Top pair makes tight fold on the flop.

Why call in the first place?? 8T not suited is not really a calling hand to me, and if blind defending i would reraise. Fold on the flop is standard. I'm guessing one has an OESD and the other 2 pairs or TPTK!!

Against 2 opponents + CAP on flop i would fold also.

P.S. - Don't know if i can discuss hands here as i'm not a judge and this is not my hand but i think this would be a great way for me/others to improve... hope i'm not intruding

cheers

Definitely keep judging hands.

Yeah thats a good question. Why do we ever call? We call because it makes us money and thats why I called here as well.

The reason I think it makes me money is because getting 5:1 odds I only need 1/6=16.7% equity to continue. I expect to have 20-25% equity against my opponents hand ranges, my hand has decent playability (its not like K2o for instance), and I expect to have a skill advantage over my opponents.

For these reasons I expect that the price I'm offered is a profitable deal. As we can see though just the equity I expect to have is enough.

In terms off % you're pretty much correct. However, that's just IF you can get to showdown+ no overpairs.

To continue post flop with the hand you have to hit the flop, and that has a low probability, and even if you it like you did you have a low kicker. Thing is going T8 with 2 players before me would not be a position i would like.

Just the other day i read a very interesting post in 2+2. Bottom line was that Preflop calling is not really an option, if you have a calling hand than it's good enough to raise with, if it's not good enough to raise with just fold.

They could make going to showdown very costly to you, and the kicker is not that great!! This hand has the potential to be very costly to you and doesn't seem that you could get much out of it.

That said, i loved you're lines on the flop, raising is correct IMHO and really cheap info, fold in also great as i don't see you winning in showdown often enough unless they're maniacs, caps are just too strong vs TP/weak kicker...

EDIT: Would have a totally different opinion against one vilain...

Thx for the post. I would like to discuss one point.

Bottom line was that Preflop calling is not really an option, if you have a calling hand than it's good enough to raise with, if it's not good enough to raise with just fold.

On this point I need to disagree. We can raise when we have greater than average equity. Against 2 opponents thats 1/3 = 33.3%. We often have less than 33% equity with hands that should continue by calling rather than raising.

To call we need to consider the pot size and as the pot size increases we should continue more often. If the pot size is large enough then theres no preflop hand we should fold.

Originally posted by datsmahname
On this point I need to disagree. We can raise when we have greater than average equity. Against 2 opponents thats 1/3 = 33.3%. We often have less than 33% equity with hands that should continue by calling rather than raising.

The post was from a NL player so i guess it makes more sense in NL, however i'm in the process of including it in my play (i only play Limit) as i'm not a very good post flop player and it saves me from becoming somewhat a calling station as i tend to be. Had i introduce it in my play earlier it would have saved me some $.

The thing is, my pokertraker seems to agree with the guy. Calling pre and folding on the flop to cbet in one of the worsts mistakes most players do as we more often don't hit the flop. It's just not the equity in our hand as we have to incorporate the villains fold equity against us, he's the agressor after all!!

Dawnfall any thoughts??

Preflop it's an easy call. If you'd ask some midstakes regulars or whoever they'd agree on that T8o is an easy call for 1:5, having a mediocre 1gapper with decent playability. After 3bet and cap you're certainly behind and to me it's an easy fold because SB first called and then he did cap. I don't think that this is a draw very often. Given he wanted to play a draw aggressively why not immidiately raising with 79 and 79 is the only good drawing hand he can represent. And CO has got the better hand.

There is no drawing hand he could have. Sometimes 77 but most of the times an overpair and if SB does really have 79, our T out is tainted. Our Equity is really poor and i suspect SB to have 66 or 22 or 68 a good portion of the time. At least you have to discount 1 out and just having 4 Outs by 1:8 it's a fold although you could argue with implied odds but if SB has got a monster there are rather reverse than implied odds.

Hi!

Im not saying this certainly is a call but for sure isnt an easy fold.I mean CO is on overpair most of the time so we have to! contiunue vs him and SB is spewing quite often here or can at least be behind. I dont mind folding but could also argue a call since odds are so nice.

thx First.

