Poker Pub Poker Blog: poker strategy

2007/02/14

2007/02/11

Making Laydowns...

2006/11/26

My Way of Selecting a Poker Table...

Christmas gifts n poker chips only at 5stardeal.
Play free poker at CheckRayz - free entry, cash prizes and money-added buyin poker tournaments. Sign up now!
New Poker Room necessary? List of Poker Rooms who welcome all customers as of 10/19/2006 10am EDT
Blogger? Join the Blogger Poker Tour today! From the Blogosphere to the Aussie Millions... BPT - only at Poker.com!. BPT Event 6 (12/2) hosted by Flopilicious!

Table selection is an important aspect of one's poker game. I'd give you a magic number I look for when selecting an online table on which to play, but I strongly suspect the majority of my readers do not have Pokertracker - free to try, by the way... So, instead of spitting and spraying numbers, I'll talk in plain English.

There are very specific things I look for when selecting a NL Hold'em table to sit down and make money from. The texture of the table, my seat relative to my "targets" all depend on how I will play once I sit down. Today, I plan to fill you in on the thought process that works for me. Perhaps it may help you as well.

For starters, let's pretend that we know we want to play a NL Texas Hold'em cash game at a given poker site. Additionally, let's assume we are adequately bankrolled to play at said level. Furthermore, we're assuming that we can look at X number of tables ourselves, without pokertracker numbers guiding us, and that the players during this observation period will not get up, switch tables or sign off. Finally, you are actively using a labeling system within the poker software to tag and label players accordingly. My system has a few labels, to keep it simple... we may get into that later.

I know this is not reflecting reality, so to speak, but again, this is meant merely to give you a view on the concepts I use to find my table.

The first thing I do is go down my list to find anyone who I have labeled "that guy." To me, "that guy" is one of those players who are all but begging to give me their money. They're the people who can somehow manage to play AA, KK, AK to negative numbers and don't know why. Their game is extremely transparant. They bluff far too often in the wrong situations. Said another way, these are the extreme donkeys. If I see them logged on and at a table, if I can get a seat with this player, I do so. Thus, my system is thrown out the door.

When I am at the table with "that guy," I try to often isolate this player either preflop or post flop. This indicates I'm pretty much playing against this player and this player alone. Initially, this may prove effective and other players will get out of your way... Until they figure out what you're doing. Most likely by then, "that guy" has handed you most of his money and has run scared.

Anyway, back on track...

I have X number of poker tables open for observation. I am first looking for the absolute softest tables preflop possible. In fact, if no one ever raised, that's the ideal situation for me. I like limpers, and lots of them. This table would be my first choice. Ideally, I also like these tables to not have a high showdown rate - meaning, I prefer that most hands terminate via fold to bets prior to the river.

At this preferred type of table, I am inclined to limp out of position with hands I'd normally play only on the button IF I believe I can both see a cheap flop and outplay post flop. From position, I'm inclined to raise with hands like J-9 suited, or 10-7 not suited, maybe even 5-4 suited, with the intention of stealing, isolating, and/or outplaying post flop. I'm being mindful here of my table image though when I do stuff of this nature and also looking for "where" the call is coming from.

My main goal is to outplay and manipulate pot size here. Big pot, big hand and in position. Small pot, oop, decent hand... I'm playing the mistakes game. I'm willing to make a small mistake in a small pot in order to create and exploit big mistakes in bigger pots. These tables typically feature players who see too many flops. They also tend to go to far with their hands. The best way to exploit is to also see many flops and "allow" them to feel safe in going to far.

The above is the ideal table. Often we do not get our ideal situation. Sure, it would be great for me to get a table of soft players with "that guy" sitting to my immediate right just dying to get on the Christmas Card Mailing List as my single largest donor (money flows from the right to the left, typically), but that's not always going to happen...

What is going to happen though is that you're going to sometimes get one of the "tough guys" who typically multi-table and are not the least bit imaginative, sometimes not because they don't have the mind, but instead because they waste resources concentrating on several tables instead of focusing on one. It should be noted, I'm not knocking multi-tablin... I am suggesting though that many players do it and they have no business even playing on one table, truth be told. They lack understanding of the concept and theories of NL Hold'em, and over time, it shows.

