But the key idea here is to not play as though your opponent has exactly one hand.
Posted Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:22 am GMT by daycri
Good points of course, no its not a deepstack game at all, blinds are .25/.50, just my friendly home game where I know how everybody plays. Although its easy to say in retrospect that they did in fact have a flush, based on my knowledge of the players betting patterns, I'd say its maybe 90+% in my eyes that someone has the flush.
AA (with a diamond), AdQ, 88, KK with a diamond possibly, though unlikely, My knowledge of these players says they aren't reraising all-in or calling a all-in with say Ace diamond without a pair, so throw those out. QQ is very slight, the only one that could have it is UTG, because he was the initial raiser preflop, the other villian would have reraised preflop if he had QQ. Now those are my hands I can see being in without having the made flush. which is 5 if we are generous.
Now the hands that could have a flush, and still be in the hand are AK,AJ,AT,A9,A7,A6,A5,A4,A3,KT, KJ (what he had), JT, T9, J9,34,45,56,79,57,
Now, of the 5 hands, I put them on out of all those that aren't a made flush, I am drawing virtually dead to two of them (QQ and 88), So now we are down to three hands, AA,KK (unlikely), and AdQ, that they could have and not have a flush. What are the odds that they both have one of these three hands out of that group? bloody unlikely, and due to the fact that two of the nonflushes (88 +QQ) beat me, I don't think the nonflush scenario adds any equity at all.
This is of course, being very player dependant (they are some "but they were sooted" freaks), as I am sure some of you would put them on some other hands big slick with a diamond etc. So i'll add some room for my error. But please tell me how do we boost my equity all the way up to 50%?
And be kind, this is my first time arguing this stuff that mathematically, I posted in this thread wanting odds help to begin with 
Posted Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:19 am GMT by suitedaces84
I don't know the players as well as you do, but someone having a flush 90% of the time seems unrealistic to me.
I would estimate half the time you win 33% of the time and half the time you win 70% of the time. If that is the case your equity in percent would be:
(1/2)*33% + (1/2)*70% = ~52% (easy call)
If you thought that someone would have a flush 75% of the time your equity would be:
(3/4)*33% + (1/4)*70% = ~42% (still a call)
I'm assuming when they don't have the flush they'll outdraw you 30% of the time.
These #s are just approximations but that's as good as you'll ever do. Making estimates and seeing what the correct play is based on them is a good way to get an idea of how to handle spots like this.
Posted Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:48 am GMT by MrSifter
hmm, think i'd have folded this
you may get slight odds, but you're going to get much better opportunities to take chips later
Posted Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:35 pm GMT by Sean_in_NJ
| MrSifter wrote: | hmm, think i'd have folded this
you may get slight odds, but you're going to get much better opportunities to take chips later |
Two-for-two.
Posted Wed Dec 06, 2006 5:36 pm GMT by daycri
Well I did think about folding...
suited aces, I think you have it more on the lines with the second equity figure, 75% that they have the flush seems more realistic from my reading of the players. putting me aprox low 40's equity to call. It's the fact that I sometimes can't figure all this out in 30 seconds that makes me not the profitable poker player I could be..
Thanks you the feedback
If you Never fold a set, is it ever a bad decision??? Discussion for the next addition of poker talk...I can't see a situation where it would ever be a good move. That is considering this situation, is about as unprofitable (bottom set on a suited board, where I am almost assuming a flush) as there is. Maybe with the right raises preflop, and the right stacks around.
Set of jacks on an all suited AKJ board with a raise preflop and a raise then reraise push in front of you?? maaaybe
Posted Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:02 am GMT by MrSifter
in theory you should come out on top, over time
but you have to factor in the fact that people will be able to read you like a book
you can't play like a robot successfully, and even if you could, it's still more profitable to drop dodgy hands and play more into better ones
Posted Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:20 pm GMT by Implied_Odds
You would have the best hand more than half the time with a set on anyboard. Ecspecially with only 3 players seeing the flop. When the guy went all in on the flop, you would have to think he had something like AQ, KK, AA and maybe a nice flush draw with it and a small chance of a set or low flush. I would call an all in with bottom set. I think it beats break even. Your redraw gives you an edge.
|
|
