Pocket pairs under the gun

[Revolver123]

I always threw pocket pairs away in UTG, UTG+1, MP1, MP2 but now I've been reading that some people raise with small PP in these positions..

Why? I know you need 8 to 1 to make it profitable to play these.

[LawDude]

I always threw pocket pairs away in UTG, UTG+1, MP1, MP2 but now I've been reading that some people raise with small PP in these positions..

Why? I know you need 8 to 1 to make it profitable to play these.

You only need 8 to 1 against a better pocket pair. But against unpaired cards, Villains can often miss the flop or only have draws, you therefore may very well flop the best hand even if you don't make a set.

That creates the potential to profitably play small pocket pairs aggressively.

However, when doing so, you need to keep in mind: (1) what your table image is, and how Villains will respond to your aggression, both when they are behind and when they are ahead, and (2) based on your reads of Villains, what their actions tell you about whether they have made a hand.

[bjsaust]

I used to raise all PPs from all positions, now I muck 22-55 in EP.

When we raise we're not only playing for implied odds, we also have initiative allowing us to take down some flops with a c-bet as well, but from EP we just end up with weak hands OOP most of the time.

[Muzzard]

It's goign to be failry hard to play them profitably post flop OOP in a FR game and ppl will be able to 3bet your UTG range a tonne more and u'll have to fold a large% if you include your small pairs UTG.

[kmind]

Yeah I agree with the last two at least. Keep in mind this goes for my 6-max game as well. It just sucks playing OOP when we are going to have to c/f a lot of flops.

[AFchung]

i've been throwing away 22-55 as well, but i dont think its a terrible leak (if at all) if we raise with them

at 25NL i opened my range back to 22-55 because a lot of utg raises result in folds

[LawDude]

I should make it clear, I don't play a lot of small pocket pairs out of position myself. Generally I play them only when my reads tell me that I can induce folds with c-bets when I miss the flop, and when my reads tell me that I can generally get to the flop no worse than heads-up with a raise.

I was just arguing against the claim that you need 8-1 odds to play them. As long as you aren't up against higher pocket pairs, you will generally end up ahead on a fair number of flops. The question is whether you will be able to extract sufficient value out of position post-flop to justify the pre-flop raise.

[Micro2Macro]

Fold them if your not comfortable post flop out of position because that's usually where you'll end up.

That's just my opinion, have you read Renton's guide yet? He talks about small pairs briefly and when to and not to play them.

[Fnord]

6 max or full ring?
online or live?

6 max online it's a raise from any position becaue I'll often win the blinds or get into a heads-up or three way pot with the table action.
full ring online 22-55 are an easy muck. Probably start doing whatever you're doing from EP with 66-99ish. TT+ are premium hands.

full ring live you're almost always playing, probably limping the smaller ones, but a raise is fine. Unless someone is doing something stupid like playing a large % of hands for his stack starting with a big pre-flop raise. Then you cry and fold 22-77.

[xX zorrito Xx]

this all depends on the table IMO... i've found pocket pairs to be very profitable in a nit table...

[Robb]

Interesting that you'd mention that - here's a classic FTR thread about small pp's and how to play them for set value and how to raise them preflop.

FTR Classic Rethread, Week 4

It doesn't answer everything about your question, but it's a helluva good start.

[Micro2Macro]

Bump!

The following is quoted from Renton and his reasoning for raising pairs UTG, found in the discussion following his post-flop article for full ring strategy:
(Why to raise all pairs UTG...)

It...

1. Increases your raising range. When you are raising 8% of hand from under the gun, a solid player can't put you on strength.

2. Increases your fold equity on the flop.

3. Defines hands preflop. You don't want to be in a race with a unusual str8 when you flop your set.

4. Increases fold equity on the flop, and improves your metagame on the flop (solid players will start to call your c-bets with weaker pairs, giving you more value for your top pair hands.

5. Builds a pot so you can get all in when you hit your set without forcing your opponent to put in two raises (he'll just have to put in one raise if its a raised pot preflop).

[bigspenda73]

It's goign to be failry hard to play them profitably post flop OOP in a FR game and ppl will be able to 3bet your UTG range a tonne more and u'll have to fold a large% if you include your small pairs UTG.

yea but no one 3bets with anywhere near the right frequency in FR so I wouldn't worry about being exploited.

However, I'd much rather open 78s-JTs UTG than 22-55, helps with balance.

[dranger7070]

I play the microstakes on stars right now and its pretty profitable to open all PP's in any position. Reasoning is, you're only being 3-bet by AA/KK and MAYBE AK. And oftentimes if you hit the set you are gonna get paid.

Just be sure, if you DO hit a set, play it fast. Don't check and try to "trap." Thats just asinine and allows worse hands to catch up.

If you are calling a raise with PP's make sure you are getting around 15:1 implied odds. (Standard rule says 8:1, but 15:1 allows you to get sucked out on and still be profitable. It's in Jyms Grinder School video.)

[kb coolman]

this all depends on the table IMO... i've found pocket pairs to be very profitable in a nit table...

This.

at 25NL i opened my range back to 22-55 because a lot of utg raises result in folds

...and this.

I've found they're also very profitable at a loose table for set mining. I will raise any PP UTG 4xBB, and usually get 2-3 callers at a loose table. The loss of position is almost negated by having so many pre-flop stations.

[Micro2Macro]

this all depends on the table IMO... i've found pocket pairs to be very profitable in a nit table...

This.

at 25NL i opened my range back to 22-55 because a lot of utg raises result in folds

...and this.

