Top set in OEOB

[5carab]

I've been playing poker 8 months now and am beginning to take it quite seriously, so thought I would start posting/ discussing some hands. I would be really interested in opinions on how I played this one, short though it is.

OEOB 6 max table (1.00/2.00)

UTG is quite loose and really passive preflop (he hasn't raised a single hand preflop), limping most any hand with an A or 3 low cards (including A23K double suited and AA34 single suited earlier).
Button has just sat down.
SB is weak tight, just folding on the flop if he doesn't have a monster (check called A3 all the way earlier when the board came out 257JK).
I'm in the BB with 88910.

UTG limps in.
Button calls.
SB completes.
I check.

I assume there is no discussion of this play here - 88910 is a dreadful hand. (Have left out description of the other two players as they folded).

Flop comes 852

SB checks.
I check.
UTG bets.
Button folds.
SB folds.
I fold.

I do realise that 88 is the nut high at this point and did at the time. I want to hear other's opinions on this hand before I explain why I folded, but I still believe that this was the correct play, and I would do it again in the same spot.

[Keebs]

WHAT? i really cant understand. i dont think i even know how to respond. what hand is beating you? how can you justify a check/fold. way to passive. i understand you cant scoop, but that is no reason to fold. my question to you: Is your bankroll low and you playing scared money? That's the only time i ever see plays like this. you should have at least called.

If it was me playing. i would have bet here, and if the UTG 2 bets i would have 3. then you say you do this again?! how do you ever make money, with this reasoning you need to fold ever hand, b/c you are way too passive.

i have to hear this reasoning.

[5carab]

Firstly, thanks for replying Keebs, I wanted the opinion's of other players on this hand, as I think it's quite an interesting spot.

You asked if I am playing scared money, the answer is categorically no. I have built up a roll of nearly 100 buy ins ($2000) from freeroll winnings that I have grinded up through sngs, cash games etc. Basically I am playing with pure profit, so I don't have any issue losing in a game other than the annoyance of possibley having to move down.

However, back to the hand. The reason I folded is because he is certain to have 3 lows in this spot, and unless he's double paired he has half of the pot locked up. I feel very confident that he doesn't have a naked 2 pair due to him being a very passive player - if he has 2 pair for sure there's a low with it. Therefore I am definately playing for only half the pot.

Consider now that I am putting in a small bet to win 2 (the high half of the pot) - seems like a good spot right, 2 to 1 odds with the nuts? However, assuming he bets every street, as I expect him to, I actually have to put in 5 smalls bets (1 on 3rd, 2 on 4th and 2 on 5th) to win 2 - my odds are now 2 to 5 with the nuts. To justify calling all the way I need to be about 71.5% favourite to win the high.

If he had just a naked 34 for a weak low and open ended straight draw then I am 75% to win the high, so it's marginally profitable to call. However, he's pretty passive, so I have him on A3 or A4 with something extra. If that something is just another low card, say A46J then he has a similar situation as with the 34, he's about 25% for the high. It would be a marginal call. However, if his something extra is a flush draw or a wrap then he's up to 45% to win the high half, making my calls a comfortable losing play.

It's for this reason that I think folding top set in that small a pot is correct when there's only action from one other player and your drawing dead to half the pot.

I believe you said you would bet and 3 bet if played back at - I hope you realise why I wouldn't do that (and why it's a dreadful losing play). You are just putting money in without any prospect of getting more back. Your best case scenario is that your 88 holds and you get your chips back, this would be a losing play even against a hand as weak as 74Q10 rainbow (although clearly that hand should be folded at every stage of the hand).

I'm interested to see what you (and anyone else who's reading this) think of my reasoning.

[GamBoelyn]

This isn't really a game I am experienced in but I will give it a try.

I can see why you check folded on this board, 5carab. There are a lot of ugly turn cards out there for you and you only temporarily have the Hi with no low draw in a small pot. If you continue with the hand you are playing for only one side on a dangerous board.

I certainly wouldn't bet out in a multiway pot and betting and 3 betting a raiser in this spot is absolutely insane, Keebs. Now there are 3 low cards on the flop you shouldn't be pumping a hi hand so heavily because you are probably playing for just half the pot, especially on such a co-ordinated flop anyway.

[iwowthebertleman]

OEOB? its either 08 (limit) or PL08. at least that's how its labeled in most forums.

08. leading out and folding if the flush or wheel wrap card hits is an option. the only benefits of this (since your playing for 1/2 the pot), is it shows that you're a complete idiot and boosts your image. folding flop is the right move. but who plays 08 correctly?

PL08. is the player who bet good? how deep? if the board pairs on the turn and you're both deep, you now have a huge advantage. if you lead out pot or a huge check raise, is he good enough to fold in fear of getting quartered? if he's short, fold flop it's pointless.

[5carab]

I've always called it OEOB or PLO8, but I am new to this. Anyways, it was a (1.00/ 2.00) O8 limit game iwowthebertleman.

