31 replies to this topic

[JackDeuce]

How do you all normally play small pocket pairs 22-88 mainly in a small stakes LIMIT holdem game? I always try to limp in from any position and probably fold to a raise pre-flop. Not hard to limp in small stakes it seems and if I dont improve to a set drop it. Reason I ask is alot of times its only one bet to see the turn and may times I would have made the set on the turn but is this profitable? When I do make a set on the flop they always pay off good. Thoughts?

[bluff2much]

Against 1-2 players,w/ positiom, and rags on the flop....thats how u play them. If its checked to you on the flop then go for it, then u can check the turn, or keep betting depending on what u put your opponents on.jason

[Smasharoo]

Reason I ask is alot of times its only one bet to see the turn and may times I would have made the set on the turn but is this profitable? Nope.Set them or forget them.

[TheGamester]

"No set, no bet" is a good rule of thumb but perhaps a little more color. First, I do distinguish 77 to 99 as mid-pairs (TT is a tweener). The mid pairs can still be good with a rag flop and no paint on the board, and I will continue to value bet them if I think they are good. The small pairs (66-22) are more problematical. If you are playing below $2-$4 limit holdem, you can call with them from early position and hope to hit your set. I usually play 2-4 and 3-6 and will fold small pairs from early position, sometimes call from mid-position, and almost always call from late position. If I have two raises in front of me and not too many players in the pot, I will lay them down. If I am in late position and there are several callers to a raise or reraise, I will play them because the pot is obviously offering you better odds. No limit is different. I will try to see a flop with any pocket pair because if you hit you have the potential to bust someone so the pay-off is better. The only exception to all of the above is if I think I have a particularly good read on a player. Against a loose maniac, I might call him down even if I don't hit my set if I think he has missed the board. Against a tight player, the opposite would apply.The Gamester

[JackDeuce]

Thanks for the replies all just wanted to make sure I was playing these right and not losing money on them. Its sometimes tempting to want to see the turn if its cheap but unless the pots really big Ive been dumping them.

[offmandh]

No limit is different. I will try to see a flop with any pocket pair because if you hit you have the potential to bust someone so the pay-off is better. People too often forget that they play the same hands the same way every time. This is what distinquishes pros from good players. You have to mix up your play (escpecially in no limit or higher stakes limit games). If you limp in no limit, I will pretty much know what you have UNLESS you mix it up. Raise with 44 from a middle position, limp in with AK. Just mix it up. Changing speeds is what ive heard it reffered to as. Chagning speeds is the key to advancing your game.

[JFarrell20]

Just remember a set isn't even that strong in limit. This is due to the fact that people often chase and catch straights and flushes, leaving your set steamrolled. At a small table of 2-4 players total, a set is pretty strong, but not usually at a larger table.

[TheGamester]

Agree on limit and changing speeds but a set or trips is still a pretty good hand and will win a lot of large pots in limit. It's much easier to see what people are drawing to in limit so you have an option to fold or make a single bet to call if you think someone has hit their straight or flush. Remember, too, that once you have hit a set in limit, your odds of making a house with two cards to come are not bad because you just have to pair the board. That gives you two possible cards to pair on the turn and 3 cards to pair on the river, or 6 and 9 outs respectively, plus your 1 out to hit your quad. You usually have the odds to call to overtake the straight or flush.Changing gears is good from time to time in both games. But for online, I think this is less so because players are in and out of the table and won't notice much. In a live cash game, I absolutely agree, especially if you are known as a tight player. The Gamester

[Smasharoo]

Just remember a set isn't even that strong in limit. This is due to the fact that people often chase and catch straights and flushes, leaving your set steamrolled. At a small table of 2-4 players total, a set is pretty strong, but not usually at a larger table.That's about the dumbest thing I've ever read.

[looshle]

Smasharoo said:

Just remember a set isn't even that strong in limit. This is due to the fact that people often chase and catch straights and flushes, leaving your set steamrolled. At a small table of 2-4 players total, a set is pretty strong, but not usually at a larger table.That's about the dumbest thing I've ever read.

Well the value of set decreases in limit but it is still extremely strong. The times people catch their straight or flush will be repaid by the times they miss. Sets are powerful no matter if it is limit, NL, or PL, they just lose more often in limit than NL because people might have the odds to draw, but they still make a good amount of money in the long run when you take the the huge pots. Just cause they lose more often in limit doesn't make them any less valuable.

[JFarrell20]

Smasharoo said:

Just remember a set isn't even that strong in limit. This is due to the fact that people often chase and catch straights and flushes, leaving your set steamrolled. At a small table of 2-4 players total, a set is pretty strong, but not usually at a larger table.That's about the dumbest thing I've ever read.

