setmining from blinds

simple question: how profitable is it to coldcall 4xbbs pf in SB/BB with 22-TT and play for set value, meaning you check fold most flops on miss?

if you say its not profitable this way, what other way do you employ most often? for example fold pf up to 88?

depending on the flop texture and villian u can donklead or check/raise some flops
and also 2 barrel on some boards vs some players
so u dont have to call preflop and check/fold every flop which would be - ev imo

yeah do it vs UTG/EP raisers that are tight, otherwise ur going to have to win the pot w/o showdown some of the time to make a profit

22-TT is pretty wide...like 22-66 against the right opponents you can profitably call and as ppad said, win some pots with the donkleads and c/r flops. Imo against many aggro opponents who cbet a ton, etc, I think it's proftiable to c/f most flops on miss.

I think like, 77-TT+ on the right flops you can even add calldown to the other 2.

Just to elaborate on what lachtan said, when you are set mining you have to consider how often an opponent has a hand that will pay you off when you make your set. For example, an aggressive player is going to be raising quite a bit from LP, so when you flop a set vs his 97s, you are almost never going to get him to put much money in the pot, unless it's a board where his hand rapes yours. On the other hand, a tight player raising from UTG is much more likely to have the sort of hand that will pay you off because it's strong enough.

As people's range get wider, you have to either start folding small PPs in blinds or have to be willing to try and take it away on the flop or 3bet PF.

Also it depends on the stakes you are playing.

depends on player
its a fold against most players tho

reasonably profitable with 100bb in play. here's the math:

11.5% of the time you flop a set
when you have that set, you only get your stack in the middle about 60% at absolute maximum
when you do get your money in, you're about 88% on average to win (usually they have 2 outs, sometimes more)
so you are flopping a set and winning an entire stack 11.5% * 60% * 88% = 6.072% of the time, at most, for a ~99bb profit
when you lose a stack with your set, you have a ~99bb loss, and it occurs 11.5% * 60% * 12% = 0.828% overall.
the other 40% when you flop a set but don't get your stack in the middle (4.6% overall), you profit about 17bb on average.
and 88.5% of the time overall, you lose 3bb (assuming you're in the big blind). so the EV is...

EV(bb) = 6.072% (99) + 4.6% (17) - 0.828% (99) - 88.5% * (3) = 6.01128 + 0.782 - 0.81972 - 2.655 = 3.31856bb (+EV)

here are the re-calculations if you're in the SB and outside the blinds:

EV(sb) = EV(bb) + 2.655 - 88.5% (3.5) = 2.87606bb (+EV)
EV(not blinds) = EV(bb) + 2.655 - 88.5% (4) = 3.43356bb (+EV)

if you only get your stack in about 30-35% of the time when hitting the set (which is still kinda high in most games, particularly 6max), then you're roughly breaking even

does that mean i should fold small pocketpairs that i used to call so far against all lag Vs and maybe play some against nits like myself but only sometimes?

if so, what is a small pocketpair, and what is a pocketpair to reraise with from SB/BB? so far i used to reraise TT+ and sometimes only JJ+

I have another set mining question. 25NL....44 utg so you raise to a 1.00. Guy to your left also with a full stack 3bets to $3 (making it an unprofitable call for set odds)....however the guy on the button (also with a full stack) flat calls. How does the math play out in a situation like this? (also i'd assume that the implied odds are huge)

On May 18 2008 11:45 [vital]Myth wrote: if you only get your stack in about 30-35% of the time when hitting the set (which is still kinda high in most games, particularly 6max), then you're roughly breaking even

I might be too pessimistic here but thinking that you will get it in even 30% of the time (having hit a set) against a loose player seems way too high. Maybe I don't know what set mining really means but if you're going to fold whenever you miss, it's like giving away money to cold call in the first place.

edit: second sentence was not a direct reply to your post

On May 18 2008 11:44 [vital]Myth wrote: reasonably profitable with 100bb in play. here's the math: 11.5% of the time you flop a set when you have that set, you only get your stack in the middle about 60% at absolute maximum

lol

i must do something wrong
60% win a full stack when flop a set ?

i dont know the numbers but half of that seems a lot more realistic

On May 18 2008 15:34 PplusAD wrote: Show nested quote + On May 18 2008 11:44 [vital]Myth wrote: reasonably profitable with 100bb in play. here's the math: 11.5% of the time you flop a set when you have that set, you only get your stack in the middle about 60% at absolute maximum lol i must do something wrong 60% win a full stack when flop a set ? i dont know the numbers but half of that seems a lot more realistic

maybe you're a nit and play face-up

as a general rule of thumb you genereally wanna win ~13x your investment if your setmining with PP's - are you playing full ring or 6-max?? cause 99-TT arn't really setmining hands