However, if it was PLO8 at similarly low stakes I would fold this hand even faster. There is absolutely 0 prospect of getting someone to fold the nut or second nut low as I am sure he had, and therefore I am just paying off big bets to win a tiny pot. At a higher limit I can see why you would call and put a huge raise in on the turn if the board paired though.

[Keebs]

first off, i am impressed you defended you side better than i would have thought. i agree with you on you can only win half the pot (i stated this in my first post) so i understand how that is a reason towards folding. but i still feel you played this hand passive. I think you gave up before you started. i think you looked at your hand pre-flop and thought it was bad, and was uncommitted to it. this is said with your 2nd to act with 6 in, its checked to you and you checked also. that i cannot understand . you should have bet there. also you could have got so much information if you bet, depending he 2 bet, called, or even folded. you discuss how passive this player is, i'd be taking advantage of this. if i have the nut high at the time, and i believe he is going low, well bet, more than likely we are spilting the pot, but at the same time i have a chance to steal the whole pot. he might have folded on the flop, if hes that passive. also if you bet, you may have been able to pull more calls, then making it profitable for you, no one going to call the tight guy.

[5carab]

I can understand why you are taking this line with the hand, and I think it would make sense in certain spots. However, there are a few things you are getting slightly wrong imo.

Firstly, the pot is 4 handed, not 6 handed. To me this is a big difference as it means that there are far fewer players capable of going low. 6 handed it's an easy lead for me, hoping to build a big enough pot to split profitably. 4 handed, especially with the small blind holding any 4 cards and having checked, I feel there is alot less value in the lead.

Secondly, leading into a player who's passive here doesn't give me any information if I am correct that his range is any low card/ any ace. He is going to call me unless he has something lik A355, A34x, A367, A3xx or possibley A4xx (I would expect him to check call this hand dreadful though that play is). However, I expect him to call all the way with a hand as weak as 34xx. By checking I give him the chance to check behind, which he's likely to do unless he makes something that he would probably raise me with anyway. Remember, passive doesn't mean he folds alot post flop, just that he doesn't bet his hands hard enough to get full value.

You expect no one to call the tight guy, but that they could call my bet. I think you give most low limit players WAY too much credit here - in general they either like their hand or they don't, regardless of who's betting. The only chance they have of getting away from a weak hand is if I bet and get raised, which would be a HORRIBLE spot. From the two folds I assume the SB had junk and the button probably had something like AQJ10 no hearts (or one heart).

Finally, by checking the flop I allow myself to make the fold I did if it goes bet, fold, fold or to lead the turn if a blank peals off. This way I am able to put money in on a 'safe' looking board, and am still capable of getting called - possibley lighter than had I led the flop. For example, if an offsuit Q rolls off I would expect the button to call turn and river bets, certainly a turn bet (assuming he had a Q as I suspect). I think that the disguise, and the chance that I get a 'free card' make the check correct. I know it seems strange to talk about a free card with the nuts, but my hand is very vulnerable, and in effect I am drawing to 2 running blanks/ a boat.

I do however understand leading the flop, and don't totally hate the play so long as you are able to dump the hand if faced with any real resistance heads up.

[Phildo449er]

I definitely bet if you're in a game where you don't have people raising naked nut lows all the time. You're hand isn't very good heads up, because anyone with a low has a straight draw and if they have a flush draw you're about a coin flip for the high. If you bet and get called, you can see if you fill up or if the straight or flush comes on the turn to see what happens.

I'm never comfortable with a set in O/8, especially when you are only going for half of the pot. There are people who are going to be chasing draws, but they already have half the pot, so you're not going to make them fold, raising a lot is just going to be throwing money away if/when the 3rd heart or another straight card comes (which is very likely).

Heads up there's not a real point in continuing, against a guy with a low and 2 hearts, you're about a coin flip for the high and can't get the low. Depending on the rake, you can have 0% chance of making money on the hand. You'd have to call the turn to get your money back (if one of your opponents many outs for the high doesn't come in).

[Keebs]

Originally Posted by 5carab

Firstly, the pot is 4 handed, not 6 handed. To me this is a big difference ....

it does

Originally Posted by 5carab

You expect no one to call the tight guy, but that they could call my bet. I think you give most low limit players WAY too much credit here - in general they either like their hand or they don't, regardless of who's betting.

ok you win on that, i did give to much for this situation

Originally Posted by 5carab

I do however understand leading the flop, and don't totally hate the play so long as you are able to dump the hand if faced with any real resistance heads up.

ok i will say i do understand your play now, and its not as bad as i originally thought. so i apologies for thinking your crazy. Still i would have bet, but i do think now with betting you still be heads up, so i do see how this is less profitable, and 2 less people(4 instead of me thinking 6) makes it harder to get calls for the obvious reason of less people. How is sounds though if the guy is passive, i dont see any resistance, so he'll be checking so i see a chop/chop coming.

some good posts 5carab