55 on a blank suited flop?

How would you play this? Note that on the river I only had $9 left (so yes, let this affect your decision). Now then, how would you play it with a bigger stack? What do you put gruvy on?

GAME #846603527 - (BLINDS $1/$2) NO LIMIT TEXAS HOLD'EM - 2005/05/30-20:17:57.3 (CST)
Table "Lalona" (real money) -- Seat 4 is the button
Seat 1: mkking ($207.00 in chips)
Seat 2: NoLoafing ($204.00 in chips)
Seat 3: lexbo ($240.25 in chips)
Seat 4: LuckyBird ($255.25 in chips)
Seat 5: JGB146para ($46.00 in chips)
Seat 6: _OCCUPANT_ ($276.25 in chips)
Seat 7: mushman20 ($70.75 in chips)
Seat 8: DodgerFan ($229.25 in chips)
Seat 9: TexMac1011 ($171.50 in chips)
Seat 10: gruvy ($474.00 in chips)
JGB146para: Post Small Blind ($1)
_OCCUPANT_: Post Big Blind ($2)
Dealt to JGB146para [ 5h ]
Dealt to JGB146para [ 5s ]
mushman20: Fold
DodgerFan: Fold
TexMac1011: Fold
gruvy : Raise ($7)
mkking : Fold
NoLoafing: Fold
lexbo : Fold
LuckyBird: Fold
JGB146para: Call ($6)
_OCCUPANT_: Fold
*** FLOP *** : [ 8c 4c Tc ]
JGB146para: Bet ($10)
gruvy : Call ($10)
*** TURN *** : [ 8c 4c Tc ] [ Ts ]
JGB146para: Bet ($20)
gruvy : Call ($20)
*** RIVER *** : [ 8c 4c Tc Ts ] [ 2d ]
JGB146para: ?

Check-fold on the flop. Why are you even getting involved here with a pair of fives and no club?

He could have lots of hands. He could've flopped the nuts and is just letting you do all the betting. I would say he either has A-K of clubs or A-K offsuit with the ace or king of clubs.

Bet your remaining 9 dollars and pray that he was chasing and not slowplaying or passively calling down wiht his overpair. Seeing as you commited yourself to the pot on the turn if he actually had the flush i believe most players would have put you allin there, that makes the made flush less likely.

I don't think you have much choice here other than to hope he was on the flush draw and push. I'd put him on AKo, one of which being a club. Tough decision but if you check the river he's gonna put you all in either way, and you could wind up laying down the best hand if he was on the draw.

Fold preflop

-'rilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bmxicle

Bet your remaining 9 dollars and pray that he was chasing and not slowplaying or passively calling down wiht his overpair. Seeing as you commited yourself to the pot on the turn if he actually had the flush i believe most players would have put you allin there, that makes the made flush less likely.

---

What's the value in betting the river here? If he was chasing, then he just folds his hand. If he wasn't, you lose another $9.

If it's reasonably likely he was on a draw, then check-call, if it's very likely that you're beaten, check-fold.

I know why you're saying to fold preflop, but I'm not sure I agree, for a couple of reasons:

First, I've already got $1 in. So it's only $6 for me to call. My stack is $46. So by the standard 10% dictates I call $4.5. However, since the BB already has $2 invested, he is more likely to call for another $5 if I call, meaning it'll be a multiway pot and I'm getting my implied odds on the set.

Further, if it ends up heads up, I'm on the winning side of a coinflop against anything but a higher pair. And that's assuming we see the turn and river. If the flop comes low, I may well win the pot before then. It's more likely that the flop will miss him than hit, so if it comes low I'm safe to bet, winning or building a pot that I am at that point a big favorite to win.

All of this sparked in my mind for the first time as I sat there. Perhaps it's a result of my recent focus on SnGs, but it seems weak to me to ONLY play pocket pairs for their set value. I pressed call. The above happened. I pushed on the river and he folded. I too put him on AKo here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsaxton

What's the value in betting the river here? If he was chasing, then he just folds his hand. If he wasn't, you lose another $9.

If it's reasonably likely he was on a draw, then check-call, if it's very likely that you're beaten, check-fold.