TT is top 3% hands of poker, not sure why you would setmine with it*

unless aaragon is opening UTG

KK can be played for set value sometimes

+ Show Spoiler +

On May 18 2008 10:45 RaSZi wrote: doomer elaborate

i dont flop sets

On May 18 2008 16:42 TalentedTom wrote: unless aaragon is opening UTG

LOL LOL LO L

@ all posts saying 60% is way too high, etc.

yes, you are right. but if you only get your stack in the middle 25% of the time when you flop a set, you should call with any 2 and play just like a set every time, and thereby win the pot at least 75% of the time (some suckout equity on top of that)

so.. -.-

when you call with a little PP (22-99) you have to consider how tight his range is and how agressive he is against you postflop. I didnt do the math about this, becouse you need a big sample size and history to determine when it's good to call against some players.
My formula is to fold or 3b 22-66 against Loose openers in the BTN/CO and call most of the utg raisers with 22-99. TT is a raising hand mostly

HOW ABOUT

not calling !!!

it's so much more fun and then you don't have to worry about dumb numbers and percentages, take that fat bitch of a load off your mind, put some lead ear-rings on it and sit it on your opponent

On May 18 2008 22:27 sOah wrote: HOW ABOUT not calling !!! it's so much more fun and then you don't have to worry about dumb numbers and percentages, take that fat bitch of a load off your mind, put some lead ear-rings on it and sit it on your opponent

wat

if calling is profitable then we should call

unless 3betting is more profitable

which is extremely doubtful

On May 18 2008 22:48 [vital]Myth wrote: unless 3betting is more profitable which is extremely doubtful

well obviously we generally want to do what's most profitable in a vacuum but there will be a lot of people who end up playing their hand very face-up because their oop calling-range consists of KQs AJs and 22-88 or w/e

it's going to be opponent dependant and table dependant (i.e. if we have a rampant squeezer behind then we have to figure whether we want to 3-bet of fold as opposed to calling)

I dunno but I would generally say that people don't 'fill in the gaps' enough in their play to make certain moves profitable although on paper they may seem profitable. Also, general metagame implications are pretty hard to calculate (speaking for both sides of this part of the argument, generally opting to 3-bet vs generally opting to call small-medium pocket pairs).

As for trying to "calculate metagame implications", I think with the right approximations, you get close enough to know a few things at least. There's enough room for error that you have that elasticity in your play to adjust when you "feel" (for lack of a better word) when you should deviate.

then again, this is just me saying "w0mg myth EV mathz = nuts" without being too overt. Meh. =p

On May 18 2008 16:38 TalentedTom wrote: as a general rule of thumb you genereally wanna win ~13x your investment if your setmining with PP's - are you playing full ring or 6-max?? cause 99-TT arn't really setmining hands

6max obv.

from myths calculation and some other reactions i would assume then that my best approach to V's raise in utg+1 to button would be to fold 22-88 pf and reraise 99+. if V is utg then call 22-TT (or reraise TT if hes not a total nit?).

once i can open my game to like 25/20 i should prolly incorporate reraising more small PPs from blinds, but until then its -ev.

any additions to this?

I hate calling out of the blinds with low pp's if it turns out to be a headsup pot.

I don't care about the math, I just know that it's not profitable. What the fuck. You're gonna win a full stack maybe 20% of the time. If you do call with them, you'd better have a plan of also calling down a barrel on bad flops and check/raising on A-high flops as a bluff or w/e. And you gotta know the opponent to do that.

You shouldnt be using a rule of thumb here imo, in some situations its profitable to setmine from the blinds, but more often than not I think its a marginal play and will get you into trouble.

Wow, PT3 is good for this kind of thing...



Since this is spread all from 100NL to 400NL it's best just to look at the BB stats. I lose 0.6BB each time, but if I look in the position tab, it shows me a net profit of $300 as the diff without blind, so overall it looks about breakeven, and I almost always set farm small PPs and fuck around on quite a few flops.

