Ok somethink that i'm confussed about (set hunting)

[littleogre]

People disagree on how deep you need to be to sethunt but that neither here nor there as far as this post is concerned. Lets just the answer is 12x the raise. Not that i know this to be true just throwing a number out there as a reference point. Here is a simple situation. A utg player raises .08 and it's folded to me. We both have 2 dollars. Far as i know we are deep enough to set hunt. Getting well over 12-1 implied odds

Here is where i get confused if several players limp and another player raises am i suppose to count the limped money as part of the implied odds? Example 3 players flat and put 6 cents in the pot and bob raises to.14. Me and bob have 2 dollars each. Are my implied odds 14-1 ( rounded number) Or do i include the 6 cents from the limpers and my implied odds are 14.7-1. I'm pretty sure i don't because i still only have 2 dollars but the fact remains that their is an extra 6 cents out there to win. so i how do i factor it into my decision?

[Belt]

The money already in the pot is considered as your immediate odds.

In your example 3 limpers put 3bbs in the pot and the villain raised to 7bbs making the pot 11.5 bbs (there are blinds of course). For the sake of the example, assume everyone will surely fold. If you want 12 to 1 odds, you need 84bbs for your 7bbs. Since 11.5bbs are already in the pot you need 72.5bbs or more in effective stacks.

[celtic123]

I watched one of Jyms Videos on Grinderschool.
He arrives at a figure of 15/1.



Your examlpe isnt that easy for me to read.
there is $0.20 in the pot , including limpers ?
and it cost you $0.07 to call ?
or $0.14 to call?

Im not sure what your example demonstrates.

It how much it cost to call compared with how much you stand to win.
This gives you your odds.

So if its going to cost you $1 to call and you win $15 or there abouts, you have set good odds.

The actual correct odds are about 8.5 /1 , but we use 15/1 to allow for times you miss your set or get sucked out etc.

[littleogre]

The money already in the pot is considered as your immediate odds.

In your example 3 limpers put 3bbs in the pot and the villain raised to 7bbs making the pot 11.5 bbs (there are blinds of course). For the sake of the example, assume everyone will surely fold. If you want 12 to 1 odds, you need 84bbs for your 7bbs. Since 11.5bbs are already in the pot you need 72.5bbs or more in effective stacks.

So in essence you add the 2 together? So if me and villain both have 100 bbs and the pot some how magically had 100 bb in dead money i would have the potential to win 200 bbs? Cause i can win the villains 100 bbs plus the 100bbs in dead money?

[Belt]

So in essence you add the 2 together? So if me and villain both have 100 bbs and the pot some how magically had 100 bb in dead money i would have the potential to win 200 bbs? Cause i can win the villains 100 bbs plus the 100bbs in dead money?

Yes.

But I think, playing for set value is not about stack sizes / bet sizes... Not everyone will hand you all their stack when you hit the set. I would aim for 15x like celtic said and choose my opponents carefully when playing for set value.

[jyms]

The consensus for me was arrived around here in the 15x rule thread by lukie back in the day. The belief now is that it needs to be closer to 20:1 to make a call. The fact that hitting a set 12% of the time is not enough reason to call a raise. Depending on a players range and stack size, it can float anywhere between 15-20 to 1 or more. You need to decide on the opponents range and then decide how often you will get a stack when calling. Calling UTG raisers with a small PP is far different from calling out of the blinds vs a OTB raiser. If you can figure out why, then you are on your way to the next big step.

[rong]

Would I be correct in thinking you are better off calling an UTG raise as this signifies a good hand that is likely to stak off shoud you hit your set?

Asdie from this, if I have a small/medium pp in late position/blinds and there is one raiser from mp onwards, I'm inclined to 3bet every time (ok not everytime, but a lot of the time, villain dependent) with the goal of taking down a 3bet pot with a cbet often enough to be +ev. Any thoughts on that?

[Jason]

This may not be exact on the math, but my "rule of thumb" regarding set hunting is to take the amount of the bet you are faced with and multiply it by 10. You need to figure out, "IF I hit my set, will I, ON AVERAGE, get paid at LEAST THAT amount?" That amount could come ALL from one player or 1/2 from one player and 1/2 from another player in a multiway pot or whatever summed value profit is greater than or equal to that #. It doesn't matter where the money comes from so long as you make at least that.