I've found they're also very profitable at a loose table for set mining. I will raise any PP UTG 4xBB, and usually get 2-3 callers at a loose table. The loss of position is almost negated by having so many pre-flop stations.

This is a really good point. At first it may seem like 'oh no 4 people have called my raise I can't c-bet and I've lost initiative', but we're now getting 4-1 on our money with a 7.5-1 chance to flop a set in a multiway pot and the stack-to-pot ratio's will be better for you when you make your hand to get all your money in by raising as opposed to limping. Plus, limp/calling with small pairs just adds to the obviousness of your line when you do flop a set, so it will be much easier to get someone else to put the money in when you raise them.

As far as 3-betting goes when are we ever getting 3-bet in microstakes full ring without seeing QQ+,AK at showdown? (unless we're up against a 3-betting monkey, 3-betting is either done wayyy too often or never enough from what I've seen. No one 3-bets a 'proper' or deceptive amount. It's either too tight or too loose, leaving the move open to being exploited). You will actually have implied odds to call and set mine with full stacks since most of the time players who are really tight as these levels can't let go of their big pairs after they re-raise with them before a flop. And the amount of MIN re-raising that goes on with these big hands is so ridiculous, I'm calling with my pair after I raise all day.

[Robb]

As far as 3-betting goes when are we ever getting 3-bet in microstakes full ring without seeing QQ+,AK at showdown? (unless we're up against a 3-betting monkey, 3-betting is either done wayyy too often or never enough from what I've seen. No one 3-bets a 'proper' or deceptive amount. It's either too tight or too loose, leaving the move open to being exploited). You will actually have implied odds to call and set mine with full stacks since most of the time players who are really tight as these levels can't let go of their big pairs after they re-raise with them before a flop. And the amount of MIN re-raising that goes on with these big hands is so ridiculous, I'm calling with my pair after I raise all day.

I still fold pp's without proper set odds when I get 3bet. Like you say, the min-3bet is a beautiful thing, signaling an "I'll stack off" hand but still giving me 20 to 1. I prefer 20 to 1 set odds in general, though I will relax that to about 15 to 1 in 3bet pots with a solid read. The regs in my game know how to 3bet, though, and they're also nitty. You have adjust the set odds you're hunting for based on the regs at your level.

Flat calling 3bets w/ 77 and barely 10 to 1 implied odds is a recipe for losing money long term, imo. I've seen it a lot from opponents - not often were they winning opponents. But I STILL have the urge to call those 3bets.

[HeAVyB101]

PP's are where I make 75% of my money at the tables. Since it's 8-1 odds to hit trips, I think it's worth it to play any pp in ep because...

1. Figure at least 25-30% of the time it will fold around and you collect the blinds. Even in microstakes people still understand that a raise in early position is probably a good hand.

2. Your hand is disguised. Unlike straights and flushes, your opponent will have no idea you hit trips.

3. If you get called preflop, you have the advantage of betting first so your continuation bet will pick up the pot usually 50% of the time from what i've seen at low limits.

4. Playing your pp's strong to start will just give you a better chance of getting all the money in the middle when you do hit strong.

Just remember though that if you face a lot of resistance, gtfo. You are trying to hit trips or overpairs, and even having 66 as an overpair doesn't hold water most of the time.

[LawDude]

At the live games I play at, it is very rare that I will raise a small pocket pair because so many of the players do not respect raises or c-bets. In that case, you are back to your 8-1 against flopping a set. I may limp in from late position or fold from early position; in rare cases where I am in late position and it folds to me, I may raise to steal the blinds and because these hands actually play much better shorthanded if you don't flop a set.

Further, when I do raise and get caught c-betting a small pocket pair (i.e., if my c-bet is called and the hand goes to showdown), I tend to stop doing it for a little while, because some players, at least, tend to remember that you raised pre-flop and then bet the flop with just a pair of 3's and that reduces your fold equity for awhile.

[Micro2Macro]

As far as 3-betting goes when are we ever getting 3-bet in microstakes full ring without seeing QQ+,AK at showdown? (unless we're up against a 3-betting monkey, 3-betting is either done wayyy too often or never enough from what I've seen. No one 3-bets a 'proper' or deceptive amount. It's either too tight or too loose, leaving the move open to being exploited). You will actually have implied odds to call and set mine with full stacks since most of the time players who are really tight as these levels can't let go of their big pairs after they re-raise with them before a flop. And the amount of MIN re-raising that goes on with these big hands is so ridiculous, I'm calling with my pair after I raise all day.

I still fold pp's without proper set odds when I get 3bet. Like you say, the min-3bet is a beautiful thing, signaling an "I'll stack off" hand but still giving me 20 to 1. I prefer 20 to 1 set odds in general, though I will relax that to about 15 to 1 in 3bet pots with a solid read. The regs in my game know how to 3bet, though, and they're also nitty. You have adjust the set odds you're hunting for based on the regs at your level.

Flat calling 3bets w/ 77 and barely 10 to 1 implied odds is a recipe for losing money long term, imo. I've seen it a lot from opponents - not often were they winning opponents. But I STILL have the urge to call those 3bets.

Yeah I kinda meant if you know they're only 3-betting a very tight range and have a high WTSD stat indicating the played probably can't fold in these spots. It works if you're up against a really, really bad nit who can't let go of a big pair. Agaisnt better players (or really loose 3-bettors) your definately right about it being -EV. I think against the right player you can get 10 to 1 or so implied, but this would have to be after getting some reads. Implied odds are always a judgement call, but unfortunately it is way to easy to overestimate them sometimes.