Playing Sets Hu Out Of Position

[Money022 0]

I had a hand at $100 NL, 6 max come up today and would like to know how some of you would suggest playing it. I was in the blind with JJ and called a $3 raise by the CO, I was in the BB and elected to call. It was my 3rd hand at the table and I generally play a little more passive until I'm able to develop reads on my opponents. Normally I would raise a pair like JJ if I'm at least a few orbits into the table.The flop came out 4s Jd Ad. I have middle set with a flush and straight draws on the board.Now I've gotten out of the habit of leading into the preflop aggressor. I figured he's likely going to fire out a bet regardless of what he's holding. I also lean towards not leading out because it shows a degree of strength that may slow the action against a player with a mildly decent holding who might fire bets on multiple streets against a more passive line. So I decided to check and the villian bet $4 into a pot of $6.50.Here's where I not 100% sure of how to act. If I raise then again I'm showing a lot of strength by check raising him. But if I just call then I'm either allowing him to draw cheaply, or, if he's not on a draw and another broadway card or another diamond hit, then this also may kill the action.So how would you play a flop like this, and why?

[trystero 0]

Check raise it up. When you flop a set your objective's to get as much money in the middle as possible. Sadly this is only possible if villain's flopped something of strength (unless he's a total idiot who goes bananas with middle pair). You have to risk losing your customer in order to stack weaker hands. If he's got a hand like QQ or TT then you're not getting any of his money unless he outdraws you. What you want to do is take the stack off AK/AQ/AJ, even weaker aces if he cannot let them go. Plus you're out of position so you should be driving the betting now - otherwise you risk losing control of the hand through scare cards or his own attempts at pot control. In this particular hand I would 3bet preflop with JJ to a CO raise.

[Money022 0]

In this particular hand I would 3bet preflop with JJ to a CO raise.

As mentioned, I normally do. But being the third hand in against an unknown with no reads, I decided to be a bit more passive. Once I have a handle on a table I open up my preflop aggression.

[coremiller 0]

I really think you need to lead out here, for a few reasons.First, without any reads, your opponent could always just check behind. Not everyone always c-bets, especially if he doesn't have an ace and is worried that you do. This is particularly the case if he has some kind of gutshot draw or something and just wants to take a free card.Second, leading out only loses you money in the situation where a, your opponent has a hand not strong enough to call a bet, and b, your opponent would have bet out if you checked. The thing to notice about these situations is that you were never likely to win much anyway, so the loss in profit is small.Third, leading shows a lot less strength than check-raising. A lot of decent opponents will fold A-10 and the like here to a check-raise, but will raise your lead with the same hand (under the old "raise to find out where you are" rationale). A check-raise here usually means at least two pair, while leading out could be some kind of ace, some kind of draw, etc. A good opponent might even fold AQ or AK to a c/r. You don't want to scare those hands off.The calling line you're considering is much too passive without a read. If you know that your opponent will make large bets with middle pair but shutdown to a raise, fine, just call him down. But there aren't that many players like that, and without a read, you're playing way too passive.One of the most important concepts I've learned about no-limit cash games (I think it's in Sklansky/Miller book) is that what happens in small pots really doesn't matter very much, except insofar as meta-game considerations are concerned (this is, btw, a huge difference between no-limit and limit, in which small margins in every pot can be exceedingly important). When you have a hand as strong as middle set, you should figure out what hands your opponent can have that you can stack him with, and then alter your play to make sure you do stack him when he has those hands. So here, you should be trying to figure out how to optimize your profit against AK or AJ or the like, not TT or middle pair, because that's where your profit comes from. If that means you lose one small bet because you scared off middle pair, that's fine. It's much better than check-calling the flop, then having the next two streets checked through after the flush card hits only to find your opponent had AK and you could have taken his whole stack. In the first case you lose one smallish bet in profit, maybe something like 7-10 bb's; in the second case you lose (assuming ~100 bb stacks) something like 80 or 90 bb's in profit.

[sabes99 0]

i like c/r as well...you give him a chance to continue leading at the pot, and in this case with the ace out there he might just go ahead and get the money in for you

[Hockey Guy 4]

I agree with core about leading out on the flop and hope he raises thinking you are trying to make a move on his A-K. If he does raise you MAY just call to see the turn then continue leading out if a blank hits. You'll always win more 1n the long run by betting your good hands then hoping others bet for you.

[mtdesmoines 3]

I had a hand at $100 NL, 6 max come up today and would like to know how some of you would suggest playing it. I was in the blind with JJ and called a $3 raise by the CO, I was in the BB and elected to call. It was my 3rd hand at the table and I generally play a little more passive until I'm able to develop reads on my opponents. Normally I would raise a pair like JJ if I'm at least a few orbits into the table.The flop came out 4s Jd Ad. I have middle set with a flush and straight draws on the board.Now I've gotten out of the habit of leading into the preflop aggressor. I figured he's likely going to fire out a bet regardless of what he's holding. I also lean towards not leading out because it shows a degree of strength that may slow the action against a player with a mildly decent holding who might fire bets on multiple streets against a more passive line. So I decided to check and the villian bet $4 into a pot of $6.50.Here's where I not 100% sure of how to act. If I raise then again I'm showing a lot of strength by check raising him. But if I just call then I'm either allowing him to draw cheaply, or, if he's not on a draw and another broadway card or another diamond hit, then this also may kill the action.So how would you play a flop like this, and why?