So, for your example of facing a bet of 8 cents, you need to make sure you'll make at LEAST 80 cents when the hand is over if you hit your set. If you hit and make less than that ON AVERAGE, you messed up. The mistake players generally make, as Belt was alluding to, is they figure out stack sizes to justify set-mining, but don't always consider that they will get paid off. Just because your opponent is deep enough to pay you off doesn't mean they necessarily will, although the worse the opponents, the more likely that is to be true.

As far as getting immediate pot odds to set-mine, it would have to be really good odds like 9 to 1 or 11%, which is basically odds to play any two cards at that point.

[Belt]

If I have history with villain then I go with my reads but against unknowns I wouldn't be thrilled about 3betting small pocket pairs especially from blinds since we will be oop for the rest of the hand...

[jyms]

10x doesn't even make up for the immediate odds of hitting a set if you get stacks in vs the player every time you hit. Now take into account when you hit your set and lose a stack ( it does happen) then you are losing money every time you call with 10X. This is the thread I was talking about, I beleive that it's even higher now say 20:1 depending on the situations we talked about.

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...es-t31291.html

[rong]

If I have history with villain then I go with my reads but against unknowns I wouldn't be thrilled about 3betting small pocket pairs especially from blinds since we will be oop for the rest of the hand...

Out of position is relative.

In a heads up pot, sometimes I find first shot at a bet can be better than being last to act, as I find people bluff far less after a cbet than as a cbet.

Also, lets asume a tagg mp bets 4bb, you have 66 in the BB and it's folded to you. His range may typically be 22+, AJ+, KQ, TJs+. Are you folding? I don't like that. And calling leaves you literally setmining which I don't think is profitable against most mp raises as chances of stacking are slim. Which leaves 3betting followed by first shot at betting the flop, which I like.

Perhaps my thinking is flawed here. Comments welcome.

[jyms]

If your plan is to 3 bet and take it down witha cbet most of the time, why are you using small PP's. Would there be a difference between say 44 and K9s

[rong]

If your plan is to 3 bet and take it down witha cbet most of the time, why are you using small PP's. Would there be a difference between say 44 and K9s

Or between k9 & 72 in that case. But I guess if youo do that with atc you end up looking to loose and won't get away with it. FWIW I would prob do the same with SC's.

Are you suggesting with your comment that this is a bad strategy? That I should do this wider?

[jyms]

No, that your taking hands with good calling EV and making them bluffs. A hand like K9s has some TP/draw potential when villain continues, some flops will also allow you to barrel. Think of it this way. You 3bet IP and MP calls Flop comes down A95r one heart. You cbet and the villain calls. you have second pair, a backdoor FD and initiative. There are so many cards that will help you fire another barrel on an A high flop when you hve 3 bet. Your obviously second barreling any A that you 3 bet, and now any heart, K or 9 (14 outs) gives you tons of equity vs some random 88-TT, Ax type hand. If you three bet 44 here, your drawing to 2 outs with someone calling a 3bet and cbet OOP. DO you really want to fire again vs someone who doesn't believe you since your 3betting so often.

[Jason]

10x doesn't even make up for the immediate odds of hitting a set if you get stacks in vs the player every time you hit. Now take into account when you hit your set and lose a stack ( it does happen) then you are losing money every time you call with 10X. This is the thread I was talking about, I beleive that it's even higher now say 20:1 depending on the situations we talked about.

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...es-t31291.html

When I referred to 10x, I was referring to IMPLIED odds, not immediate. Yes, you will lose your stack sometimes when you hit, but by the same token, sometimes you will win when you don't such as 4 cards to a str8 or flush or if you are able to hand read and take it down after the flop versus AK or even pushing them off a marginal hand like when they have TT on an AJx board.

10x is just a rule of thumb and it's served me well. The main point is that you take into account what you will get paid when you hit. Some villains just won't pay you off hit and that's -EV. Taking into account the times you can win WITHOUT hitting is important, too. I tend not to like going heads-up with tight regulars with small pocket pairs out of position because you're much more likely to get outplayed by not extracting enough value when you hit and not taking the pot down when you miss.

[jyms]

Jason, read that whole thread I linked.

