Coolered with a Set

Perfect example of why you should raise the flop IP here to get the shit hands out...

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.05 BB (7 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP2 ($10.75)
CO ($5.35)
Hero (Button) ($5.44)
SB ($4.31)
BB ($5.57)
UTG ($10.42)
MP1 ($10.38)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 3, 3
UTG calls $0.05, 3 folds, Hero calls $0.05, SB calls $0.03, BB checks

Flop: ($0.20) 4, A, 3 (4 players)
SB checks, BB bets $0.10, UTG raises to $0.20, Hero raises to $0.80, SB raises to $4.26 (All-In), 2 folds, Hero calls $3.46

Turn: ($9.02) 2 (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($9.02) 8 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $9.02 | Rake: $0.45

Results:
Hero mucked 3, 3 (three of a kind, threes).
SB had 5, 2 (straight, five high).
Outcome: SB won $8.57

Perfect example of why you should raise the flop IP here to get the shit hands out...

how does raising the flop prevent you from getting coolered here?

if anything you should've raised on the button preflop

Don't post results. They are not relevant to hand analysis.

Besides that, did you not raise the flop...?

I think you mean raise preflop? A made straight on the flop isn't going anywhere But, a pair of 3's isn't exactly a powerhouse hand to raise with either, so, I think it's just a cooler depending on how well you know your villain.

Originally Posted by Jason

But, a pair of 3's isn't exactly a powerhouse hand to raise with either.

Except when your facing a limper and a preflop raise can put you heads up in position, anything playable will do because you don't need to hit-to-win with initiative.

This of course depends on whether or not the limper can fold postflop. If he won't let it go postflop then limping behind is fine since you'll get paid when you hit.

tilt thread!

Don't raise preflop. It's fine to stack off on this flop.

Originally Posted by Muzzard

Don't raise preflop. It's fine to stack off on this flop.

Would preflop not be an either/or situation, dependant on opponents fold to Cbet tendancies?

Originally Posted by AFchung

Perfect example of why you should raise the flop IP here to get the shit hands out...

how does raising the flop prevent you from getting coolered here?

if anything you should've raised on the button preflop

Durrrr I meant preflop.

Not much left to add. Raise 3x PF. Most of the time you can take it down pre-flop or with a cbet on this board, representing the ace.

limping behind here is fine and probably the more optimal play, and getting it in on the flop is fine too. there's nothing we could've done here

Originally Posted by Illfavor

Don't post results. They are not relevant to hand analysis.

I posted the results to show what happens by not being aggressive IP. Sure, the board could have paired on 4th or 5th street but if I would have raised preflop, the small blind would have folded his 52o unless he was a complete donkey. BB and UTG hit the flop and/or were repping that Ace so I should have been able to get it all-in by the turn/river. Of course they all could have folded to my preflop raise too.

On the other hand, I think I'm being too aggressive and tricky in spots where I sense my opponent is weak. For the most part I'm usually right but they'll call my 3x re-raise OOP with 2nd or bottom pair on any street. This is great when I actually have them beat but I need to stop giving my opponents credit for having the ability to fold to aggression OOP with marginal hands. I guess Nitty McTight it is then...

yawn

Originally Posted by Airles™

Originally Posted by Illfavor

Don't post results. They are not relevant to hand analysis.

I posted the results to show what happens by not being aggressive IP. Sure, the board could have paired on 4th or 5th street but if I would have raised preflop, the small blind would have folded his 52o unless he was a complete donkey. BB and UTG hit the flop and/or were repping that Ace so I should have been able to get it all-in by the turn/river. Of course they all could have folded to my preflop raise too.

On the other hand, I think I'm being too aggressive and tricky in spots where I sense my opponent is weak. For the most part I'm usually right but they'll call my 3x re-raise OOP with 2nd or bottom pair on any street. This is great when I actually have them beat but I need to stop giving my opponents credit for having the ability to fold to aggression OOP with marginal hands. I guess Nitty McTight it is then...

What about if you had 44, raised and folded out 33 in the blinds? Was raising IP such a good decision then? I love raising limpers with anything but this results-oriented reasoning is poor.

Okay, I can respect your opinion but why is my reasoning poor? When/why would I not raise this up from the button?

Based on villains and situations, I think you need to decide your goal with the hand. Usually with a small pocket pair, it's either to snap off a set and take a large chunk of money from a bigger pair like AA or AK when an ace spikes. On the other hand, in this scenario with just a limper and blinds, you could have played it bigger to chase out the dead money and go heads up with position representing more strength than you actually had. By limping, you're basically trying to go the first route, but no one has shown strength, so it could be more difficult to extract money if you do hit.