---

I think thats basically the question he's asking here...Is it likely the guy was on a draw? or likely that you're beaten? The calling to me indicates a draw. If he has a hand made on the flop or turn (AA/KK/QQ etc), i doubt he's just calling with 3 clubs out there. If you put him on a draw, and you're planning to check-call, why not just be the bettor and save everyone some time :P . Either that or just fold pre flop like rilla said *shrug*. If i was gonna bet the turn and flop with a board like that....i'd most certainly follow it up on the river in hopes that he missed it.

There are hands that beat me but don't beat what he probably thinks I have (a flush or three tens). Betting drives them away. It's always possible that he indeed does have a higher pocket pair and called all the bets looking for a boat putting me on the flush, though I agree that this is unlikely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bmxicle

Bet your remaining 9 dollars and pray that he was chasing and not slowplaying or passively calling down wiht his overpair. Seeing as you commited yourself to the pot on the turn if he actually had the flush i believe most players would have put you allin there, that makes the made flush less likely.

---

What's the value in betting the river here? If he was chasing, then he just folds his hand. If he wasn't, you lose another $9.

If it's reasonably likely he was on a draw, then check-call, if it's very likely that you're beaten, check-fold.

---

I don't really see check folding here, getting 8 to 1 odds on the river, he is on a draw enough that it makes it profitable. However i guess you are probably right that a check call might be more appropriate, it could save you some money when he is just calling down tentatively with an overpair or with a T. But from what jeffrey told me in a pm this guy was very aggressive, and aggressive players wouldn't usually just call down with those ahnds.

I think it'd be a dumb play to just call with an over pair on a suited flop like that...Wouldn't you expect a raise on the flop and even the turn to prevent drawing the flush out?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PokerPatNEU

I think it'd be a dumb play to just call with an over pair on a suited flop like that...Wouldn't you expect a raise on the flop and even the turn to prevent drawing the flush out?

---

Yeah thats the correct play, but that doesn't mean he is playing with players who generally make correct plays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

I know why you're saying to fold preflop, but I'm not sure I agree, for a couple of reasons:

First, I've already got $1 in. So it's only $6 for me to call. My stack is $46. So by the standard 10% dictates I call $4.5. However, since the BB already has $2 invested, he is more likely to call for another $5 if I call, meaning it'll be a multiway pot and I'm getting my implied odds on the set.

Further, if it ends up heads up, I'm on the winning side of a coinflop against anything but a higher pair. And that's assuming we see the turn and river. If the flop comes low, I may well win the pot before then. It's more likely that the flop will miss him than hit, so if it comes low I'm safe to bet, winning or building a pot that I am at that point a big favorite to win.

All of this sparked in my mind for the first time as I sat there. Perhaps it's a result of my recent focus on SnGs, but it seems weak to me to ONLY play pocket pairs for their set value. I pressed call. The above happened. I pushed on the river and he folded. I too put him on AKo here.

---

The 10% rule is when you think you can take their whole stack. So when they raise big and you have to quote the 10% rule, it's usually indicating a higher pocket pair preflop. And this negates the reasons for calling and hoping to go HU.

And it still violates the 10% rule even if it was 3 ways, it's just too difficult to get the other two AI without running the very distinct risk of having a set beat.

-'rilla

I agree with fold preflop. I want to see another two hands in the pot
for me to call that. Otherwise, no way you can get enough value out
of your set to justify getting in.

You would need to net about 70 to justify a call here based on set value. That means the pot would need to get to about 140. No way that
can happen heads up.

Now, if you know your opp only plays std poker and you feel he doesn't
have his own pair, you can take the flop and work your slight advantage
(55/45). But what do you do if a QJ shows on the board and he bets? He may have AT, so that slight advantage you had going in can easily be
taken away.

Hard to tell. On one hand he has $474 dollars and can afford to call big bets with unimproved broadways. On the other hand he must be pretty good if he has $474 dollars, and probably won't make bad decisions such as calling big bets with unimproved broadways. I go with the latter.

Once he called $20 on the turn, he has a pair of 5's beat. That means overpair. He looked at your tiny stack and was willing to double you up to find out if you have the flush. Even worse he may have flopped the nut flush himself. I don't see you being ahead here anyway. Check/call on the river since you unfortunately committed yourself badly. There is a chance he can't let go of AK, but only an idiot would call $20 into a $35 pot with one card to come and an unmade hand. A guy with $474 in front of him is no idiot.

