pokerfied.com
Promoting poker discussions.

Main
Date: 07 Dec 2008 13:02:14
From: Stephen Jacobs
Subject: Limit O8: vulnerable full house on the flop?
I haven't read much about this, and the money difference between playing it
well vs badly can be big.

We're talking about a "Cappelletti's rule" game; around half the players in
for the flop.

What are the considerations in how to play stuff like A-little-little-8 on
an AA8 flop (you're pretty sure you have the only full house now, but
someone else probably has an A and bigger side cards) or A337 on a JJ3 flop
(Any action means probably at least one over-set against you)?

I tend to bet as hard as I can on the flop in hopes of winning it there, and
then get real meek--basically, except for ignoring straight possibilities (a
sane opponent won't be looking at a straight draw on a paired board), I play
vulnerable fulls about the same as sets. This probably exaggerates the risk
in the AA8 flop case, but betting strongly there can get extremely expensive
against stubborn-but-lucky opposition. On the other hand, in cases like the
JJ3 flop, I'll entertain the idea that the best play might be to try to keep
the pot small and hope things work out (and look for a reason to fold, too).






 
Date: 07 Dec 2008 12:06:06
From: johnny_t
Subject: Re: Limit O8: vulnerable full house on the flop?
I don't think that there is that much wrong on boards like this.

This is a limit game. There are hands where you want to get the most
chips in, because you are a big favorite.

There are hands where you want to fold because you are not.

There are hands like this, where you are a moderate favorite. There is
nothing really wrong with a bet/call (there is moderate fold equity
involved in letting your opponent making a mistake and fold.

Just because it is easy for your opponent to beat you, doesn't mean that
you shouldn't be putting money in when you are ahead. Yes he can beat
you, no its not likely it's likely.

There are many other cases where you are ahead on the flop, but you are
likely to lose rather than win. In those cases check/call would be
better until the turn.

But just bet.

It's a limit game, its about doing the right thing over a course of
sessions. Not whether you win or lose a hand your ahead in.


 
Date: 07 Dec 2008 12:04:22
From: Tad Perry
Subject: Re: Limit O8: vulnerable full house on the flop?
"Stephen Jacobs" <jacosa@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:zqqdnQ0mrZA1kqHUnZ2dnUVZ_sjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
> I haven't read much about this, and the money difference between playing
it
> well vs badly can be big.
>
> We're talking about a "Cappelletti's rule" game; around half the players
in
> for the flop.
>
> What are the considerations in how to play stuff like A-little-little-8 on
> an AA8 flop (you're pretty sure you have the only full house now, but
> someone else probably has an A and bigger side cards) or A337 on a JJ3
flop
> (Any action means probably at least one over-set against you)?
>
> I tend to bet as hard as I can on the flop in hopes of winning it there,
and
> then get real meek--basically, except for ignoring straight possibilities
(a
> sane opponent won't be looking at a straight draw on a paired board), I
play
> vulnerable fulls about the same as sets. This probably exaggerates the
risk
> in the AA8 flop case, but betting strongly there can get extremely
expensive
> against stubborn-but-lucky opposition. On the other hand, in cases like
the
> JJ3 flop, I'll entertain the idea that the best play might be to try to
keep
> the pot small and hope things work out (and look for a reason to fold,
too).

I think you would want to bet, but be very careful if anything bigger than
the eight shows AND someone else wakes up and starts giving action. In fact,
consider folding if a bigger card comes and someone raises you, but be sure
to factor in your opponent's playing style. If opponents are just calling on
the flop, keep betting the turn. IF A BIGGER CARD COMES ON THE RIVER, check
in case you can induce a bluff or avoid a raise against players capable of a
bluff, and call (don't raise) if it's bet into you. Bet the river instead of
checking, if you feel you're against a typical check-and-call hand that's
likely to lose (You're against a weak player who won't bet a worse hand if
you check and often calls with a wide range of hands and therefore doesn't
necessarily have much).

I'm not a big fan of formulaic answers, but for the most part these should
be your considerations and general line of play.

tvp




 
Date: 07 Dec 2008 14:59:27
From: A Man Beaten by Jacks
Subject: Re: Limit O8: vulnerable full house on the flop?
On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 13:02:14 -0500, "Stephen Jacobs"
<jacosa@comcast.net > wrote:

[Note that I suck at LO8 as this post will probably reveal.]

>I haven't read much about this, and the money difference between playing it
>well vs badly can be big.

>We're talking about a "Cappelletti's rule" game; around half the players in
>for the flop.

>What are the considerations in how to play stuff like A-little-little-8 on
>an AA8 flop (you're pretty sure you have the only full house now, but
>someone else probably has an A and bigger side cards)

What's my little little? If it's 23 I'm going apeshit. Actually, I'm
probably going apeshit regardless, but I'm more likely to slow down on
the turn if another baby hits if I don't have 23. The only thing that
really concerns me are big cards. Faced with another baby on the turn
I keep up the pressure.

>or A337 on a JJ3 flop
>(Any action means probably at least one over-set against you)?

Also, it means someone else is winning the low end of the pot, and you
might not even take the high.

>I tend to bet as hard as I can on the flop in hopes of winning it there, and

I doubt you're going to win it there. I take this one easier based on
what people are doing. I might even fold to extreme action (like 3
bets before me or I check and the other clowns cap). I probably do
any raising on the flop and shut down after that, though.

>then get real meek--basically, except for ignoring straight possibilities (a
>sane opponent won't be looking at a straight draw on a paired board), I play
>vulnerable fulls about the same as sets. This probably exaggerates the risk
>in the AA8 flop case, but betting strongly there can get extremely expensive
>against stubborn-but-lucky opposition. On the other hand, in cases like the
>JJ3 flop, I'll entertain the idea that the best play might be to try to keep
>the pot small and hope things work out (and look for a reason to fold, too).

I think in the Axx8 case, you're stronger than the other.


 
Date: 07 Dec 2008 14:43:47
From: Vince
Subject: Re: Limit O8: vulnerable full house on the flop?

"Stephen Jacobs" <jacosa@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:zqqdnQ0mrZA1kqHUnZ2dnUVZ_sjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
>I haven't read much about this, and the money difference between playing it
>well vs badly can be big.
>
> We're talking about a "Cappelletti's rule" game; around half the players
> in for the flop.
>
> What are the considerations in how to play stuff like A-little-little-8 on
> an AA8 flop (you're pretty sure you have the only full house now, but
> someone else probably has an A and bigger side cards) or A337 on a JJ3
> flop (Any action means probably at least one over-set against you)?
>
> I tend to bet as hard as I can on the flop in hopes of winning it there,
> and then get real meek--basically, except for ignoring straight
> possibilities (a sane opponent won't be looking at a straight draw on a
> paired board), I play vulnerable fulls about the same as sets. This
> probably exaggerates the risk in the AA8 flop case, but betting strongly
> there can get extremely expensive against stubborn-but-lucky opposition.
> On the other hand, in cases like the JJ3 flop, I'll entertain the idea
> that the best play might be to try to keep the pot small and hope things
> work out (and look for a reason to fold, too).
> I think you are 100% correct.

Vince