Live Poker Poker Forums

Ty spew/meow.

It does seem like 10:1 is too small though considering how often we hit our set and don't win a ton of $.

If we're hitting our sets and not getting paid, then we need to expand our strat on how we play versus that villain. We need to not set mine, but float more often, bluff more often and 3b! more often. DU see why? villain's range is either wider preflop than you think, or he's risk-adverse after the flop. Either way, we exploit by being more aggressive with our range rather than just looking to hit a set.

Ty spew/meow.

It does seem like 10:1 is too small though considering how often we hit our set and don't win a ton of $.

Well you also have to consider:
In most games you're never ever seeing a flop less then 3 way. So basically your individual villain doesn't necessarily have to have 10x, as long as combined villains have that much.

Most villains are either oblivious or scared of flop textures. Like spew was saying this is totally read dependent.

I feel like pairs are such a HUGE moneymaker in my game, it's almost never wrong to play them.

Ty spew/meow.

It does seem like 10:1 is too small though considering how often we hit our set and don't win a ton of $.

Part of the reason Bart goes w/ 10x+ for pairs, 20x+ for suited-connectors and 30x+ for gapped-suited-connectors is pragmatic. It's simply easier to do the math at the table. He does talk about (in his podcast) how you should probably have a little more than 10x w/ small pairs.

Well you also have to consider:
In most games you're never ever seeing a flop less then 3 way. So basically your individual villain doesn't necessarily have to have 10x, as long as combined villains have that much.

Most villains are either oblivious or scared of flop textures. Like spew was saying this is totally read dependent.

I feel like pairs are such a HUGE moneymaker in my game, it's almost never wrong to play them.

I don't think this is right. You're going after the preflop raisers $$$, not the other callers. It's the guy w/ the premium hand you're looking to stack. Not the players w/ 78s and 22.

i also fold all 3.

I don't think this is right. You're going after the preflop raisers $$$, not the other callers. It's the guy w/ the premium hand you're looking to stack. Not the players w/ 78s and 22.

Why would you not consider stack sizes of everyone involved in the hand?

Lets say we're 4 ways (not at all uncommon). The PFR is probably going to cbet, and it's very likely that someone (besides you flopping your set) has hit the flop. There's already a nice sized pot being built, likely getting into the area of your 10x already.

This seems to be the most common scenario in which I make money. I usually make more money in multiway pots with sets then against heads up nits. While I do occasionally run into someone willing to stack off with an overpair, more often then not they fold to raises.

It's OK to add a little value for the other callers, but not to use them as an excuse to call if the original raiser is short stacked. The reason is that the players who are calling behind are generally calling with the same type hand you are, and thus less likely to have a hand you can stack if you hit yours. As with everything in poker it happens some times, but we're talking a general rule here.
As you said, if there is 5 callers of a smallish bet size then you've already made half of what you need so overcalling can work out fine.

It's OK to add a little value for the other callers, but not to use them as an excuse to call if the original raiser is short stacked. The reason is that the players who are calling behind are generally calling with the same type hand you are, and thus less likely to have a hand you can stack if you hit yours. As with everything in poker it happens some times, but we're talking a general rule here.
As you said, if there is 5 callers of a smallish bet size then you've already made half of what you need so overcalling can work out fine.

+1

I posted these hands because I consider all three to be folds for the reasons that have generally been given here, but wanted to see whether others agreed. I tried to make the hands/situations somewhat tempting to play. I like spewtastic's take on hand #2 ... there are some lineups where overlimping is the most profitable situation, but I think this is the exception to the rule. In hand #3, I think people who are saying we are 360 bbs deep are missing the bet sizing context. For one, the raise is to 10x the bb, thereby cutting down greatly on implied odds. Also, from the read given, the opponent is likely to be betting really large with his value betting range, cutting our implied odds even further. Suited / connected hands do best when the bet sizes are smaller on the flop and turn, as well as against weaker ranges where equity plus aggression may win us the pot. These factors go against us when playing the typical live player who has a very strong raising range and bets the hell out of such hands because they desperately want to win the pot.

As far as set mining goes, its value is significantly higher live and you should be really try to stretch to see flops with pocket pairs. The reasons for this are several: (1) live pots tend to be multiway, increasing the chances that someone flops a piece that will put money into the pot when you flop your set, (2) live continuation bet sizes tend to be bigger postflop, which is great for setmining since you want the pot to grow quickly when you hit your set (and don't really care what size the bet is when you miss, since you generally won't have odds to call a bet either way), (3) live players are much more willing to hold onto top pair for dear life and "make you show them a better hand" as well as to chase straight or flush draws even if they are getting bad odds, (4) if there are one or more short stacks in the hand, they are likely to stick the rest of their chips in pretty light (sometimes calling with middle or bottom pair trying to draw to two pair/trips) postflop.

1. In general, stack sizes are too small to play a 1 gapper unless both opponents are known bad players and I could get paid off by both. In general, this would be an occasional shot with very deep stack sizes and a good table image.

2. Occasional call with a good table image.

3. K-9 suited is wonderful HU against an ABC player when playing deep.

3. K-9 suited is wonderful HU against an ABC player when playing deep.

why?

In hand #3, I think people who are saying we are 360 bbs deep are missing the bet sizing context.

Do you call if we are 2000bbs deep?

Do you call if we are 2000bbs deep?

My general thought process is that I will fold UNLESS I believe I have a read on my opponent's play and that it is very predictable. For example, if the flop comes K high, how many streets will he bet QQ? If the flop comes low cards and he has AK, is he going to check the flop? If so, will he call a bet or fold to a bet on the turn? Etc. But if I am just guessing at these and my read is that he is a "typical" live fish, then I usually won't call. Imo, you need really specific information to overcome being out of position against a tighter range.

I mean, if he will literally stack off for 2000 bbs with JJ on a K9xxx board, that's a different story. But I'm not going to assume that of even the fishiest live players until I see some evidence for it.

Sounds good