Standard?

Okay so i know this is standard but...

No-Limit Hold'em, $0.05 BB (9 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP3 ($5.50)
CO ($6.06)
Button ($17.93)
Hero (SB) ($9.95)
BB ($10)
UTG ($11.19)
UTG+1 ($5)
MP1 ($0.70)
MP2 ($5.38)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A, A
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.05, 5 folds, Hero raises $0.23, 1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.20

Flop: ($0.55) 9, 2, 4 (2 players)
Hero bets $0.50, UTG+1 raises $4.75 (All-In), Hero calls $4.25

Turn: ($10.05) 5 (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($10.05) 7 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $10.05

This got me thinking about if the villian had been deeper. At what point do we fold to the all in? What pot odds do i need to make sure this is profitable.

The question is, how deep do you have to be to avoid getting setmined?

He's calling 20 cents to get $5.25 on the flop if he hits his set.

Yeah, you're getting setmined. Now we need hud stats or reads or anything...

barring any sort of read i´m probably stacking off here every time, assuming people are dumb enough to show up with JJ/TT/A9.

best way to make setfarming vs you unprofitable is to have a wide opening range. If only a relative small % of your range is vulnerable to getting stacked by sets (ie overpairs) you´re denying the implied odds to setfarm AND can stack off now and then without worrying about being expüloitable, because often enough you´re sitting there with some sort of junky hand, that doenst put in anymore money once the set-nit called the flop.

Am I wrong to say that JJ+ pots it here?

idk, theres not much + of JJ+ in his limp-call range i suppose

I have a bet sizing read that he's either got a flush draw or a set.

Why would he bet so much if he was on a flush draw?

stop worrying so much about "set miners." they are at all levels. they are your basic nit. you need to watch the player and see if he raises big with big hands. or, if he folds to pressure a lot. or, if he only shows the nuts. those are signs. you cant just go assuming set miners are running rampant at these stakes. you are missing a ton of value.

i dont lay down overpairs w/o a read, no matter the effective stacks, below 10NL. there's just too much unpredictable stuff going on.

but, am i going to stack off with a guy in this hand that i havent seen play a hand in two orbits? hell no.

people will felt flush draws, and weak ones at that (especially after reading an FTR article about flop equity...lol). some are bluff tards. some are just stoopid. some will try and push you off with their whiffed AK hands. some will do this with TP.

you just need to find out who is who and play accordingly.

Originally Posted by SiCK_Boy

Why would he bet so much if he was on a flush draw?

fold equity + 9live outs + 6 possibly live outs (overcard draw) = +EV

I would too put his range at TT+ (higher pairs more likely obviously) Possibly A9, a set or a flushdraw. I'm never folding in this situation. I don't think you need any pot odds, and the point where I'm folding this would be unrealistically deep stacked.

I think the problem with getting the exact equity is that you can't just put this hand through pokerstove. Some hands are more or less likely according to the action.
Tons of villains limp with quality hands at these limits because they fear just picking up the blinds more than they fear death.

A9 pots it
like I said I think those hands are possible, but not as likely as a set or flush draw

my read from this bet sizing is saying that this is either a little EV+ (flush draw) or barely drawing live (set)
we could also be flipping against straight draw + flush draw

if the betting went in PSBs then I would say it's standard
unless op goes into PT and gives stats on the guy you haven't convinced me that my read is incorrect

I wish I knew which site this was on

Good Idea to bet on the flop, to see where he was at. He defiantly would have folded any AJ+ combo leaving only pocket pairs maybe a over pocket pair. Watching your betting villain would be inclined to fold any overpair besides KK. This leaves only the set to be considered. The flop bet was good to find out one thing, did he hit his set. Next time maybe make a pot sized flop bet, risk a little more but be even more sure that his raise if b/c of a set. I know how you feel I can never throw away AA but in this situation the only reason to follow you pf is to try to double through you on a set.

I don't like playing small pocket pairs. If I have a large stack I'll play them in late position. I just limp in.

Originally Posted by jolub

I don't like playing small pocket pairs. If I have a large stack I'll play them in late position. I just limp in.

