This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

should i go for the set mine in this spot?

    • Lefty85
      Lefty85
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.06.2008 Posts: 171
      So you are going to try to represent a set and expect him to fold, but call you down when you hit a set? Pretty optimistic don't you think?

      BTW: after you folded 5 flops in a row in 3-bet pots and suddenly you donkpot the flop, don't you think alarmbells are going off.
    • metza
      metza
      Bronze
      Joined: 28.01.2012 Posts: 2,220
      Originally posted by YohanN7
      If you fold here, you shouldn't be open-raising in the first place.
      What logic is this statement based on?

      To me this statement is absurd and unjustifiable.
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,711
      Originally posted by metza
      Originally posted by YohanN7
      If you fold here, you shouldn't be open-raising in the first place.
      What logic is this statement based on?

      To me this statement is absurd and unjustifiable.
      It's based on the observation that you are not ready to play 300bb deep if you fold here. Leave the table.
    • MasochisticDesire
      MasochisticDesire
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2010 Posts: 487
      Interesting thread though I am firmly of the opinion (unqualified though it may be) that it is pretty criminal to fold this deep.

      If we are confident of villains range AA,KK,AK or considered another way, 16 combos AK and 12 combos of OP's then we also need to consider villains flop aggression, Cbet and prior history as we will not ONLY win this pot with a set.

      Have you got any further stats to share with us?
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,711
      Originally posted by Lefty85
      So you are going to try to represent a set and expect him to fold, but call you down when you hit a set? Pretty optimistic don't you think?
      Expecting to win more on our good hands than we lose when our opponents have good hands? Thought that was the essence of good poker.

      Originally posted by Lefty85
      BTW: after you folded 5 flops in a row in 3-bet pots and suddenly you donkpot the flop, don't you think alarmbells are going off.
      Absolutely! You may also donk air, it's allowed you know. Also, also it's not the standard line, it's an option if you want to stack him.

      Bottom line is that folding preflop versus an opponent playing with his cards face up when 300 bb deep is too weak. If you can't see that, you shouldn't play deep.
    • metza
      metza
      Bronze
      Joined: 28.01.2012 Posts: 2,220
      I don't see how its relevant that we're 300bb deep given that its going to be near impossible to get in 300bb oop with the best hand unless our opponent is an extremely poor hand reader. Obviously if villain is this much of a drooler its a clear call.

      Hero's range is just as face up as villains, weaker, and oop. That doesn't seem like a hugely desirable spot for us.

      I am not advocating to always fold here, just saying its nowhere near a clear fistpump call, and that I am not sure that hero will win 68bb every time he hits set vs good opponent given that he is oop and it is fairly obvious that hero is setmining. I am fairly confident that a strong opponent will very easily catch on to a blatant setmine and render the situation unprofitable. Of course if hero is calling SCs and other hands that makes things different but a) he's not and b) he's probably not raising many SC's here to begin with and c) if so we then have to play the SCs profitably oop too vs a range of just monster hands.

      We are dealing with such narrow ranges here, UTG vs UTG 3bet, happens so rarely, and I don't think you are justified in saying that just because hero is folding here he shouldn't be playing 300bb deep. There are so many other factors that could encourage hero to keep playing this deep.

      I think you also misinterpreted what Lefty85 is saying, he means that it doesn't make sense to say villain will pay us off so nicely when we hit a set, but that bluffing and repping a set will get us a cheap fold. We are taking the exact same line I'm assuming, so why is villain magically only calling down when we have it? That's what he was saying, not expecting to win more good hands vs good hands in the long run.
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,711
      If your main reason for folding is that it is UTG vs UTG + 1, I'll respect that. But the stack depth has been an issue the whole thread. If you take the stack depth as an extra incentive to fold rather than to call, then we aren't on the same wavelength.

      It was the OP that expressed concern himself about playing deep (middle of previous page), it's not an insult, at least it isn't intended that way. Lefty expressed fear in a previous post that we are somehow more likely to stack off to our opponent than vice versa. When that feeling arrives, then it is time to change table. I'm not comfortable myself when playing deep. I'd leave at 200bb (provided I'm covered), but I haven't played much NL the last couple of years.

      I did not at all misinterpret what Lefty was saying. He's saying precisely what you are repeating now, that is, that I'm in the belief that villain will miraculously donate us all his money.
    • metza
      metza
      Bronze
      Joined: 28.01.2012 Posts: 2,220
      I agree with you its better for villain to have 300bb than 100bb, I just think from what I remember of playing FR its far easier to get away from overpairs than in 6max, so villain may as well have 100bb cos he's probably not putting in more than that, maybe not even that.