Unimproved broadways on a scary board don't call deep like this, unless they have a one card nut flush draw and feel like gambling. That's all you can hope for.

Don't call 3.5x raises with 55 and no callers before you. It's terrible poker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rondavu

Hard to tell. On one hand he has $474 dollars and can afford to call big bets with unimproved broadways. On the other hand he must be pretty good if he has $474 dollars, and probably won't make bad decisions such as calling big bets with unimproved broadways. I go with the latter.

Once he called $20 on the turn, he has a pair of 5's beat. That means overpair. He looked at your tiny stack and was willing to double you up to find out if you have the flush. Even worse he may have flopped the nut flush himself. I don't see you being ahead here anyway. Check/call on the river since you unfortunately committed yourself badly. There is a chance he can't let go of AK, but only an idiot would call $20 into a $35 pot with one card to come and an unmade hand. A guy with $474 in front of him is no idiot.

Unimproved broadways on a scary board don't call deep like this, unless they have a one card nut flush draw and feel like gambling. That's all you can hope for.

Don't call 3.5x raises with 55 and no callers before you. It's terrible poker.

---

All $474 dollars means is that he probably doubled up once. It is amazing the crap you will see at 200nl, so you can't assume that he is a decent player. I have seen many a fish (with both large stacks and small stacks) chase flushes till the end without even close to the right pot odds or implied odds. Although i agree that i probably wouldn't call preflop in that situation because it was a bit large compared to his stack, i wouldn't say its a bad play. Also i regularily call up to 7xbb without any other callers before me wiht hands like 55, and i'll even occsionally call up to 10x bb depending on reads and stack sizes, so calling 2.5x bb w/ 55 is usually not "terrible poker".

Fold pre-flop. I don't think you're getting good implied odds with your small stack, and you're probably not getting both of them to call your all-in if you hit. Even if you do manage to make that happen, the fact that there would be two of them calling slightly devalues your set, because one or the other could make a better hand. I also am not crazy about staying involved in this hand after the flop - I see your reasoning but even if you're ahead, it's a very slim advantage that you're pressing. If you're going to play it this way you can either check/call or just go all in on the river. You're probably going to end up putting it all in either way though.

This is also, incidentally, a strong argument in favor of keeping a full stack in a ring game. You're so short-stacked here that you are limited in the calls you can make, because there's less than usual implied value.

Fold preflop

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilikeaces86

Fold preflop

---

Or better, rebuy before the hand starts, then call.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilikeaces86

Fold preflop

---

Or better, rebuy before the hand starts, then call.

---

Well, his small stack play is profitable. To each his own. I just dont think his stack allows him to make this call.

-'rilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

I know why you're saying to fold preflop, but I'm not sure I agree, for a couple of reasons:

First, I've already got $1 in. So it's only $6 for me to call. My stack is $46. So by the standard 10% dictates I call $4.5. However, since the BB already has $2 invested, he is more likely to call for another $5 if I call, meaning it'll be a multiway pot and I'm getting my implied odds on the set.

Further, if it ends up heads up, I'm on the winning side of a coinflop against anything but a higher pair. And that's assuming we see the turn and river. If the flop comes low, I may well win the pot before then. It's more likely that the flop will miss him than hit, so if it comes low I'm safe to bet, winning or building a pot that I am at that point a big favorite to win.

All of this sparked in my mind for the first time as I sat there. Perhaps it's a result of my recent focus on SnGs, but it seems weak to me to ONLY play pocket pairs for their set value. I pressed call. The above happened. I pushed on the river and he folded. I too put him on AKo here.

---

The 10% rule is when you think you can take their whole stack. So when they raise big and you have to quote the 10% rule, it's usually indicating a higher pocket pair preflop. And this negates the reasons for calling and hoping to go HU.

And it still violates the 10% rule even if it was 3 ways, it's just too difficult to get the other two AI without running the very distinct risk of having a set beat.

-'rilla

---

There's a difference between getting them to bet their whole stack and getting them to call for all of mine. That's a fundamental concept to the short stack style I play.

He didn't raise big. That's a standard preflop raise. There's no reason to put him on a big pair over any other generic raising hand.

I maintain that calling an extra $1 over 10% into a multiway pot is the correct play (at least for deeper stacks). That's based on discussions I've had with ilikeaces (which I'll grant I could be remembering wrong).