Anyone else to post this? Just look in filters, it's easy.

edit: well I contradicted myself by showing my difference without blind as $. It's +0.15BB

On May 18 2008 22:08 [vital]Myth wrote: @ all posts saying 60% is way too high, etc. yes, you are right. but if you only get your stack in the middle 25% of the time when you flop a set, you should call with any 2 and play just like a set every time, and thereby win the pot at least 75% of the time (some suckout equity on top of that) so.. -.-

i dont think losing a whole stack every 1/4 hands can be counteracted by winning 3 times with flop and turn bets
the other guy wont even have better than a mid pair 60% of the time so even if you spew hard the whole time he wont stack off to sets 60% of the time

anyway to the question, im pretty sure its fairly marginal if you call every time regardless of other conditions
I generally fold but i think if you really thought it was the best place to work on your equity you could generate a nice profit if you picked spots against the right players(such as someone playing any 2 as a set)

On May 19 2008 07:11 Shabbzoy wrote: Show nested quote + On May 18 2008 22:08 [vital]Myth wrote: @ all posts saying 60% is way too high, etc. yes, you are right. but if you only get your stack in the middle 25% of the time when you flop a set, you should call with any 2 and play just like a set every time, and thereby win the pot at least 75% of the time (some suckout equity on top of that) so.. -.- i dont think losing a whole stack every 1/4 hands can be counteracted by winning 3 times with flop and turn bets the other guy wont even have better than a mid pair 60% of the time so even if you spew hard the whole time he wont stack off to sets 60% of the time anyway to the question, im pretty sure its fairly marginal if you call every time regardless of other conditions I generally fold but i think if you really thought it was the best place to work on your equity you could generate a nice profit if you picked spots against the right players(such as someone playing any 2 as a set)

I think his post was a little more to make the point that if you can't get your stack in more than 25% of the time you probably aren't playing aggressively enough without a monster, and also to illustrate that its kind of silly to think your opponents are folding whatever they have 75% of the time (but hey, if they are then hes right).

We tend to feel like "they always fold when I have a monster, but never fold when I'm bluffing" because the big losses with bluffs and the times you don't get paid with a monster tend to stick out in your mind. His example essentially helps to dispel those kind of thoughts, and illustrates thats if they really are folding to your monsters a ton then you literally should play all your hands like monsters and expect folds a huge % of the time until you realize they're adapting blah blah etc etc

Against me youre gonna win a full stack with bottom set about... 5% of the time.

setmining from the blinds is so retarded

people are too good for you to do it. they pot control and read hands/board textures well enough so that youre just going to lose money doing it

i two pair mine from the blinds

i never mine for hands, i just mine for weakness

or i just mine for the opportunity to lead with no information

if somebody bets i just raise
if i'm first to act i just bet

win every pot

I dont know why people are calling it setmining?

I tend to either play back at a variety of boards or handread decent enough to show my hand down when its good most of the time..
Like if your plan is to c/f every flop you miss then dont call pre

Generally I lean towards folding vs both good lags and good tags, and lean towards calling vs bad tags (will regularly stack off with an overpair) and reraising vs bad lags (will frequently call and fold to cbet when they miss)

Folding a pair preflop for a normal raise with 100 bb stacks doesn't feel right to me Not saying you have to play set or fold but folding pre seems ugh?

lawl @ people setmining oop

I much rather open 64o from the button than flatting 66 in the blinds

On May 19 2008 17:20 Loco wrote: lawl @ people setmining oop I much rather open 64o from the button than flatting 66 in the blinds

folding a 2-card straight on the button is a sin

On May 19 2008 17:07 TianYuan wrote: Folding a pair preflop for a normal raise with 100 bb stacks doesn't feel right to me Not saying you have to play set or fold but folding pre seems ugh?

call me crazy but i think if i raise utg in a 9 handed game with 100bb you should be folding tens in the small blind if there are no other callers

Really?? I don't play full ring at all so folding tens seems pretty much insane to me lol

6max is different
i think in a 6max game its fine to call with down to sevens in that spot but the low pairs are worthless

yeah i bet you'd like it if ppl folded tens to your single raise

i wouldnt care
they are making mistakes by calling with worse than that

do you ever call out of the blinds daut44?

only when i get dealt an uno card

if you only get one do you have to call uno?