[Muzzard]

I actually wrote a thread on this about a year, maybe even 2 years ago, lets see if I can find it.

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ue-t81708.html

[Jason]

jyms, I read over most of that thread and I still think what I've stated is accurate. Feel free to quote whatever point I'm missing to spell it out for me because it is a lengthy thread. To me, the 10x rule does NOT say the villain needs to stack off, which many people implied in that thread. As I said in my post, it simply means you need to get paid that much money - it could come from 2 or 3 villains, it could come from 1 villain who only loses 25% of his stack, or maybe all of it. You DO need to assess stack sizes to first see if there's even enough money to pay you off and then based on villain's tendencies and your image if it's conceivable to get that money.

Trying to use an arbitary # like 20:1 or 25:1 or 15:1 to try to account for all villains and situations and when you'll LOSE when you hit your set is not going to maximize your value. The 10x rule gives you the INFORMATION of WHAT you need to figure out - there is no "one size fits all" approach or rule to calling to set-mine, which is what I believe some people in that thread and possibly this one would like to do. Every situation is different, but the math is real. When you call a bet setmining, you will NOT hit it 9 out of 10 times on average. If you're fairly certain you won't win the pot when you hit, you need to make sure you can make it when you DO. Notice I'm not saying to CALL if your opponent has 10x the amount of the bet, I'm saying "figure out if you can get 10x that money when you hit". If you think you can get that money when you hit and you're right, it IS correct in my view to do it.

By the way, the odds of getting set over set or some other highly unlikely scenario where you hit your set and they still win is around 1% or less AGAIN not taking into consideration the times when YOU still win because you get a str8 or flush or quads when they only have a set. Not to mention against some villains you can STILL win after the flop when you miss because they have AK and missed or you push them off their hand or you had the best hand all along because they had a smaller pp.

But, for the sake of argument, say you're playing $2NL and are facing an 8 cent bet. You will lose 8 cents by calling 9 times on average. Let's say you CORRECTLY peg a villain, who AFTER the FLOP on AVERAGE, will pay you off 80 cents and not a penny less or a penny more when you hit. The +EV of calling is 16 cents -> -$.08 * 9 (the 8 cents you lose by calling 9 times) + $0.80 (the amount EXTRA you get paid the time you hit) + $0.08 (the original raise/bet). Now, let's examine that time you WON and divide that into 100 trials to account for the 1% time you get coolered with set over set or whatever. You will win the $0.88 cents 99 times and lose your effective $2 100 bb stack once - that's $0.88 * 99 minus $2 DIVIDED by 100 (total trials) which equals $0.85 cents. So, instead of winning $0.88 cents in our original 10 trial example, we'll adjust it to $0.85 and our 16 cents is reduced to 13 cents. So, it's still a winning play. This also assumes that YOU will never fold when you hit. I got news for you, if you're going to be a long term winning player moving up the stakes, there will be times you need to lay down sets when you set-mine and hit.

My main point, which I stand by, is that 10x the bet size you are facing IS a good approximation of what you need to win AFTER the flop on average if you can't win when you miss. There is a lot more analysis and consideration on when you can get that money and when you can't plus when you can take down the pot when you miss. For those considerations, there is no ratio or math rule that can help you - you have to play poker @ some point

[Warpe]

This may not be exact on the math, but my "rule of thumb" regarding set hunting is to take the amount of the bet you are faced with and multiply it by 10. You need to figure out, "IF I hit my set, will I, ON AVERAGE, get paid at LEAST THAT amount?" That amount could come ALL from one player or 1/2 from one player and 1/2 from another player in a multiway pot or whatever summed value profit is greater than or equal to that #. It doesn't matter where the money comes from so long as you make at least that.

Since you're talking "rule of thumb" then 15x plus is better, especially since we're usually weighing this preflop. Odds of improving to a set on the flop are 1 in 8 or 7:1. It's rare we're multi-way past the flop, rarer still that we get villain's full stack so we hope to get half or more, and even rarer that we're getting paid by more than one opp.