I am currently playing at these stakes and there are MANY villains who typically play tight/passive/aggressive who LOVE to shove all-in when they have a big hand because someone will pay them off. If I had a read on that villain as such a player, I could see myself laying it down with just the two of us in the hand, although with an Ace on board it's a little tougher as you wonder if they'll do the same thing with AK. On the other hand, if it's a looser, weak player, it's pretty difficult to lay that down. I actually think the way this hand played out, it was theoretically easier for you to get out because the villain pushed all-in after a bet and not one, but TWO re-raises. Unless he is really loose and clueless, what hand is he going to push in with that you can beat?

But, to get back to the point on chasing hands out or not, it goes back to how you want to play it. With pocket 3's on the button, you have the flexibility to go either route and then you have to play well post flop to take advantage. So, I don't think it was necessarily a mistake to limp, but I think you might think it was a mistake in hindsight since you know the result.

Originally Posted by Da GOAT

yawn

Thanks for the dynamite drop in by the way.

Originally Posted by Jason

So, I don't think it was necessarily a mistake to limp, but I think you might think it was a mistake in hindsight since you know the result.

You're right. I mean, really, how often does villain have 52o? In a limped pot I'd expect him to have a weak Ace or 2-pair more often then flopping the nuts with a raggy triple-gapper.

But again I want to stress the importance of knowing your villains. I see so many threads on FTR where people say red faced how this is ALWAYS the best way to play this hand or "you're stupid for thinking this" or "you're donk for doing that" or "yawn" or whatever. The truth is that a significant % of money I and others make and how I and others play poker deviates from the traditional "right" play IF you have good reads. This hand in particular reminds me of that because I can remember so many villains at these stakes who I would practically NEVER call an all-in from unless I had the stone cold nuts. I don't know if this villain is one of those or not, but the main point is that reads and situations are so important.

So, how often does villain have 52o is not the question I'd be concerned with, rather how often will this villain push with something besides 52o. If you think, based on actual reads and data, he'll do the same thing with Ax or two pair, then you're good. But, if you're guessing that and don't really know, then it's just wishful thinking.

Originally Posted by Airles™

Originally Posted by Jason

So, I don't think it was necessarily a mistake to limp, but I think you might think it was a mistake in hindsight since you know the result.

You're right. I mean, really, how often does villain have 52o? In a limped pot I'd expect him to have a weak Ace or 2-pair more often then flopping the nuts with a raggy triple-gapper.

This is all I meant

Okay, I gotcha. Good reads = money in the bank, whether won or saved. Wishful thinking = reckless gambling.

Originally Posted by Jason

But again I want to stress the importance of knowing your villains. I see so many threads on FTR where people say red faced how this is ALWAYS the best way to play this hand or "you're stupid for thinking this" or "you're donk for doing that" or "yawn" or whatever. The truth is that a significant % of money I and others make and how I and others play poker deviates from the traditional "right" play IF you have good reads. This hand in particular reminds me of that because I can remember so many villains at these stakes who I would practically NEVER call an all-in from unless I had the stone cold nuts. I don't know if this villain is one of those or not, but the main point is that reads and situations are so important.

So, how often does villain have 52o is not the question I'd be concerned with, rather how often will this villain push with something besides 52o. If you think, based on actual reads and data, he'll do the same thing with Ax or two pair, then you're good. But, if you're guessing that and don't really know, then it's just wishful thinking.

Post of the week, IMO.

The reason this is "yawn" is its just a cooler, it happens. Its not terrible or anything to limp here, and played fine on the flop. That trash hand that flopped a straight is more likely to flop 2P and get it in just as quick. Or maybe they limped with 77 and now have the NUTS with an overpair.

People might say you should always raise IP here, but they'd be wrong. Against some opponents who make it easy to build pots postflop limping here is the right move.

The arguement of whether to raise or limp behind the limper depends on the opponent. Anyone who favours one line to the other is an autobot and will be leaving money on the table. To make this clear: if you ALWAYS raise limpers, you're doing something wrong, and if you NEVER raise limpers, well - you're also doing something wrong. Spoon's article is a great read and I wouldn't pass on reading this if you already haven't. Even if you have, it's worth a re-read:

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...rs-t66631.html

In this situation we can't say whether limping behind was preffered over raising because what do we know about our opponent when it comes to postflop play - which is a huge factor in determining which line to take.