To everyone who says I was beat, I'll repeat what happened in the actual hand: I pushed on the river for $9 more. He folded. Still think I was beat? If so, then he definitely put me on either the flush or a T and was looking to outdraw me (in either situation, his outs were limited enough that I believe these were bad calls). I personally feel confident that he simply couldn't let go of his overs + 4-to-nut-flush.

The discussion as Jeffrey remembers it.

"Aces! What do you think about my tactic for playing medium and low pocket pairs as a short stack?"

"Jeffrey! I think it's just lovely and I wish for some way to exploit it. How would you like to play the 10/20 tables staked by me? We shall split the profit 50/50 of course."

"Aces! I'd find that just lovely!"

How the discussion actually went.

"Hey, so what do you think?"

"I think it's just lovely. Now I need the rest of my attention back so I can properly play my 8 10/20 NL tables. kthxbye"

-'rilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

The discussion as Jeffrey remembers it.

"Aces! What do you think about my tactic for playing medium and low pocket pairs as a short stack?"

"Jeffrey! I think it's just lovely and I wish for some way to exploit it. How would you like to play the 10/20 tables staked by me? We shall split the profit 50/50 of course."

"Aces! I'd find that just lovely!"

How the discussion actually went.

"Hey, so what do you think?"

"I think it's just lovely. Now I need the rest of my attention back so I can properly play my 8 10/20 NL tables. kthxbye"

-'rilla

---

Heh. Actually, prior to that discussion, I was routinely folding low pocket pairs to any size raise preflop. So there was no "Aces, I think this would work...do you agree?" It was more "how the hell can you call preflop?...Oh. Wow."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rondavu

Don't call 3.5x raises with 55 and no callers before you. It's terrible poker.

---

Assuming a full stack, this is unquestionably false. A big money maker in NL play is playing low pocket pairs for the set. The fact that I play short stack (limiting the implied odds if I hit) is the only reason it's questionable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

The discussion as Jeffrey remembers it.

"Aces! What do you think about my tactic for playing medium and low pocket pairs as a short stack?"

"Jeffrey! I think it's just lovely and I wish for some way to exploit it. How would you like to play the 10/20 tables staked by me? We shall split the profit 50/50 of course."

"Aces! I'd find that just lovely!"

How the discussion actually went.

"Hey, so what do you think?"

"I think it's just lovely. Now I need the rest of my attention back so I can properly play my 8 10/20 NL tables. kthxbye"

-'rilla

---

Heh. Actually, prior to that discussion, I was routinely folding low pocket pairs to any size raise preflop. So there was no "Aces, I think this would work...do you agree?" It was more "how the hell can you call preflop?...Oh. Wow."

---

Alright, you might be right here. Might. I can only assume that pocket pairs become noticably more profitable as they increase in value.

-'rilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Alright, you might be right here. Might. I can only assume that pocket pairs become noticably more profitable as they increase in value.

-'rilla

---

I'd assume that this depends on what point you start playing them for set/overpair vs. the point you just play them for their value. Obviously higher = better, but I'm not sure it would be a noticable difference b/t 33 and 88, for instance.

BTW, I'm not trying to be annoying by arguing about my play here. I just felt it was an Eureka moment when I said to myself "I don't have odds to play this for the set, but I don't have to hit the set to win." I suppose that's covered within the 10% rule by the times that you hit and don't double up, however...

I also felt confident in my read and wanted comments on the post flop play (which apparently everyone feels was bad).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Alright, you might be right here. Might. I can only assume that pocket pairs become noticably more profitable as they increase in value.

-'rilla

---

I'd assume that this depends on what point you start playing them for set/overpair vs. the point you just play them for their value. Obviously higher = better, but I'm not sure it would be a noticable difference b/t 33 and 88, for instance.

---

It's less likely someone else will flop a higher set, and higher pairs are less likely to get outdrawn in unraised pots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Alright, you might be right here. Might. I can only assume that pocket pairs become noticably more profitable as they increase in value.

-'rilla

---

I'd assume that this depends on what point you start playing them for set/overpair vs. the point you just play them for their value. Obviously higher = better, but I'm not sure it would be a noticable difference b/t 33 and 88, for instance.

---

It's less likely someone else will flop a higher set, and higher pairs are less likely to get outdrawn in unraised pots.

---

Yes. But set over set is relatively rare.