That has little-nothing to do w/ hero's hand, and at 5NL wrong. Set mining is a must.

ive seen sets play this way(and BTW i payed them off), but the standard set here slowplays, so he would just call, and then probably a minraise on turn. This is the line people usually follow at these stakes(not a good line).
So, i would call thinking he is drawing with A2s(11 outs), he has an overpair(TT would be the most likely), or he has A9, or another flush draw. I wouldn´t consider 2pair or 35s because of the preflop action.

why reads or stats of some kind are really nice in the playing of the unlimited hold them...

without any of the above, at this level you've got tag to 'tard, and in situations like this guessing which is as much a part of the equation as anything else.

some good thinking on ranges and bet sizes, but at the end of the day, with no reads this could just as easily also be...
... QQ+ getting tricky-trappy with their limp, call, shove
... total crap
... A9, K9, Q9...f-it anything 9 thinking he's pulling the rad semi-bluff with fold equity...
... a middle, bottom pair + FD looking to "get it in"

and I actually think a set is less likely tho' not impossible... it's a strong enuff hand that most people will just pot this to avoid blowing you out the hand.

Bottom line -- I think Chopper hit it. Laying down an AA on this action at this level is prolly something I won't do regularly WITHOUT compelling reads. There's just too much retarded sh!t going on that you're +EV against...

I must be biased here because I've seen this being a set 2/2 times I've seen this exact line in NL10. I'm being results oriented :O

Originally Posted by iopq

I must be biased here because I've seen this being a set 2/2 times I've seen this exact line in NL10. I'm being results oriented :O

ahhh... but it's times 3-5 where you make the moniez

Originally Posted by sarbox68

Originally Posted by iopq

I must be biased here because I've seen this being a set 2/2 times I've seen this exact line in NL10. I'm being results oriented :O

ahhh... but it's times 3-5 where you make the moniez

LOL

Originally Posted by sarbox68

Originally Posted by iopq

I must be biased here because I've seen this being a set 2/2 times I've seen this exact line in NL10. I'm being results oriented :O

ahhh... but it's times 3-5 where you make the moniez ;)

Nah, after that I quit and moved to limit

Originally Posted by iopq

Originally Posted by sarbox68

Originally Posted by iopq

I must be biased here because I've seen this being a set 2/2 times I've seen this exact line in NL10. I'm being results oriented :O

ahhh... but it's times 3-5 where you make the moniez

Nah, after that I quit and moved to limit

lemme guess.......all the bad beats just disappeared when you went to limit?

Originally Posted by Chopper

Originally Posted by iopq

Originally Posted by sarbox68

Originally Posted by iopq

I must be biased here because I've seen this being a set 2/2 times I've seen this exact line in NL10. I'm being results oriented :O

ahhh... but it's times 3-5 where you make the moniez

Nah, after that I quit and moved to limit

lemme guess.......all the bad beats just disappeared when you went to limit?

I can haz no bad beats at limit?!?!

isnt limit where people go when they can't be bothered to learn to bet size and live with variance?

Originally Posted by Chopper

Originally Posted by iopq

Originally Posted by sarbox68

Originally Posted by iopq

I must be biased here because I've seen this being a set 2/2 times I've seen this exact line in NL10. I'm being results oriented :O

ahhh... but it's times 3-5 where you make the moniez ;)

Nah, after that I quit and moved to limit

lemme guess.......all the bad beats just disappeared when you went to limit? ;)

No, it's just when they flop sets I pay them off one bet at a time and certainly not with a whole stack.

Originally Posted by MuddyWicket

isnt limit where people go when they can't be bothered to learn to bet size and live with variance?

variance in limit is different, and in many cases worse since it seems to last forever.

limit is also a more pure form of poker, imo. you have to really understand math. you cant just shove all in when the pot is small. you are forced to actually PLAY all the streets properly.

dont get me wrong, both forms are great to play, but i think too many NL also fit the mold "cant be bothered to learn bet sizing" and just shove their chips in when they dont know what to do. you cant play that chicken shit style in a limit game.

Originally Posted by MuddyWicket

isnt limit where people go when they can't be bothered to learn to bet size and live with variance?

You're kidding me right, I had a 300+ BB downswing in limit

I always thought that the variance was worse in limit because you can't control the pot odds you give your opponent.