Two hands. No payoff.

PokerStars 0.05/0.10 Hold'em (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is MP3 with [Kd], [Qs].
UTG calls, 4 folds, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (4 SB) [4s], [Qc], [Qd] (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, Hero bets, SB folds, BB folds, UTG folds.

Final Pot: 2.50 BB

PokerStars 0.05/0.10 Hold'em (8 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with [Ac], [Tc].
UTG calls, Hero calls, 4 folds, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (4 SB) [As], [9c], [Ad] (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, Hero checks.

Turn: (2 BB) [6s] (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, Hero checks.

River: (2 BB) [3h] (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, Hero bets, SB folds, BB folds, UTG folds.

Final Pot: 3 BB

Raise preflop. Nothing you can do here after the flop

Like Vade said, raise preflop on both hands. At low limits, especially 1/2, 2/4, and 3/6, people are going to pay you in general. I play sets straightforward most of the time. Bet or check call the flop. Check raise the turn.

And these aren't sets. Some reading would be a good idea.

technically, they are sets. Dont believe everything you read. And yes, raise PF both hands.

I've done some reading, but maybe not the best. Juanda's book and Ken Warren.

I was unsure about sets vs. trips, which i think i correctly identified.

Even UTG +1 raise with A10s?

As Vade said, raise PF. Also, because technically these are trips (ie a paired board where you have a third of the same rank in your hand), you really should play these hands more aggressively on the flop on IMHO. It's always possible that someone else has a boat, or a better kicker. Happens all the time. You should start feeling this out with a flop bet to see what's up. I really would have come out firing...

Now... if, for the sake of argument, in the second hand you held A-A, and you made your set when the board comes A- 9-5 rainbow, then a slowplay would be perfectly acceptible. Although even in that case I still think that you should turn on the juice when the turn card hits the board.

BTW, it is important to deliniate between sets and trips when talking strategy. They must be played differently and therefore it is a better way to identify what you are talking about. In general parlance it is OK to use the two interchangable, but for the sake of discussing strategy I think it's better to keep them separate. Just my .02 and 1.4.

No, they aren't.

Raise pf on the first hand and I'm not sure if I would have even called AT utg. Maybe I'm too tight though.

First hand : raise preflop...but since you didn't and you hit the flop nicely with a rainbow board there is no reason to bet out here. Everybody else showed weakness so you need them to catch up a little...maybe you get lucky and an Ace or King hits the turn and somebody might try to bet out ..then you can put in a raise when the bets are bigger.

Second hand : i play limit pretty aggressive so I would of raised preflop. whether that is right or not...i don't know

Yeah, Doyle is probably wrong. But I'll go with him anyway.

This is likely a discussion that's been had here that I haven't been around for, but please do point out where Doyle says this and what the reasoning is.

In every piece of poker literature and in every game I've ever played, it goes like this: Some trips are sets. All sets are trips. Not all trips are sets.

Sets and trips are the same. The first time I saw a distinction was with Sklanksy and he does is as a teaching distinction.

You can use both terms in stud and it makes no different (I say this because if you ever play in certrain card rooms--not casino's--you must declare a hand. In stud, and holdem for that matter, you can declare sets or trips and no one will give you hassle...its semantics.)

I like the distinction as short form in strategy discussion, but don't correct anybody. I wouldnt correct someone for calling em rockets when we all know that they're bullets.

Super System. The reasononing is that Texas Holdem is not the only game of poker. 30 years ago, when these terms originated, Draw games were the most popular form of poker. prior to that, it was Stud games. In both of these games, there are no community cards. Therefore, the distinction between a set and trips was non-existant. The distinction is a contortion of the original term, brought on by the surge in popularity of holdem, and the flood of new players into the game for whom a definite distinction is needed (because, as Bean mentioned, the play of both is different). However, dont confuse the inferred meaning of a term with the actual definition.

HEY! are you the beer baron?

Listen, rummy, I'm gonna say it plain and simple. Where'd you pinch the hooch? Is some blind tiger jerking suds on the side?

