I get my share of loses and at this one table I was getting mugged regularily by calling stations all around the table. I can usually make money with passive calling stations but at this table I was really getting thumped and it took over 2 hours and 5 or 6 other tables to get back into the plus column after I finally left. This is one hand that Trons can appreciate having posted a couple along this line already - playing mediocre pairs.


PokerStars 0.25/0.50 Hold'em (9 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is UTG with , .
1 fold, Hero calls, UTG+1 calls, MP1 raises, 1 fold, MP3 calls, CO calls, Button calls, 1 fold, BB folds, Hero calls, UTG+1 calls.

OK, I know a lot of you would have raised pre-flop while a lot of others would have folded. I never play small pairs from such an early position and mid pairs only if I figure I can get in cheap, see the flop and if not good then get out quick. I knew I could stand one raise but not two so limping (vs folding)was the strategy I went with this time.

Flop: (13.40 SB) , , (5 players)
Hero checks, UTG+1 checks, MP1 bets, MP3 raises, CO folds, Button folds, Hero 3-bets, UTG+1 calls, MP1 calls, MP3 calls.

Well, pretty good flop for a pocket pair of 8s. I decided to see just how solid the opps were and went for a check-raise - the pf raiser was sure to bet as a continuation but if that failed the Button would as an obligation to his position. Any come back and I would be outta there. They all fall quietly into line so I figure I have the best hand - at least so far.

Turn: (12.70 BB) (3 players)
Hero bets, UTG+1 calls, MP1 calls, MP3 folds.

A lot of opps will hang on for one more card and then drop out on the turn so this bet was a continuation of the check-raise on the flop. Surprise - the only one to fold is the pre-flop raiser! I have a rainbow board of rags and two calling stations. I figure maybe one of them for a small pair from their pocket flush cards (at these tables most opps play any and all flush cards so a small pair is not unusal) and the other has been known to chase to the river. With absolutely no resistance I still think I have the best hand!

River: (15.70 BB) (2 players)
Hero bets, UTG+1 calls, MP1 calls.

Another undercard rag! I am sure one more bet and these last 2 will fold but am not too worried b/c I have top pair.

Final Pot: 18.70 BB

Results in white below:
Hero has 8h 8d (two pair, eights and threes).
UTG+1 has Tc Td (two pair, tens and threes).
MP1 has Jc JavaScript (two pair, jacks and threes).
Outcome: MP1 wins 18.70 BB.

Like I said at the top I was getting mugged regularily at this table. Did anyone see something I should have caught to warn me off this hand. Other than not playing it at all, I thought I played it fairly well but am open to alternate view points

with the pre-flop raise from MP1 and then leading out the betting post flop (even though his preflop raise was re-raised 2x)... I would put him on a high pocket pair.

The MP3 raising post flop would be what scared me outta the pot... I would have thought he stayed in with suited 4 5... and what trying to represent large cards with his pre-flop raise.

I woulda bailed on it... but im a bit tight still

raise or fold pre-flop depending on the table. This is a bad hand to limp in with in early position, unless of course you are fairly sure you'll get plently of callers in that case it's fine to limp.

By you 3 betting the flop you represented a big hand, the guys with JJ or TT think that you may have hit a set or 2 pair. Therefore they just called you down, not much you can do here.

I hate passive players more than maniacs. I find it easier to beat maniacs because their style typically forces me to play tighter, with better hands, so that when we're in a pot together, I often have a huge edge.

Passive players are more difficult for me because they never define the strength of their hands. Thus, as an aggressive player, I stay aggressive with my betting until I'm given a reason to think otherwise. Since a passive player is just as likely to be calling you down with bottom pair as with a set, I wind up losing some big pots to them that I have built.

In the hand you described here, I wouldn't have checkraised the flop, but would have bet out instead. Since you didn't re-raise preflop, you haven't yet tested the strength of the preflop raiser's hand. If you bet out on the flop, his subsequent actions might tell you something. If he has a big pair, he's likely to raise you; if he has a hand like AK, he might fold or just call. Either way, you get a sense where you stand.

I see problems with the checkraise strategy on this flop. If the preflop raiser just has overcards, he might check behind you and you've given him a free card. That's really bad with a hand like 88... about half the deck is an overcard to you.