On May 19 2008 17:48 Daut wrote: 6max is different i think in a 6max game its fine to call with down to sevens in that spot but the low pairs are worthless

How deep would you have to be for the low pairs to not be worthless in your opinion? Folding low pairs to ep raises isn't something I had considered much but I haven't played above 1/2 for very long and have a long long history of setmining ; [

id say 150bb its fine to play them vs utg raisers. but once youre deep enough it becomes bad again because people start excessively pot controlling vs certain players 250bb deep

late position 100bb its playable, you can c/r more flops profitable, RR preflop more profitably, but folding preflop is also fine

what do you do with AK?

i flat my entire playable range in the blinds vs ep raisers

sounds like you should raise your entire range <3

wat... i can guarantee im ev+ with low pp from the blinds

On May 19 2008 20:06 Daut wrote: i flat my entire playable range in the blinds vs ep raisers

you flat QQ+ ??

On May 20 2008 00:48 chipsOwner wrote: Show nested quote + On May 19 2008 20:06 Daut wrote: i flat my entire playable range in the blinds vs ep raisers you flat QQ+ ??

of course he does, lol, what would be the point of ONLY 3betting QQ+? even retards play well when your hand is face-up

On May 20 2008 00:58 [vital]Myth wrote: Show nested quote + On May 20 2008 00:48 chipsOwner wrote:   On May 19 2008 20:06 Daut wrote: i flat my entire playable range in the blinds vs ep raisers you flat QQ+ ?? of course he does, lol, what would be the point of ONLY 3betting QQ+? even retards play well when your hand is face-up

exactly, so im pretty confused why not to 3bet the whole playable range from the blinds instead??

On May 20 2008 01:14 chipsOwner wrote: Show nested quote + On May 20 2008 00:58 [vital]Myth wrote:   On May 20 2008 00:48 chipsOwner wrote:   On May 19 2008 20:06 Daut wrote: i flat my entire playable range in the blinds vs ep raisers you flat QQ+ ?? of course he does, lol, what would be the point of ONLY 3betting QQ+? even retards play well when your hand is face-up exactly, so im pretty confused why not to 3bet the whole playable range from the blinds instead??

wouldn't u then be playing a bloated pot oop against ranges that have adjusted to your 3bets but are still tighter than yours??

On May 20 2008 01:14 chipsOwner wrote: Show nested quote + On May 20 2008 00:58 [vital]Myth wrote:   On May 20 2008 00:48 chipsOwner wrote:   On May 19 2008 20:06 Daut wrote: i flat my entire playable range in the blinds vs ep raisers you flat QQ+ ?? of course he does, lol, what would be the point of ONLY 3betting QQ+? even retards play well when your hand is face-up exactly, so im pretty confused why not to 3bet the whole playable range from the blinds instead??

the point is that they only open raise with sick monsters anyway. so if you are trying to be really aggro to combat their nittiness, by 3betting a lot of hands, then you are REALLY often 3betting into KK and AA, which is just rofl

what are the stats of these people we are talking about that we should fold TT pf ?

i mean if we are so often 3betting AA-KK then setmining with PP is super profitable cuz our implied odds are huge

On May 20 2008 03:25 Baal wrote: what are the stats of these people we are talking about that we should fold TT pf ? i mean if we are so often 3betting AA-KK then setmining with PP is super profitable cuz our implied odds are huge

yeah don't listen to daut, it's complete nonsense to fold TT due to somebody having an ultra-nit range, when you can just setmine instead. and even if you think setmining is bad because they never stack off, then you should call with any 2 and just force them to fold almost every time.

but as for their stats, there are tons of FR regs with under 10% pfr, and they just limp JJ utg

On May 20 2008 04:17 [vital]Myth wrote: it's complete nonsense to fold TT due to somebody having an ultra-nit range

that is, with 100bb in play facing an open raise to 4 (or fewer) bb.

i am 1000% positive if someone calls my 4x utg raise in full ring in the small blind with tens they are losing money
you can go ahead and keep thinking they can somehow make money by increasing their bluff frequency and i wont notice it and will lose to them

thats in a tough game at least
in softer games where i am loosening up significantly utg....thats a diff story, and its probably profitably to play stuff like KQs and down to 77 because the players are much worse and my range is much wider

the key point is you are oop, youre up against a good player who understands what your range is fairly well in spots and knows fairly well when you have it/when you dont. you arent going to magically start outplaying someone who is good that has a tight range when youre out of position and not really that deep.


you should be defending with the top 75% of their range in the big blind i believe, and maybe a little bit tighter in the sb.
so ifthey are opening 88+ AK, you should be defending TT+ AK in bb, slightly tighter in sb

if they are opening 22+ AJ+ and big suited connectors, you should be defending 66+, AQs, AK in bb, slightly tighter in sb.