Gotcha. Being as this was a strategy discussion about Hold'em, the distinction is significant, it seems to me. That it is not a significant distinction in other games is true, but not relevant here.

If A10s and KQo are first in raises in any position, what would you ever limp in with?

I don't think many people here limp first in with any regularity. You shouldn't either. KQo and ATs are not playable hands in some positions in some games, though, so sometimes they're going to be preflop folds. If you're playing them, though, usually you should be raising them.

depends on the game. In an extremely loose passive game, ill limp with some small pairs, middle suited connectors, and occasionally Ace-small suited. In a tight passive game, or an aggressive game of any kind, im not open-limping with anything. And in a 10 handed game, A10s and KQs are sometimes an UTG fold. Open limping usually isnt a good idea. However, the KQ wasnt first in, there was 1 limper and only 2 left to act after us. Easy raise. The A10 was an 8 handed game, and at these limits you stand to be ahead of a lot of hands that will call, particularily when its 8 handed.

First hand i defiantly check and hope they can catch up some..sb bets first round arent worth it when you are that far ahead...just check call the first round if u can and then check raise the turn if you can. And just pray somebody catches...The second after the flop there was nothing you could have done

I agree that u have to raisee PF. In both cases I think u gotta check the flop because there r no draws prsennt but u cant check the turn with the spade draw there. And to answer the calling hand question, I would call with suited connectors,and small pairs and a large variety of hands outta the SB. And in late position with alot of limpers already in, I might call with a hand like 9-9 or K-Qs where u the hand is worthless without hitting a flop. I know u may be thinkin Im crazy but in limit, more times than not u dont push anybody out with a raise and u the extra bets will be made up for when u do hit that hand, cuz u almost always get paid off post-flop with that many players

the first sentence was good. after that, you should probably ignore the rest of this post. if you like money, that is. You dont want to check that flop because a) you reaaaaally dont want to give 22 or 33 a free look at the turn, and if someone has another Q you are going to lose a lot of bets by trying to slowplay. whats your plan - let someone bluff the flop, and checkraise em on the turn? any semi competent player is going to dump his bluff when you checkraise him. Im not even gonna get into the disaster that was his calling hand advice.

I disagree with u. in the first example I think u check that flop. If someone has a PP there is a 8 % chance of someone hitting a pocket pair. Ill take that chance anyday. theres a good chance that someone pairs up and u get paid off alot more. In that case u can either call the turn hoping to win a bet on the river or raise the turn. Id rather take the chance at 2 more big bets than risk losing the pot 8% of the time. And if someone else has the case Q (again NOT LIKELY) ull get paid off regardless. u lose 4 small bets maybe in that case. That scenario will only pop up 5-10% of the time ( I'm just guessin here, forgive me if I'm wrong) so in the long run it's not much of a loss. And in case yur wondering about the scenario of A-Q, no one raised preflop so it's not a likely holding at all.

You're losing so much money it's not even funny.

Raise preflop in both hands. Build big pots when you have an obvious edge.



it's sooted. ATo might be a fold fromEP.

technically, they are sets


No one cares. When you say "set" in a strategy discussion it's inferred to mean "I had a pocket pair and the board hit it with a third".

It's a dramaitaclly diffrent hand stratigically compared to trips, so let's just use the convention, ok? There's a need to have a diffrentiation, I don't care what the technical usage is. Ok?

sklansky agrees with me. If i had to have one or the other, i think i'll take sklansky.

Sklansky agrees with u? Ive read Thery of Poker and nowhere does it say to bet in that situation. If ever there was a time to slowplay the first hand was it. only A-Q ( highly unlikely), Q-4 and 4-4 have u beat, and there arent any straight or flush draws present. In that spot u must sacrifice 1 or 2 small bets to win big bets later. Look, I respect yur views but I disagree with them. I dont want to start any huge arguments here. I wish Daniel were here to give his advice. About the usage of the term "set," does it really matter at all? And about playing A-10 in early position, this is .05/.10 limit. You have to play A-10, suited or not. Position doesnt matter as much cuz many of the advantages of postion disappear in limits that low.