The other problem is that the checkraise is a really strong play in a multiway pot. Even with a hand like JJ or TT on this board, I probably wouldn't cap the betting because your play indicated great strength to me, and I would interpret your checkraise as you having hit a set or flopped a straight. Thus, if the purpose of your bet is to get information as to whether an overpair is out there, I don't think the checkraise is best suited to flush that out (no pun intended!).

Originally Posted by mxp2004

I hate passive players more than maniacs. I find it easier to beat maniacs because their style typically forces me to play tighter, with better hands, so that when we're in a pot together, I often have a huge edge.

Passive players are more difficult for me because they never define the strength of their hands. Thus, as an aggressive player, I stay aggressive with my betting until I'm given a reason to think otherwise. Since a passive player is just as likely to be calling you down with bottom pair as with a set, I wind up losing some big pots to them that I have built.

In the hand you described here, I wouldn't have checkraised the flop, but would have bet out instead. Since you didn't re-raise preflop, you haven't yet tested the strength of the preflop raiser's hand. If you bet out on the flop, his subsequent actions might tell you something. If he has a big pair, he's likely to raise you; if he has a hand like AK, he might fold or just call. Either way, you get a sense where you stand.

I see problems with the checkraise strategy on this flop. If the preflop raiser just has overcards, he might check behind you and you've given him a free card. That's really bad with a hand like 88... about half the deck is an overcard to you.

The other problem is that the checkraise is a really strong play in a multiway pot. Even with a hand like JJ or TT on this board, I probably wouldn't cap the betting because your play indicated great strength to me, and I would interpret your checkraise as you having hit a set or flopped a straight. Thus, if the purpose of your bet is to get information as to whether an overpair is out there, I don't think the checkraise is best suited to flush that out (no pun intended!).

Good analysis, if you had just lead off the flop it would have given the JJ and TT a chance to raise and re-raise you...then you can safely deposit your cards in the muck if you feel you are beat.

Have to disagree with passive players being hard to beat, just value bet and value bet some more. When you know or are pretty confident you are behind, just muck...no harm in it and the calling stations will think you more of a bluffer than before....hence more calling.

OK - looks like the conscenous is to bet out and not check-raise on the flop.
The problem I have with this is that all too often the lead out bet on flop round is allowed to flow thru and the real raising occurs on the turn after the bet doubles - I know b/c I do it all the time!. I hoped to draw out a re-raise on the flop round with my check-raise while the bets were still small. Also, I was looking for a reason to fold and not getting one was lead to believe I was holding best hand. These hands are dangerous and while I most generally get the set on the flop or fold, I will have to try the lead-out next time.

The problem is that small and medium pairs don't play very well against a loose table. If you see let others see the flop cheaply, then you can easily find that loose Q-6 caller has just made a better hand than you. There's just too high a chance of at least one overcard hitting to play with a significant number of callers. That said, you'd have probably been called by the TT and JJ players anyway.
The problem seems to be a lack of information - by not betting, the TT and JJ players were hoping to get the maximum amount of money in the pot by not scaring off other players. Playing a loose, passive table can change the way you get information - generally a bet will scare off some players, and whether they fold, call or raise provides you with information, but in a loose, passive table it may be necessary to check to encourage another player to show strength by raising to try to get the necessary information about what you're likely to be up against.

Originally Posted by starfall

The problem is that small and medium pairs don't play very well against a loose table.

I don't agree with this, although I think you probably don't mean this statement to be as broad as it reads.

Small and medium pairs play well at a loose, passive preflop table, but you have to know how you intend to make money with the hand. First, you want to have a multiway pot that allows you to see the flop for only one bet. This gives you the pot odds you need to try to make your set.

And that's the second point: you're primary thought should be "no set, no bet." The usual way to make money with small and medium pairs is to hit a set. You don't want to keep playing the hand against overcards.

This leads to the third point. If you don't hit a set, but your pocket pair turns out to be higher than any card on the flop, then I think you need to bet on the flop in a way that is best calculated to get you information about where you stand. Your small and medium pair is easily beaten, and so you can't fall in love with it, especially in limit hold'em. You need to be prepared to release the hand when the betting and your information about your opponents indicates to you that you are behind.

Thus, don't give up on small or medium pairs in loose games. To the contrary, play them, but be mindful of position, the number of players in the pot, and how the cards have to fall for you to stick with the hand after the flop.