1/3 100 bb's eff.
utg solid on the nitty side opens to $10, I call from MP with 2's and the blinds call.

QcJc2h sb checks bb donks 25 (also a fairly solid player) I put him on KQ+, QJ, maybe occasionally JJ or QQ but after he flats pre these probably prefer to check raise.

UTG calls but I doubt he's opening QJ or KQ maybe he has AQ+, AKcc ,1 combo of JJ and 1 combo of QQ. (the other combos of QQ JJ would just raise here)

I make it $75, instantly regret the sizing it should be $100+ as I'm up against a strong range from both players and want max value before any cards kill action and to set up an easy turn shove.

sb folds then bb flats and then UTG jams?! I can pretty much rule out QQ, JJ for bb as he would surely try to get it in? So AQ, QJ?
Should this be an easy fold vs UTG as the flop flat, 3 bet jam should be really nutted. If this is only QQ, JJ I am super crushed. If he ever can shove AKcc here I am still crushed. If he could also spaz backraise 3 combos of AA ((containing Ac) I'm not convinced of this)then it's 52% in his favour or 3 KK combo's then it's 54% to us.

Are we always just folding here?

I am felting here 100 percent of the time with 100 BB or less effective with a flopped set on no flush/no straight possible board, and i feel pretty good about it.

I just see too much random spaz/buttonclicking/weird tabled hands at 1-2 and 1-3 stakes (even from "rocks" or "Nitty OMC" from time to time that is having a spazz or blowup), that i am just not willing to fold a set here.

If we get shown JJ or QQ, nice hand good cooler for you sir- reload. Basically i think folding sets based on soulreads at the lower stakes its not the way to go.

I can get closer to 70% equity if I include hands like QJ, AcQx and all combos of AA, KK and maybe AcTc. I guess even if I only get 50% there's around $100 dead money so it becomes ok. I just think the spaz jams from this particular V will happen much less than say your average rock who I agree I would be very happy to get it in against.

For sure man, i totally agree on the last part that spaz/blowup happens way much less for the really nitty rocks. And you know this villain, and i dont. Let me be clear that i am not loving the situation at all here with bottom set with this particular nutted line from described type of villain. Its more like i am sigh stacking off, believing its +EV move in the long run.

So yeah, all that being said, i dont think we can fold here for several reasons. It goes to a point where we are gonna be overfolding ridic strong hands relative to the board and our stackdepth because we "feel" that we are beat (feelings can easily fool us), and chances are we start to level ourself in more spots and make the wrong laydowns.

As Doug Polk famous words says "Sometimes its just your time to die man". Sometimes you are just doomed to stackoff and possibly lose your stack.

I think I'm in the small minority on this forum and I'll probably hear that I am hurting my winrate, but this is one rule that I am an absolute stickler for. Poker is obviously a game of incomplete information and I guess we can debate the value of the information we receive versus "killing the vibe" but I just don't think asking that the rules be enforced is a jerk move.

My biggest pet peeve in my cardroom is when Player A bets on the river (and is bluffing), player B calls. Player A mucks, and half the dealers insist that Player B still show his hand. One night just for fun, I asked the first 4 dealers what the rule is in that situation and 2 said Player B has to show and 2 said he does not. To me, it is completely unfair for Player B to have to show his hand when Player A does not.

Never folding in his situation.

Personally, im not in the business of making hero folds at llsnl when I have close to the nuts

If the UTG nit had a set, why isn't he raising the donk bet? He's happy to let the turn roll of for $25 and let everyone behind him get a 3+:1 to draw???

I think it's more likely he has AA/KK/AQ and got cold feet the 1st time around but now he's not gonna let the young whipper snappers take his pot away

They changed the showing rule at my casino recently. It used to be that you had to show to win, now Player B could muck, which I think is a much better rule. Sure I guess there's collusion points on why they want you to show but I think that's a bit silly given how much other collusion can go on here.

Regarding making the other guy show, I don't do that if I have the absolute nuts or a hand I'm 90%+ to win. But if I'm calling down with something like TPTK, I'm 100% asking him to show his cards. We rarely get to see the other player's hole cards in poker and I'm taking advantage of this situation.

I nit fold preflop. Raiser is solid which means purely setmining against him is unlikely to be profitable and we don't have anyone else in the pot to pad our immediate odds / improve our IO, plus someone could still raise behind us, plus we're in horrible relative position postflop if it goes multiway. If a bunch of other people at the table were passive horrendous postflop payoff stations, I'm cool with the flat and hoping everyone else comes along; but otherwise (and it sounds like two of the people we ended up with in the pot are solid), meh, imo.

The basic problem with preflop is the situation we're in postflop. Both of these opponents sound solid. Which means they're going to continue if they feel it's profitable (mega draws and sets that are crushing us) or fold if they know they are beat (solid raiser folds AA here without much of a second though, right?). Basically our IO aren't nearly as good as we think they are, and are RIO are worse that we think they are. If a solid player decides to play for stacks when we have bottom set, we're typically in trouble.

But yeah, I'd raise larger.

FWIW, we're doing fine against AKcc (we're definitely not crushed). But yeah, basically a solid players range here is QQ/JJ/AKcc and stuff like ATcc/T9cc/etc plus have to add spazz AA/KK/QJs some percentage of the time too. I'm too lazy to stove, but my guess is overall we're doing ok against that with all this dead money although with BB flatting obviously some of our redraw outs (if we need them) are likely dead. Think we're likely forced to call at this point.