      Basically I am just saying its not a snapcall, I believe its only +EV vs some people, and since I expect the average NL200 reg to be pretty good, most of them will play fairly well in this spot making it -EV for us imo.
    • VorpalF2F
      VorpalF2F
      Super Moderator
      Super Moderator
      Joined: 02.09.2010 Posts: 11,085
      Originally posted by YohanN7
      If your main reason for folding is that it is UTG vs UTG + 1, I'll respect that. But the stack depth has been an issue the whole thread. If you take the stack depth as an extra incentive to fold rather than to call, then we aren't on the same wavelength.

      It was the OP that expressed concern himself about playing deep (middle of previous page), it's not an insult, at least it isn't intended that way. Lefty expressed fear in a previous post that we are somehow more likely to stack off to our opponent than vice versa. When that feeling arrives, then it is time to change table. I'm not comfortable myself when playing deep. I'd leave at 200bb (provided I'm covered), but I haven't played much NL the last couple of years.

      I did not at all misinterpret what Lefty was saying. He's saying precisely what you are repeating now, that is, that I'm in the belief that villain will miraculously donate us all his money.
      The fear factor.

      Your rant was fantastic Yohan, and it actually fundamentally altered the way I look and hands and ranges.

      We know UTG's range and if we assume it is tight,

      It should NEVER be about "what if I lose" but should be what are the chances of winning?

      If *we* are risk-averse because we are deep, then isn't UTG+2 also risk-averse for the same reason?

      It looks like we need to cough up 7 BB into a pot of 11 BB, and there is much more than 20x the required bet in the effective stack size.

      This is a call, see a flop and happily fold if you don't like it.

      metza, I think it was you that in another post said, "If the odds are in your favour, you make the call no matter how ridiculous the situation".

      I think that statement fits here.

      I am no where near a NL 1K player, but I think that the principle holds.

      All that said, if OP has a solid read, or a "gut feeling" when all is said and done, that has to be taking into account too.

      Wonderful thread!
      --VS
    • metza
      metza
      Bronze
      Joined: 28.01.2012 Posts: 2,220
      Originally posted by VorpalF2F

      If *we* are risk-averse because we are deep, then isn't UTG+2 also risk-averse for the same reason?

      Exactly. But UTG being risk averse is a bad thing here, since it makes it harder for us to win money when we hit a set.


      metza, I think it was you that in another post said, "If the odds are in your favour, you make the call no matter how ridiculous the situation".

      I believe that. I also believe in this spot that the odds are not in our favour, since we need to get back 7bb every flop oop vs range of basically KK+ (imo QQ/AK are mistake to 3b here and he shouldn't have them in his range w overall 3b 3.5%). Not exactly easy. If we are x/f except when we hit a set, then we need to win 68bb every time we flop a set, while 40% of flops are either Axx/Kxx and 300bb is never going in with 1pair.

      I guess its just a matter of opinion. Personally I think given that its very hard to get value from sets oop, this is not a profitable call since we either end up x/f too much or spewing away money postflop on bluffs.

      Think about it from villains perspective. I am not even very good at poker but if I have a range of KK+ and my opponent knows it, I am still gonna feel pretty damn comfortable playing my range in position in a 3bet pot vs fairly obvious flatting range that is weaker than my own.

    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,711
      Originally posted by metza
      Think about it from villains perspective. I am not even very good at poker but if I have a range of KK+ and my opponent knows it, I am still gonna feel pretty damn comfortable playing my range in position in a 3bet pot vs fairly obvious flatting range that is weaker than my own.
      Oh boy!
      You have picked one of the most unpleasant situations in poker (super-deep, super-narrow range which your opponent knows) and you are pretty damn comfortable?

      You are completely out of your mind sir ;)

      Seriously, you need to reconsider things here. The fact that the opponents range is weaker (= wider) is working against you big time. You'll be winning the small pots (comfortably) and lose the big ones and sometimes get bluffed out from some really big pots. This is what automatically comes with the situation.

      I have played with some very good players (talking live here), and believe me, when you are "comfortable" betting for a couple of streets of value with your obviousbig pair in a 3-bet pot - then - KABOOM. You face a gigantic all in. You know the opponent is bluffing with a frequency of 50% or slightly more here. Yet, you can't do shit about it. (This is how I learn't to mix in weak holdings in my otherwise tight range.) Playing with your cards face up isn't fun.