The "tough guy" is going to maintain his 26% preflop raise because he read somewhere he should do that (and thinks this means all the time in all conditions). He will almost religiously make a pot size continuation bet on the flop no matter the cards. When encountering a player of this nature on an ideal poker table (see above), I tend to adjust my buy-in upward. Usually, I start off with about 1/2 the max allowed (NL $100, $50 is normally sufficient for me). I will buy in for the max when the "tough guy" is present.

Here, when he has entered the pot AND I have position on him, I will tend to mix it up, sometimes calling cleanly, intending to raise the flop bet, other times re-raising preflop and either checking or betting the flop... depending. When out of position, I will tend to go into re-raise or fold mode. If I am going to play a bigger pot against this "tough guy," I'm needing to take control of the hand. This requires me to show strength by reraising. He has a wide hand range he'd likely be raising with... remember, he believes it's correct to raise 25% of the time. On a table of this nature, when he's called, he's often an underdog AND KNOWS IT. So, if he knows this, my mere calling has somewhat tipped my hand. Why not make him pay for that knowledge? Reraise it, my friends... take charge. Be sure to make his decision difficult, while keeping your options open (i.e. - do not re-raise for half your stack, which makes folding to a re-reraise impossible... if you go that far, why not push it all-in preflop and eliminate position, simplifying your decision)?

Against the "tough guy" my goal is to isolate and control. Re-raise, position, and simplification of decisions for myself are my primary goals. Against this guy, I'm either going to educate him or he's going to run away to another table, because some idiot (me) re-raised him with AQs when he had 44 and position. He's not going to understand how I could play against him out of position, because he's seen me show down hands such as jack ten under the gun as a winner, so he just "knows" I have no starting hand selection and no concept of position... I must have got lucky. I had to have "known" that he either had a pocket pair or AKs, and either way I was "dominated" but yet I played back at him anyway... (someone get the cat litter out, as he's spit all over the felt and it's soaked).

I avoid completely the players I label as "tricky." This is not a large percentage of the players. These are the players who are really able to mix it up. They always keep you guessing and shift gears based on table conditions, opposition, and texture of the board. These players are surely the top players in the given limit, and while I want to get better and play against good players, I don't wish to do it on the nine-to-five. Save that for the CheckRayz tourneys... When I am trying to grow the bankroll, I don't need "good play" I need donkeys. These tricky players are rarely going to give it up. They understand pot size manipulation and often come out on the winning end with the big pots.

As for the "call stations," I make sure I note their bet button is broke. I tend to do a lot of checking against these guys with medium strength hands, post flop. I tend to value bet more, and I rarely, if ever bluff (don't bluff if you believe it will most often be called).

I am sure I lost track of where I am. Ah yes, my point is/was... have some sort of method of table selection that works for you. Borrow mine in whole, tweak it slightly... do whatever. But, if you're serious about your game, you won't just simply accept a seat at a table just because it's there. Do your homework, know "who" is at the table, know "where" your money is coming from, and "how" you're going to get it. Exchange small mistakes for big mistakes, exploit your oppositions weaknesses to maximize your return.

Mike

Related Posts

Getting what you want from the poker tables

Pfft, you called me with what?

Poker and Investing

Preflop in the Microlimits

2006/11/22

[+/-]

"but i was 75% preflop, how could you call?"

High quality, cheap home poker tourney supplies only at 5 Star Deal.
Play free poker at CheckRayz - free entry, cash prizes and money-added buyin poker tournaments. Sign up now!
New Poker Room necessary? List of Poker Rooms who welcome all customers as of 10/19/2006 10am EDT
Blogger? Join the Blogger Poker Tour today! From the Blogosphere to the Aussie Millions... BPT - only at Poker.com!. BPT Event 6 (12/2) hosted by Flopilicious!

As poker players, we hear that a lot, don't we? Especially online, where we have plenty of time and resources to crunch the numbers.

Usually these words are uttered in the context of complaining and whining. I am here to tell you... and the whiners, what you already really know... deep down. Just like having a static, one style approach to poker, this line of thinking is flawed.

My buddy Gerg (Greg backwards, pronounced as it sits) and I were talking poker last night. Of which, the whining part came up. It occured to me that I hear entirely too much "didn't he know that I had (insert hand such as pocket 4's, 7s, Kings, AKs here)? And then they follow up with "how could he call, I was 70%?"

For starters, maybe the "caller" thinks you're a donkey... and hopefully if he thinks that, it's wrongfully so. But maybe, just maybe he thinks you have a weak hand or are bluffing. As poker players, we do sometimes like people to think we're bluffing when we are not, right? Don't we also sometimes want players to call with weak hands - or at least hands weaker than ours?