I don't really care for the check ... don't give a free diamond, even though you have a set. But now that the villain has given us a choice, I like a nice, hearty raise here when the villain adds to the pot. I'd go ahead and check-raise to $10.

[VernonME 0]

Leading out would be the safer side, as to not giving your opponent any chance to see a free card. And there's always the appearance of you trying to buy the pot quick/easy, thus inducing a bluff/raise by villain.

[Scott3705 0]

these situations I usually weak-bet and look like I'm unsure of my hand... it gives Aface a chance to put in a subsantial raise and also puts it in the villian's mind that he may be able to take the hand away from you. I give odds to the flush and straight, I just remain aware of that.

[trystero 0]

One of the most important concepts I've learned about no-limit cash games (I think it's in Sklansky/Miller book) is that what happens in small pots really doesn't matter very much, except insofar as meta-game considerations are concerned (this is, btw, a huge difference between no-limit and limit, in which small margins in every pot can be exceedingly important). When you have a hand as strong as middle set, you should figure out what hands your opponent can have that you can stack him with, and then alter your play to make sure you do stack him when he has those hands. So here, you should be trying to figure out how to optimize your profit against AK or AJ or the like, not TT or middle pair, because that's where your profit comes from. If that means you lose one small bet because you scared off middle pair, that's fine. It's much better than check-calling the flop, then having the next two streets checked through after the flush card hits only to find your opponent had AK and you could have taken his whole stack. In the first case you lose one smallish bet in profit, maybe something like 7-10 bb's; in the second case you lose (assuming ~100 bb stacks) something like 80 or 90 bb's in profit.

What's important to take from this thread isn't so much the line - leading or check-raising - as it is the thought process. I disagree with miller on the actual line against an unknown but his attitude's the right one to have. Whenever you play a hand you have to ask yourself what your objective is. If it's a small to medium pocket pair then, most likely, it's to take your opponent's entire stack by investing a little bit of money when behind and a lot of money when ahead. In order to accomplish this you've got to play the hand aggressively when you flop a set so that you take stacks off other good hands. You shouldn't be concerned with doing anything else, especially when you're out of position and unable to respond to both your opponent's actions and the board's evolution. Too many players raise or lead here with their sets, get no action, and then decide to "slowplay" next time, not understanding that doing so only ensures that they get action from hands which draw out on them (like QQ hitting a Q or KQ hitting a T...).And, of course, you should apply this type of thinking to all of your monsters.

[Money022 0]

Thanks guys.I did raise his bet to $11 and he chose to fold. It's quite possible the hand may have not gotten past the flop had I even led out. I know an opponent has to have a pretty solid holding or decide to make a play for you to get paid off with monsters. In the future I think I'll do as some said, which is to lead out and go from there.

[krup24 0]

these situations I usually weak-bet and look like I'm unsure of my hand... it gives Aface a chance to put in a subsantial raise and also puts it in the villian's mind that he may be able to take the hand away from you. I give odds to the flush and straight, I just remain aware of that.

yes yes yes

[NoBBiR 0]

Let's be a little more sensible. If the villian is at all capable, he's not checking this flop with any hand he raised preflop at all. Especially if he has a diamond. Check/raising is the best line here by far because he will always bet unless he is a complete moron (and even morons bet when they flop good flush draws). Check raising says "Get the hell out of my pot, buddy." Not only that, but he then has to put in two bets to see the hand down any farther. If you lead for the pot (or even overbet it), he's not folding a good diamond draw (and he's def. not if he has an ace too) anyway. If you check, and he bets (which he should close to 100% of the time at 6 max), say the pot, you can now raise it up a lot and make him change his mind about drawing to a non-nut flush and you're usually getting it in with AxKd anyway. This takes a c-bet out of a garbage hand on the flop as well, whereas leading pushes him out. Also, if hes a real big tard he might put you on the Kd if he doesn't have it and blow up with AxKx or AxJx.DISCLAIMER: I USE ((((((((((((((PARENTHESES))))))))))))))))) A LOT.

[dms26 3]

On this board I'd raise him on the flop. Let him pay you off with AK, AQ or AJ and maybe even overplay a weaker ace. If he has a smaller pocket pair you're not getting much more out of him anyway. He could also have various gutshot draws or flush draws, I want to make him pay if he wants to try to hit.

[pokerinc 0]

great board for a weak lead.When I raise the button and the blind calls then bets into me, I almost always re raise him on principle, and it works most of the time. It's a weak move, it looks like you're trying to get to a diamond cheap or something, you leading this flop in no way says I hit a set of freaking jacks, your hand is the 100% perfect disguised hand right now for betting out. And like the people on this side of the argument are saying; if he folds you aren't risking much. Really just 4$ as if he doesn't have a hand worth calling here he would have fired once and folded to a checke raise or checked the turn.On the flip side, if you bet the four and he makes it 16, well that's a much better scenario.