      Returning to the original context, we aren't worried about our opponent having AA, we want him to have AA when we make the call. Moreover, consider opening wider than usual with small pp if you have a 300bb stack on your left, at least if he isn't very good, but beware of other holdings because he has position. Position isn't important when setmining, but it certainly is with things like AQ and suited connectors.
    • metza
      metza
      Bronze
      Joined: 28.01.2012 Posts: 2,220
      Originally posted by YohanN7
      The fact that the opponents range is weaker (= wider)
      No, I wouldn't say its much wider, its probably going to be something like 99-QQ/AQ,AJ. I don't see how playing KK+ in position vs this range is that hard. If we're dealing with later positions its totally different but its vs an 8% or so opening range, seems like you're advocating calling the entire range to 3b oop which to me seems pretty -EV.

      Originally posted by YohanN7
      You know the opponent is bluffing with a frequency of 50% or slightly more here. Yet, you can't do shit about it.
      I can't do shit about it? Pretty sure I can since if he jams after I 2barrel I'd be getting pot odds where I needed to be good 40% of the time or less and it would be a very easy call if he's bluffing 50%+ of the time.

      I can also not 2 barrel if this is happening all the time, though if he's spewing off 300bb >50% of the time I would definitely want it to.

      Originally posted by YohanN7
      Position isn't important when setmining
      Not sure how to even respond to this. :f_biggrin:
    • mesisification
      mesisification
      Bronze
      Joined: 05.08.2011 Posts: 1,465
      Originally posted by YohanN7
      Position isn't important when setmining
      I think this is somewhat true because when we setmine we either have the nuts or nothing which means our hand is quite easy to play. Whereas if we are not calling just for setmine then playing becomes harder since we have to play second/third or bottom pair out of position but that's not the case when we setimine since we're just folding most of the time if we don't hit.

      On the other hand position is always important and we are certainly getting more value IP most of the time, but position is not that important when we setmine compared to many other situations in poker. But position definitely matters.

      Just my thoughts, keep talking about the subject! :D
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,711
      No Metza, it isn't easy at all to put in $1000 to call in a $2000 pot on the river with a pair. As I said, you can't do very much about it since your opponent knows what you have. He's the one picking the right time to pull it off. He's on top. Needless to say, when you do call the next time, then you'll be facing the nuts. You aren't going to get enough of a sample size (you can't afford it) to determine his bluffing frequency. These spots are quite rare. It's only in the long term you can do something. Don't ever get into situations where your range is super-narrow. You don't seem to understand that having a range of KK+ is a disaster if the opponent knows it.

      Position is not that important when setmining as nesisification details above. Position is almost always nice, but it is not crucial for setmining. Why would it be that? For bluffing, it can even be a disadvantage to have position. (Why?)
    • Lefty85
      Lefty85
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.06.2008 Posts: 171
      So how are you going to try and bluff villain of his KK+? Most villains are going to c/b the turn for pot control and call/fold river, unless you are some sort of nonbeliever.

      That's why it's so hard to extract value with your set, it would be much easier in position.

      You might know that villain has KK+ but villain knows pretty well what he is up against aswell since your range is pretty tight.

      Here is an old hand of me vs a reg (donking strategy).

      http://weaktight.com/6479397
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,711
      Nice catch

      I'm sure you can figure out yourself at least two counter-strategies versus the turn c/b whether for bluffing purposes or for value.

      Edit: By the way, the turn check-behind, is yet one more incentive for the UTG to call the raise with 100% of his opening range. Chances are that he gets to see the river card for the price of 8.5bb + one c-bet. It's a bargain when 300bb deep.
    • Lefty85
      Lefty85
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.06.2008 Posts: 171
      So you are saying you're gonna float the flop with TT on 8-4-2, hoping he checks behind the turn?

      Sounds even more -EV to me...
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,711
      Lefty, stop make pretend that I say something I haven't said. Not the first time you do that this thread, which is going stale. I'm done with it.
    • Lefty85
      Lefty85
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.06.2008 Posts: 171
      Chances are that he gets to see the river card for the price of 8.5bb + one c-bet. It's a bargain when 300bb deep.


      Why would you want to see a free river card unless you missed? If you would have hit, you might want to get money in the pot.

      I just don't understand what your plan is for the hand, maybe you can explain it better.
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,711
      Now you take a sentence of mine out of context and make it sound very strange. Full quote:

      Originally posted by YohanN7
      Edit: By the way, the turn check-behind, is yet one more incentive for the UTG to call the raise with 100% of his opening range. Chances are that he gets to see the river card for the price of 8.5bb + one c-bet. It's a bargain when 300bb deep.
      I'm thinking primarily about suited connectors (if you have any in your opening range). Such hands like free cards on the turn. You suggested playing them yourself rather than TT in an earlier post.

      Edit: I wouldn't like going on with AQ and the like, so 100% is obviously not a good idea, and some stuff should be reraised of course. But you get the general idea.