Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:30 pm GMT by Soup_dog
Ok, I thought I made the right play but naturally it ticked some people off.
Playing on the micro limit tables.
I have about $1.50 preflop in late position.
Dealt J  K I call the big blind of .02.
Next player min raises and then the next guy raises to .42.
Naturally I would fold at this point normally but then the next 3 players all called. That means I am getting 5 to 1 odds for my money so I called.
The flop had two spades so I pushed for my remaining .80 and got two more callers out of it.
My flush hit on the turn and I took a nice pot.
So my question is, was I right in thinking that 5 to 1 odds were good enough to call with marginal cards? More than likely I was dominated preflop.
Just wondering.
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 Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:26 pm GMT by MilkyPirate
If you are dominated by say AK or KQ, you are a 3:1 dog. You are getting 5:1 on your money and even though KJs is a marginal hand, with those odds you are correct to call preflop.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:41 pm GMT by Gunslinger
| MilkyPirate wrote: | | If you are dominated by say AK or KQ, you are a 3:1 dog. You are getting 5:1 on your money and even though KJs is a marginal hand, with those odds you are correct to call preflop. |
I have a related question. I see this argument all the time in favor of calling raises preflop, or even completing the small blind. That argument being, you are getting X:1 on your call and you are never worse than a Y:1 dog (where Y<X). Like MilkyPirate says, if Soup Dog is dominated, he is a 3:1 dog, and he is getting 5:1 on his money. My question is, he is a 3:1 dog to a dominating hand if he gets to see all 5 cards. So why do I see this argument all the time in favor of calling and only seeing 3?
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:49 pm GMT by aaronw
| Gunslinger wrote: | | MilkyPirate wrote: | | If you are dominated by say AK or KQ, you are a 3:1 dog. You are getting 5:1 on your money and even though KJs is a marginal hand, with those odds you are correct to call preflop. |
I have a related question. I see this argument all the time in favor of calling raises preflop, or even completing the small blind. That argument being, you are getting X:1 on your call and you are never worse than a Y:1 dog (where Y<X). Like MilkyPirate says, if Soup Dog is dominated, he is a 3:1 dog, and he is getting 5:1 on his money. My question is, he is a 3:1 dog to a dominating hand if he gets to see all 5 cards. So why do I see this argument all the time in favor of calling and only seeing 3? |
You are correct that he is only a 3:1 dog if he sees ALL 5 cards.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 9:54 am GMT by Gogie
You have to factor in implied odds in these hands as well. Ignoring future betting and assuming you can see all the cards to come, your assumption about getting proper odds to call is corrrect. However, when you factor in future bets that may be required to see future cards, your odds probably won't be so good. However, as a rule of thumb, using current pot odds instead of implied odds should give you an indication of whether or not you should call. Then you have to decide if you think the implied odds you are probably getting are worth it. You'll never get a "correct" answer because every hand will play out differently.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:17 am GMT by Jauron
There are lots of reasons I don't like the call, with that many players calling that huge of a raise and mini raise UTG he's not even closing the action. If mini raise moves in, he's forced to call now?
While he may be dominated he might also be dominated twice, something like KQ AND AJ and he's in horrible shape.
His hand is going to have to win in a showdown, there is next to no chance he takes this pot down without one, he doesn't have enough to even bet pot after the flop. It will be nearly impossible to get away from it if he hits any part of the flop or gets any draw.
I don't think implied odds should be factored in here, his stack isn't deep enough IMO to think about that.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:17 pm GMT by suitedaces84
You need to factor in how the hand will play postflop. Considering you're likely to be dominated and can never get away if you catch a peice you'll take the worst of it postflop.
Re-raising preflop would be a neat play. It allows you to take advantage of your equity vs. the awful hands (I'm assuming everyone is terrible). If others fold their dead money can probably make up for your lack of equity vs. the remaining hands. But folding is probably best.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:33 am GMT by TheSalche
pot odds are incredibly deceitful and as was pointed out this hand plays poorly postflop
however if you had a mid pocket pair, this is a very easy call, and postflop is easy to play ... get the money in when you hit a set and usually fold when you don't
|
|