Smash, we are done 'flaming'. No matter how bad you want it, we are not gonna fight anymore. I am totally right when I say the a set isn't that strong in limit [relative to NL]. You can't tell me you feel the same way when you flop a set in a 10-handed limit game as you do in a 10-handed NL game. If you feel the same, then your person has not evolved much since caveman days. I never said it's not strong. I just said it's not that strong in limit. I would definitely make a deal where I could flop a set in limit every hand for the rest of my life. That wasn't the point.Stop being such a flamer Smash

[Smasharoo]

Smash, we are done 'flaming'. No matter how bad you want it, we are not gonna fight anymore.I am totally right when I say the a set isn't that strong in limit [relative to NL]. You can't tell me you feel the same way when you flop a set in a 10-handed limit game as you do in a 10-handed NL game. If you feel the same, then your person has not evolved much since caveman days. I never said it's not strong. I just said it's not that strong in limit. I would definitely make a deal where I could flop a set in limit every hand for the rest of my life. That wasn't the point.Stop being such a flamer SmashDon't flatter yourself. I didn't even notice who had posted it. It's mindbogglingly stupid to think you're better off with a set on a table with 4 people where pot size will allways be too small to bother calling with a small pocket pair pre-flop.You want to flop a set in a big pot in limit. You get big pots in limit by having large multiway pots with lots of people in on the flop.Sets make so much more money 10 handed in limit than shorthanded it's not even worth discussing further.If I happen to call things you say stupid a lot it's because you say stupid things. Not because it's you saying them. I barely remeber who you are most of the time.

[NorthPacific]

I have been trying a new strategy with low and middle pp in late position. Any insight to the long term profitability would be appriciated. If I have no raises into me, I raise. This a lot of times gives me a free card on the turn if I don't hit my set on the flop it gives me one more chance. Of course if I am re-raised I have some decisions to make.

[Smasharoo]

I have been trying a new strategy with low and middle pp in late position. Any insight to the long term profitability would be appriciated. If I have no raises into me, I raise. This a lot of times gives me a free card on the turn if I don't hit my set on the flop it gives me one more chance. Of course if I am re-raised I have some decisions to make.It's a horrible money losing play if you're making it to see a free card.The card's not free, one. You're just paying the flop bet in advance some of the time, and some of the time you'll be bet into on the flop anyway.Two, the idea with small PP especially is to get in cheap, and get paid off the 1 time in 8 that you flop a set. You make it HARDER to get paid off when you spend an extra bet each time. Now instead of getting paid off with 8 small bets by the end of the hand you need to get paid off with 16 bets by the end of the hand when you do hit the set.Three, think about what the extra bet actually does for you if you do get to see a free card. When you pay to see the flop you're seeing 3 cards for one bet. This is why it's ok to take a shot at flopping a set because you have 3 chances to hit one of two outs for one small bet. Seeing the turn for an additional small bet gives you an additional single chance to hit your set at 22-1. There are situations where you might raise for other reasons, but it's a *very* situational play.The thing about it that's particularly bad is that it's very deceptive and you are going to win bigger pots when you do hit the set so it'll seem like a good idea. They're not twice as big, though, which they'd need to be for it to be worth it.Stop it.

[JFarrell20]

Smasharoo said:

Smash, we are done 'flaming'. No matter how bad you want it, we are not gonna fight anymore.I am totally right when I say the a set isn't that strong in limit [relative to NL]. You can't tell me you feel the same way when you flop a set in a 10-handed limit game as you do in a 10-handed NL game. If you feel the same, then your person has not evolved much since caveman days. I never said it's not strong. I just said it's not that strong in limit. I would definitely make a deal where I could flop a set in limit every hand for the rest of my life. That wasn't the point.Stop being such a flamer SmashDon't flatter yourself. I didn't even notice who had posted it. It's mindbogglingly stupid to think you're better off with a set on a table with 4 people where pot size will allways be too small to bother calling with a small pocket pair pre-flop.You want to flop a set in a big pot in limit. You get big pots in limit by having large multiway pots with lots of people in on the flop.Sets make so much more money 10 handed in limit than shorthanded it's not even worth discussing further.If I happen to call things you say stupid a lot it's because you say stupid things. Not because it's you saying them. I barely remeber who you are most of the time.

Smash, your inconsitency has now reached a previously undiscovered level. Applaud yourself. Now I know why you need to account for such variance in your game. You get involved with pocket pairs moreso at big tables, than at small tables.Thanks for the clarification.

[Smasharoo]

Smash, your inconsitency has now reached a previously undiscovered level. Applaud yourself.Now I know why you need to account for such variance in your game. You get involved with pocket pairs moreso at big tables, than at small tables.Thanks for the clarification.Which part was confusing to you? The part where you win more money with more people in the hand or the part where when you don't win a lot of money smal pairs lose value?

[JFarrell20]

The clarification I'm speaking of is in regards to your needing such a huge bankroll to play in limit games. You just clarified why you can lose 200XBB in a bad streak. It doesn't matter man, less people in hand means more likely you win; but less money when you do.More people in hand means less likely you win; but more money when you do.It's the same frickin thing moron. The difference is you said you thinks it's pointless getting involved with pocket pairs at a small table. Don't you realize that at a small table, sometimes a mid-pocket pair can actually hold up as top pair??? No way this happens at a large table.Stop playing like this and you won't hit 200XBB "bad luck" streaks.

[JFarrell20]

(this post is an addendum to the previous)

Smasharoo said:

It's mindbogglingly stupid to think you're better off with a set on a table with 4 people where pot size will allways be too small to bother calling with a small pocket pair pre-flop.

LOL

[rog]

I gotta agree with Smash on this. Small pocket pairs are played as drawing hands. Drawing hands need lots of callers to make the pot odds favorable. By wanting fewer callers you are playing it like a made hand, folding out the weak draws, but lowering your own pot odds to keep going. The real problem is, once you fold out the weak draws, you're left with all the hands that are ahead of you, and the better draws. Sure 44 may stand once in a while 3 way, but if that's your strategy, you're going to lose a lot of money IMO.Rog