Middle Set

[David_Nicoson 1]

In low stakes PLO on an uncoordinated board, it is reasonable to always pay off top set with middle set? I remember folding middle set with no straight or flush possible only once, and I was wrong.

[greatwhite 0]

With no straight or flush possibilities I'd say yes in all limits. I see so many people going in with top and bottom or bottom 2 its not even funny. Unless you know they are good I'd call them.

[Vman96 0]

It's fairly reasonable. And the lower limit you play the more reasonable it is. If the guy is a solid player though...who wouldn't pot-raise without a big hand or draw....you should consider mucking it on an uncoordinated board. If the guy is a lagtard and willing to do this with only 2 pair, you have to pay him off if he has it.

[nutsontheriver 0]

Make a good-sized bet/raise and fold to a max reraise. Most players at lower limits just aren't tricky enough.

[timwakefield 69]

I can see folding in some situations. Say you have an opponent who is VERY tight, and you are pretty certain that he will not pot-raise a limped pot pre-flop without AAxx. So he does, you call with say QQJT double-suited, flop comes AQ6 rainbow...you bet, he raises pot. I might fold that.

[iggymcfly 0]

I just had a situation where I should have folded middle set, but I didn't. I was this close to pressing the fold button, but then I talked myself into calling at the last second.Relevant stack sizes:iggymcfly: ($201.36)fitzfitz: ($100.75)Dealt to iggymcfly: (4h, 7s, 6s, 4s)Pre-flop:3 callsiggymcfly calls1 callfitzfitz callsSB foldsBB checksFlop: (Jh, 3c, 4c)3 checksiggymcfly bets $7.501 foldfitzfitz raises to $30Anyway, I called him down and lost $100 on that hand. If I had bottom set, I definitely would have folded there, but I just didn't quite have the discipline to lay down middle set in that spot.