Meh... Not folding a set for 100bb. I probably shove and see if he has a heart attack.

This can be an over pair more often then you think.

The Td and 9s are dead.

So the remaining nine (not 12) combos of T9 are:
1. 9cTc
2. 9cTh
3. 9cTs
4. 9hTc
5. 9hTh
6. 9hTs
7. 9sTc
8. 9sTh
9. 9sTs

Stacking off in a limped pot isn't ideal even for 100bb. Let's assign V a conservative range of 78o, T9, 99, AT, JJ, KQ. I know we want to believe that V will raise 98 but face facts - LLSNL this is a c/c/f line all day with pair+GS.

I flat and eval turn. Likely getting it in on safe turns. Keep V's range wide.

Results?

Villain range is 87s(4), 99(3), TT(3). If he is anything like the older nits in my game he is set mining with TT and 99 all day here. Plus you have seen him 3-bet once so we know what happens with AA/KK. If he limps and folds to raises then I like this range even better. QJs is in a good spot to call otf as well.

I know we have a set, but the way you exploit this opponent is by folding when his hand is face up. And you are 17%.

If you could see AT in the hand of the player in the middle I still think it is a fold.

Results: I didn't take too long to shove. Player in between folds, villain calls with 87 and (I'll leave this blank sine it doesn't matter. I had a little over 30% equity on the flop).

As is often the case, I'm still not sure if I made a mistake. Some posters said shove, some said just call, some said fold.

Case for shoving: If villain is raise/calling with 109, then shoving is obviously right, as proved by my EV equation. Wouldn't even nits usually raise this hand though? Not all nits are the same, and it seems to me only the tightest of nits would not raise top two pair. What's top two pair afraid of anyway on this flop? My range is usually just top pair or a limped overpair when I lead flop. Did I have enough information to categorize villain as one of those nits who would only raise sets and straights on this flop?

Case for folding: IF villain is only raising sets and straights, then the EV of shoving is quite negative, over $150 in the red. On the other hand, IF villain has a wider range, the EV of shoving is positive but less than $100 EV.

Would villain really have not played 109 the same way? If he had 87o in his range, he would also be seeing the flop with all combos of 109o.

He has to be raising every combo of T9 (to this sizing) to make continuing profitable.

There is no chance that's true vs a nit.

You exploit nits by not paying them off. So in this case, folding a set is exploiting him.

Think about that.

7 limpers see the flop... $35. Hero opens for $35, there is a caller for $35, then V raises to $120.

Pot is (35+35+35+120)=225 and its 85 to call. Getting > 2.5:1, folding here would be terrible.

Including just the 2 T9s combos available and all straights and bigger sets, we have plenty of equity to call. V has to shove the turn every single time to make this a bad call.

I still think the right move is to stick it in so V cannot fold OTT if the board pairs. This can still be a horribly played overpair.

Board: 6h Td 9s
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 68.786% 68.22% 00.57% 16208 135.50 { TT-99, T9s, 87s, 87o }
Hand 1: 31.214% 30.64% 00.57% 7281 135.50 { 6c6s }

So you want to stick it in on 31% equity vs that range. You just owned yourself.

Raising in his spot with T9 is awful btw.

Actually, if I'm in villain's spot and you ship 66 on me after I raise, GL with that.

Having a super nutted range in this spot doesn't make you a nit. It just means you understand relative value vs absolute value.

/zoltan

Never ever an over-pair if he's like the nits in my game. Never. I mean exactly 0.0%. Playing for stacks on that board with an over-pair? Just no.

Hey again all. Sorry to come back to this one, but I did some analysis of the line of just flatting his flop raise.

Assumptions:

1. He's calling a turn shove with 87 even if the board pairs.
2. His range is sets and straights.

EV flat with plan on shoving on paired turns or if I make quads, check/folding to non-paired, non-6 turns unless he prices me in to keep drawing =

(6/22) ((1/45) $575 - (4/45) $435 - (40/45)$85) + (16/22)((7/45)$575 - (38/45)$85 = (6/22)($12.8 - $39 - $76) + (16/22)($89 - $72) = -$28 - $12.4 =
-$15.4

Someone might want to double check that equation...I began each main "part" of the equation with the chance of him having either a flopped set (6/22) or a straight (16/22). This is a pretty interesting result. As long as my assumption that he calls a turn ship with a straight on a paired board getting ~2-1 is correct, against the tightest possible range imaginable, the EV of calling is only -$15.4. In reality, his range can only be looser than sets and 87, not tighter. If it's looser, the EV would shoot way way up.

How about assumption #3? He's limping around around 50% of the time (or more) so we can include 78o in his range.

How can that assumption be true if he's only limped a few times in hours?

This is correct.

Old nits limp 99 TT quite often and the fact remains that it is over the top to expect him to be raising QJ huge here. And raising AT this large into a limped pot after hero pots the flop, well i think thats very very optimistic as well. He will raise sets and straights 100% here. Frequency of these alone make it a fold.

Obviously white blackbirds like AT might show up here and there, but play the hand 100 times and those wont show but a handful of trials. The great majority of time we are smoked.