I didn't question that they would be more profitable (over an inifinite amount of time), I merely posted the question of if it would be enough to be noticeable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Alright, you might be right here. Might. I can only assume that pocket pairs become noticably more profitable as they increase in value.

-'rilla

---

I'd assume that this depends on what point you start playing them for set/overpair vs. the point you just play them for their value. Obviously higher = better, but I'm not sure it would be a noticable difference b/t 33 and 88, for instance.

---

It's less likely someone else will flop a higher set, and higher pairs are less likely to get outdrawn in unraised pots.

---

Yes. But set over set is relatively rare.

I didn't question that they would be more profitable (over an inifinite amount of time), I merely posted the question of if it would be enough to be noticeable.

---

I know. I was just saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Alright, you might be right here. Might. I can only assume that pocket pairs become noticably more profitable as they increase in value.

-'rilla

---

I'd assume that this depends on what point you start playing them for set/overpair vs. the point you just play them for their value. Obviously higher = better, but I'm not sure it would be a noticable difference b/t 33 and 88, for instance.

---

It's less likely someone else will flop a higher set, and higher pairs are less likely to get outdrawn in unraised pots.

---

With his shortstack play, he invests more in the ability to know when the pair is best with short stacks (right?) so I figured this would impact value more noticably then set over set.

-'rilla

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

With his shortstack play, he invests more in the ability to know when the pair is best with short stacks (right?) so I figured this would impact value more noticably then set over set.

-'rilla

---

Agreed. Though until the above hand, I was rather passive (by comparison) in doing so, and always made sure the pot was either multiway or giving me the 10x implications (apparently something I may return to). Previously I'd have expected I was ahead (call it a feeling) on that flop, but not done anything about it and folded to aggression rather than exhibiting such for myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffreyGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rondavu

Don't call 3.5x raises with 55 and no callers before you. It's terrible poker.

---

Assuming a full stack, this is unquestionably false. A big money maker in NL play is playing low pocket pairs for the set. The fact that I play short stack (limiting the implied odds if I hit) is the only reason it's questionable.

---

Fair enough. I often see people trying to do this, and often they are successful.

Here's my point. If someone continually called my raises as the only other person in hand with stuff like 55 or 66, they would get raped. That's because you can't put me on broadways when I raise, and I sniff out trips well. I would never pay them off when they hit a set. After they looked me up a couple times to find out I raised 87 suited on a 2 4 8 4 T board when they hold 55, they would become weary of continuing the low pocket pair business.

A agree it pays you off against predictable players, but I think it's a bad habit to play these hands for a raise in a non community pot.

Besides, when are you going to get doubled through more often, when you hit your set against 3 other opponents in a raised pot, or against one other opponent? I don't see the implied odds being all that great against one opponent in hand.

You flop a set 1 out of 12 times with a pocket pair or something like that. If you're playing against opponents who don't freely allow you to know where you stand when you don't flop a set, then it keeps you honest, and forces you to get correct pot odds to call with them preflop.

you cant play the 10% rule profitibally on that small of a stack.. if you had a full buyin, the preflop call would have been ok.


this is a perfect example why a full buyin is recommended.


now that i look at the hand closer, im saying villan has AQ AK

he woulda reraised you on the turn to get more money off of you if he had a higher pocket pair then what was on the board. push all in on him and take his stack. err well, what he has you covered for anyways ;)

if he's slow playing the nut flush, he's an idiot, your play goes along with someone who caught their set on the flop, and someone with a flush needs to be worried about the board pairing.

This is a fine call preflop, and not a bad flop for 5's into a raise. You bet the flop and got a call which rings draw or nuts, your bet on the turn gave you all the information you needed to know you were ahead and he was in fact on a draw.

The rep bet on the flop is a bit questionable with such a short stack, but at that low of a stack you have to put some chips in somewhere to try and get something started. So after the flop bet and the cold call when that ten hit It was an imediate bet again. At the river with the deuce hitting you were pushing there no matter what, giving yourself an small extra way to win the pot. He couldn't beat a pair so he folded.

Nothing is wrong with continueing to play a pocket pair in a hand, you still have a 5% chance of hitting the set, and also have a made hand. Which plays well HU considering your opponent will hit 30% of the time. However if this was 3 handed its a check fold on the flop. I will never fold a pocket pair preflop for a 3x or 3.5x raise.