ETA: Did some quick stoving and it looks like a pretty simple call at this point. However, it's interesting that our overall EV is only about 13x (+/- depending on what you range him on exactly), which is kinda meh for setmining (such as when you take into account all the times you flop a set and his KK sees a A high flop and we make nothing). Note that if our raise takes it down on the flop that we win $30 + $25 + $25 - $8 (rake/BBJ/tip) for a profit of 7x. Again, purely setmining likely isn't nearly as profitable as you think it might be here, imo.

GcluelessnitnoobG

The only time we fold pre is when 3bet likelihood is significant. At a standard 1-3 table this is a super easy call pre. Yes, there are reasons why the profitability isn't as high as it might first appear, but it's still a profitable call in the vast majority of 1-3 lineups.

AP, please don't fold your set Texas, way too many draws, QJ, Qx, KK, AA in their ranges to even consider it.

It really depends on what you consider a "standard" 1/3 NL lineup, and I believe our notions of this differ greatly.

In this case, 2 of the opponents we saw the flop with are described as solid players.

Obviously if there are a bunch of morons behind us, by all means, lets get in there.

GI'llleaveituptoOPtodecidewhatkindoftableheissitti ngatG

lol solid players at 1-3.

I fold 0% of the time here. Rarely an error.

I play in a room that only features 1/3 NL. So using your standard, that means there are no solid players playing poker.

Again, we *really* disagree on the current state of a typical 1/3 NL game and that's pretty clear. I'm not sure if we simply have totally different experiences or what. All I can go by in this hand is that 2 of the 3 opponents we're seeing a flop with OP described as solid; I'll let you draw your own conclusions on that only bit of information we have. Again, if OP hadda stated there were 4 droolers behind him, I have zero problems with preflop, but that wasn't stated.

I'll agree that it likely isn't a crippling error by any means. I just simply question whether it is profitable (the only thing that matters). Interestingly enough, I believe even HOC wants to see other callers first before calling to setmine; I always thought this was a bit too tight, but games have changed enough where I now believe this is correct.

GcluelessNLnoobG

In LLSNL the only hesitation here is the 3bet likelihood. If we have multiple players remaining who recognize a good squeeze spot (or a maniac) this can be a fold.

We can often go nuts on a flop like this and solid players will put us on a combo draw and snap us off with AQ for example.

Don't make the recs show their cards.

GG, with as much as you preach about denying proper setmining odds with PF raise sizes, how on earth can you fold a pocket pair getting 30:1 implied?

Just because stacks are 30x the bet doesn't mean we have 30:1 implied odds; stack sizes only make up a small part of whether we have setmining odds.

The only thing that matters is whether we are able to setmine profitably here. I simply think it's debatable at a lot of tables being the first to call when we're not guaranteed overcalls / no 3bets.

But I agree that it's likely not any horrendous mistake or anything.

GcluelessNLnoobG

I think you need to explain the bolded, because that's EXACTLY what it means.

I understand your second part, but that analysis doesn't go to what our odds are, it only goes to whether 30:1 implied odds are sufficient in this spot.

With the actual odds of flopping a set being 8.5:1, and taking into account that we don't always win when we flop a set, and ALSO taking into account that we don't always stack villain when we do flop a set, it's generally accepted that 15:1 implied is sufficient to setmine. Certainly no one will argue you need more than 20:1. We have much more than that here.

The only argument for folding pre is the propensity for being 3bet squeezed behind us.

Phil Ivey (or insert your fave fan boy player here) raises to $10. He has $1Million in front of him. You think you have 100,000:1 IO to setmine again Phil Ivey? Nope. I'd actually go so far as to say there are very few hands (if any?) that would actually be profitable to play against him, let alone 22.

Now I'm assuming this dude isn't Phil Ivey. But he is described as a solid player. You're not getting nearly the IO you think you are, regardless of how much he has in his stack.

GcluelessIOnoobG

Is there a thread talking about table selection in llsnl?

You realize you only need to really make 85 bucks, right? The 15x suggestion is to account for the 7x we miss.

Folding for $10 with 1 mirrrrrion behind is beyond terrible.

the man just said to fold AA against Phil so ignore the f***ing troll

If we're not calling with a pocket pair getting 30:1 (in MP! Like when I call in MP I completely expect 2-4 other people to call. The pot is 1/3 of the way to where it needs to be and inevitable someone will hit a piece 6 ways), what are we calling with?

Anything?

We're only 3! Or folding?

I can't even imagine how boring this must be...

Yes, I do. It's exactly what implied odds mean. Now, do I expect to get all $1 million effective stacks absent some cooler runout like A22TK when Ivey holds AA? No. But do I have the implied chances of winning 100,000x the preflop wager? Yes.

Again, what you're discussing has nothing to do with what the implied odds actually are. Math is math, and we can't change that or argue it. What you can change or argue is how much implied odds we need to play a small PP profitably.

15:1 takes into account the odds of flopping the set, having the best hand by the river, and whether you earn enough of the opponent's stack to justify the "true odds" of calling a bet PF which really lays you 8.5:1 to flop the set.

Hi has anyone created reasonable standard ranges for the common player archetypes you run into at LLSNL? Ideally, which can be imported into something like poker cruncher.