the deeper you get bb wise or the smaller the opponent raises effectively (like if he minraises or 3xs instead of 4x'ing) the more hands you should be playing because once someones hand is pretty face up and yours is not and the stacks are deep enough then you can really take advantage of situations and it becomes worth it to run more serious bluffs a bit often.

nice quad post daut, really good info

On May 20 2008 08:15 Daut wrote: the key point is you are oop, youre up against a good player who understands what your range is fairly well in spots and knows fairly well when you have it/when you dont. you arent going to magically start outplaying someone who is good that has a tight range when youre out of position and not really that deep. you should be defending with the top 75% of their range in the big blind i believe, and maybe a little bit tighter in the sb. so ifthey are opening 88+ AK, you should be defending TT+ AK in bb, slightly tighter in sb if they are opening 22+ AJ+ and big suited connectors, you should be defending 66+, AQs, AK in bb, slightly tighter in sb.

are we talking about gap concept here.. daut?
yes this makes perfect sense .. but this is against some realy good TAG and LAG players

if utg raiser is realy bad tag lets say.. who probably don't know when to fold good hands then setmining with any PP even from blinds is very profitable for us..
and thx God that very very big % of players on micro stakes are very very bad

agree if guy cant fold or puts in way too much money every hand then its good to setmine
or if he 3x's its good to as well

On May 20 2008 13:46 Daut wrote: agree if guy cant fold or puts in way too much money every hand then its good to setmine or if he 3x's its good to as well

if we don't call with tens then why are we calling with JJ or QQ either? don't see how they're different really.

but my point is that people are asking whether they can generally setmine from the blinds. the correct answer is yes, of course. and if they can't setmine vs supertight ranges, then it's implicit that they can DEFINITELY just go nuts with any 2 and win tons of pots, even oop

you, skillwise, are in the top 1% of FR players and shouldn't even be considered in the relevant learning that is going on in this thread.

so if you're playing against daut, probably don't setmine. as long as it's not daut, either setmine or play any 2 as if you flopped a set

well the diff with JJ or QQ is that youre ahead of 88+ AK whereas TT gets in some sticky spots
just nice to be clearly ahead of someones raising range when youre oop and theyre good.

but i feel like even more than just me, people just pot control so much they dont stack off. they go into this check call mode where they wont fold but its hard for you to get a ton of value or push them off hands

but i totally agree vs low limit players at .5/1 or lower its correct to. vs super spewy guys its correct to. and guys really tight guys that never fold overpairs its correct to. but good players youre going to lose money by doing it

you just have to make them believe. they have no pot control when you take the initiative

check/call flop, lead turn for same $ amt they bet on flop, insta overbet shove river for 3x pot

now what daut?

actually pot size will be like

9 pre
14 flop
14 turn
= 37bb

and we have what, 82 bb's left

yeah my line is fucking brilliant

actually probably lead turn for a lot more so that you win more money from the river folds

check/call, pot, shove is prob really nasty for demolishing weak/tight idiots when the board makes it obvious they never have a set

because think about it, we're only doing this on boards that are like T high or lower since the nit-tard's opening range utg is like JJ+ anyway, so on those types of boards there will inevitably be some kind of possible straight as well

and nits are nits dude

you just gotta be able to discern the nits who fold AA way too much from the nits who fold JJ way too seldom, and proceed appropriately

plus since almost 100% of their range is paired, they almost never have a flush on a 3flush board so that just gives our represented range more power

daut you need to sweat rekrul for a while

i don't play with players of Daut44's caliber often, and i feel that by making sets, playing pairs for value and the occasional bluff makes playing pairs in any position profitable for me. i think that playing low pairs for value on low boards against players who rarely fire 2 barrels is being overlooked in this discussion, it doesn't have to be a set or a bluff to win a pot.

On May 20 2008 14:11 [vital]Myth wrote: you just have to make them believe.

if it works for oj simpson it works for me

well if you have a HUGE HUGE database you could see how much are you doing utg vs blinds with TT

On May 20 2008 08:18 Daut wrote: the deeper you get bb wise or the smaller the opponent raises effectively (like if he minraises or 3xs instead of 4x'ing) the more hands you should be playing because once someones hand is pretty face up and yours is not and the stacks are deep enough then you can really take advantage of situations and it becomes worth it to run more serious bluffs a bit often.

Lol, utg range is wider than ours and contains all of our hands. How is his hand "face up" and ours isnt.

Why do I want to argue with you in every topic..