As I replied to SanHouser's thread about 15/25/35, I started reflecting (unscientifically, mind you) about my experience with pocket pairs and set mining. Bart preaches rules about the required implied odds, and how pocket pairs, and all implied odds-type hands should be compared against the PFR, not field players. However, in my game, usually pots are multi-way, even if raised, and it seems like I'm going to more often realize my equity from a flopped set against a field player, rather than the PFR.
A simple example like what Bart preaches would be:
$2/$5, $500 effective, UTG+1 raises to $15 with KK, folds to hero in CO who calls with 55, everyone else folds. Heads up, pot is $32. Flop T52hh, villain c-bets to $25, hero raises to $75, villain re-raises to $225, hero shoves, villain snaps and gets felted. Hero gets implied odds from villain who thinks KK is the nutz on a T-high board.
However, a more typical scenario in my games would be:
$2/$5, $500 effective, UTG+1 raises to $15 with whatever (broadway cards, premium hands, medium pocket pairs, a suited A), two callers, hero in CO calls with 55, button and BB call, pot is 6 ways, $87. Flop comes T52hh, PFR checks, callers check, I bet $55, button folds, BB calls with flush draw (donkey), PFR folds, caller in the middle calls with a T (another donkey). Pot is $197. Turn is offsuit 3. Field player checks, I bet $125, BB calls, field player calls. Pot is $572. River is an offsuit K, field player checks, hero bets $225, BB mucks, field better hems and haws and either calls or folds.
In my games, sets don't usually pay me off in heads-up pots vs. the PFR. They usually pay me off in multi-way pots with other donkeys that are chasing their draws or hit top pair.
Is this how it is in your games? Am I just playing in super donkey games? Are most pots in your world at the $5 blind or lower levels heads up vs. a PFR? They aren't in my games - I have many gambol gambol types in my games, loosey-goosey, pay-off wizards.
Please comment, agree, disagree, etc. Cheers!