[jyms]

Once you get past $2NL the odds of making almost 40BB ($0.80) will be a huge problem. Getting paid off declines when TPNK becomes a foldable hand. Playing against guys that open wide, but control pots IP will make calling with 10X a losing play. I am in no way going to run the math and post it here, it's been done several times in other posts. I can say that I have started to pretty much use 20X on aggro players or players in the CO or BTN and closer to 12x or 13X if they are Taggs UTG opening around 10% of hands. Particularly when OOP. I don't want to argue Jason, you have obviously done the math and are confident, I just don't see how your making 40BB's on avg when flopping sets and that's the flaw in the thinking.

here is this month. Edited for top set, middle set and bottom set on the flop with PP's under JJ since JJ+ will win more often and we are not playing them for set value as often. It's 2044BB/71 hands +29BB per hand

[zom]

cool thread..

actually jyms, you have made 2044bb/100 hands, to get the bb per hand simply divide by 100 = 20.44bb.

I think set mining against aggressive or fishy players is much more preferable than the standard reg/tag. Multi-way it is a great thing as well since you're very much more likely to get paid off.

[daven]

jyms, jason. It seems that you're arguing the same point. I also think you're both underestimating how often you take down pots with small pocket pairs that don't hit a set. Float and the world starts getting blurry

Jason - set-hunt if you are confident you will win at least 10x the call size on average, base this decision on loads of factors (including, but not exclusively, pfr's stack size)

Jyms - set-hunt if you are confident you will win at least 10x the call size on average, base this decision on several factors - but focus on the stack size of the pfr (cos you're not going to get all their stack every time, this needs to be far greater than 10x the call) and strength of their range.

Multi-way it is a great thing as well since you're very much more likely to get paid off.

disagree - overpairs are going to be way more scared of sets multiway, depends on who the multi-way players are. Careful, especially if they are also set-miner tag-nits and you have 22. etc.

and, more interesting info for the "how much money do sets make?" brigade - below are data for my flopped sets so far this month, mix of 50nl and 100nl

[jyms]

cool thread..

actually jyms, you have made 2044bb/100 hands, to get the bb per hand simply divide by 100 = 20.44bb.

Your right, and this makes the estimates of how much is made on sets even less. Daven, I think we are argueing the opposite. The big difference here is talkking about calling vs a 10x stack. Would you ever call a 40BB stacks open raise top 4BB for set odds?

[daven]

. Daven, I think we are argueing the opposite. The big difference here is talkking about calling vs a 10x stack. Would you ever call a 40BB stacks open raise top 4BB for set odds?

nope, ez fold. I think Jason would agree, based on how i read his posts.

[littleogre]

wouldn't position and relative donkiness of villain effect stack sizes needed to set hunt? Say in one situation ricky the nit who only raises 4 percent of hands comes out swinging utg. We also know that ricky will frequently call of his entire stack. Compare that to sammy the lag who raises on the button and stacks off much less frequently. Wouldn't the necessary stack sizes be much different of both situations.

[jyms]

Absolutely, hence the reason I use anywhere between 15-20X. UTG nits may get a 12x but that is the lowest I will ever go.

[Jason]

For some reason, some people think my 10x bet calculation translates to a stack size that I think you should call with. I never said any such thing. I simply said your villain(s) need AT LEAST that amount before even considering a call and then you need to figure out the actual amount you think you can get based on many factors.

For some villains, having a stack size of 10x may be the right amount because they WILL stack off everytime. For some villains, they could have a 1000x stack size and won't put a dime more in the pot unless they have the stone cold nuts and set-mining would ALWAYS be pointless. It's all villain dependent.

I'm just saying (for the 3rd time) the BASIC math approach used to evaluate all those factors. If you always call or fold based on ANY math number or ratio, without considering villain tendencies and a zillion other things, you're not playing winning poker.

[jyms]

Fair enough Jason, I was just trying to say in this day and age, once your not in the $2NL-$5NL stages, I don't think 10X is a good minimum, becasue of the amount of actual stacks you win long term at higher stakes. As you say, if villain is stacking off every time 10X is fine, but you will be hard pressed to find one of these, let alone enough to make 10X your standard starting point. I am trying to establish the thinking required to figure out what is a good calling point for most peoples range, I just don't want beginners to start calling raises becasue the stacks are 10x a raise and thinking it's OK. Personally, I have never used 10x to make a call in 3 years and I still think I call too light sometimes