Dawnfall no sitting the fence!!!

I think that one problem with deciding to fold T8 on the flop based on our outs is that we already have a hand that can win at showdown sometimes.

Given that we have a possible best hand we might want to try and get to show down as cheap as we can... but I think this will generally prove to be quite difficult. Calling because we want to show down UI just seems far to expensive.

Our implied odds are also tricky since if the SB actually has the range he's representing (sets, 2 pair, ocasional overpair, 97) then a T or 8 is often no good.

Improving usually puts us ahead of just the over pairs in their hand range. I say this because the T completes 97 and we can be behind to the CO... and most of the SB's 2 pair combos will block our trips.

Given this discussion i posted a similar hand on https://forums.pokerstrategy.com/forum/thread.php?threadid=181657 . Would like to hear you opinion as well datsmahname.

Originally posted by datsmahname
we already have a hand that can win at showdown sometimes.

I have your opinion and probabilistically speaking you are correct my question is: Will you get to showdown often enough? It can get really expensive. In general i agree with you're line, maybe i play too tight pre flop, it saves me from awkward situations as this one!!

Hey Virt,

You're right to question that. We need to get to show down AND win a certain amount to justify continuing when we cannot draw profitably (or bluff). Having showdown value can improve a draw enough to justify calling... but thats only true when we can Actually Get to showdown.

Its tough to do a full analysis but I think that on the turn we'll often call 1 bet getting 11:1 only to see a raise and often a 3-bet behind us at which point we fold. If the SB doesnt 3-bet we'll be getting like 15:1 to continue and cannot fold. When we coldcall the cap we often end up putting in 2 Big bets just to see the river OR we get blown off our hand.

Its not that likely for us to see a showdown cheap if at all.

All that said, its possible that our implied odds are decent. its hard to guess if the money we can make when we improve is enough to justify calling when you aren't getting the right price to draw.

Hey Dats,

Are you going to let the cat out of the bag re: the call/capper??

As you know, I thought it was insane.

EDIT: In fact forget it, I really need to stop thinking about things this way, except for player image considerations

is this really a tight fold ?

it seems a trivial one to me with that action in such a drawless board ( and yes , i have seen those unprobable str8's ).

The questions in this thread are relevant. Preflop equity is not the single relevant factor. Position, postflop skill, and the particular opponents are, at least taken together, at least as important. Say that there are 3 more coldcallers. Then we have 11:1, and some would take that as an excuse to play 85o here because we easily have enough equity.

Other factors to be considered: What is the rake? If it is 5%, then a marginal call is turning into an easy fold. Blind stucture? [More relevant in SB of course].

Consider folding offsuit gappers preflop. I'd personally let my own stats rule here if I have some sort of history actually playing theese hands. One systematic approach is to play relatively tightly early on in the learning stages (definitly ditching 97o, but definitly playing e.g. T9s). If most hands provably do well (FOR YOU!), then throw on a bunch more hands into the range (e.g. T8s, T9o). Reevaluate. Etcetera. Eventually, this process will come to an end. If T8o is in the range then, then you are absolutly certainly a winning player.

/Johan =

Hi guys,

I think a lot of the value that I get from looking at a hand which maybe seems trivial is that sometimes trivial decisions aren't well justified. Like, we make these decisions and they seem clearly right but when we step back and try to convince ourselves as if we're our own biggest doubter...

Sometimes I learn a lot more. A lot of the time I figure out that the reasons I think are good ones are really just garbage and that there are better reasons.

In poker we only have 3 options and so on any given decision we have a high probability of being right by chance alone. So unless we have the right reasons it doesn't really matter if we made the right bet/raise, check/call, or fold. In the long run we're not going to be very reliable.

Thanks for the input . Nice post m8 .

I see your point , probably I was thinking of the hand from a different perspective as if I was 12-16 multitabling where we have to make decisions in seconds and we - by default - try to avoid very close decisions on the flop with a weak made hand in 3bet pots and lots of action when , if ahead , half of the deck is playing against us with two streets to come .

Does it make any sense ?

yep and we've got to include the pot size/our cost to show down as well.