Also, what's this 70% stuff you're talking about preflop? If you're playing against a good player, he's probably got you on a hand range preflop... If you're not playing against a good player, he has no clue you even have a hand. He's not thinking past his own foxhole.

Additionally, pondering how they could have called THERE is flawed. Put yourself in their head. Understanding who they are and what motivates them will help you to better understand how to defeat them. You can't think that you'd never call there with ace king, because to them, Ace king is a made hand! Know this, understand this, embrace and accept this, because it is EXACTLY how it is... People play their style, not yours. Be flexable, think like they do... figure out what mistakes they make, and why they make them. Commit to making adjustments to your game to best exploit their errors, which can also include PURPOSELY MAKING MISTAKES TO GET THEM TO SCREW UP.

The point is... and I know I've made this same point before... First off, know how other players view you RIGHT NOW. Second, have an idea what level thinker you're up against. Do they even know you have a hand or do they think you think that they think they have exactly AK?

Third, don't fall into the "but i was 70% preflop" trap. If it's me, I'm AT LEAST a cointoss on your range, and probably a favorite. If it's a bad player, they don't even know what you mean by incorrectly stating you're 70%.

And finally, don't assume that your opposition thinks just like you... Get into their heads, don't place your head into their situation. Exploit their mistakes...

Related Posts

preflop strategy in No Limit Hold'em

Poker Play and Investing

All day long, catchin cards

2006/11/16

[+/-]

Poker Playing Style and Investment Strategy

high quality inexpensive poker chips only at 5 Star Deal.
Get a free iPod of your choice.
Play free poker at CheckRayz - free entry, cash prizes and money-added buyin poker tournaments. Sign up now!
Need a new Poker Room? List of Poker Rooms who welcome all customers as of 10/19/2006 10am EDT
Blogger? Join the Blogger Poker Tour today! From the Blogosphere to the Aussie Millions... BPT - only at Poker.com!. This week's event hosted by The House of Poker Blues!

In my "previous life" I used to laugh at many of my peers. Generally speaking, they believed that "buy and hold" was an actual investment strategy. Worse yet, they believed "buy and hold" was the correct all around investment strategy. They'd say stuff such as "well, over time, markets ALWAYS go up..." And throw other things in there starting with "we all know that..." and using supporting charts that start off in the middle of a year, but imply that it's a year over year chart. And these brokers tell their customers to pay attention not to the market today, but instead to where it will be 20 years from now. Or, "Joe, what do you mean you want to sell, I thought you were in this for the long haul... WE need to hang in there... Buy and hold, remember?"

To blindly invest and believe, in my opinion, is a mistake. Buy and hold was a great posture to have when the market itself was in a tremendous upswing, as it was in the majority of the 90's. In the 90's buy and hold was the correct POSTURE, because most all was going up. It was however never a philosophy, just a posture.

In a structurally fair market, buy and hold investers will tend to get crushed. Structurally fair markets tend to feature stocks going up and down equally, both in magnitude and quantity. The correct posture, generally speaking, during these fair markets are properly timing the market. Picking your spot, moving in when the time's right and leaving the party on a high note, before it dies down.

I believe playing hold'em, the same is to be said. I believe that there's a time to play tight, aggressive poker. I believe there's a time to play a more passive, deceptive game. I do not believe that I am a tight aggressive player. I don't believe I am a weak-tighter, nor a loose-passive player for that matter. If I were to put myself into a catigory of what kind of ring game hold'em player I am, I'd say I was an observant, thinking poker player.

I'd say I can and do adjust my game to table conditions. Generally speaking, I know when I can limp with shit OOP and not have my ass handed to me. I try to know when top pair is good, and when yours is not. I can play hard, I can play soft... I can be aggressive and effective, I can be passive and cause you to fail. The point is, I am a thinking player. A cereberal assassin on the tables, if you will. And sure, I may sound full of myself by saying that... My point is, I strive to understand the game of hold'em. I've come to understand it in such a way to know that it's illogical to think that playing "a certain style" is also a correct overall philosophy. I believe that effective playing styles vary by opponent, by hand, and by table conditions. I believe I am wise enough to recognize that and to adjust my play.

I also believe that my few readers are insightful enough to understand and embrace the same.

Mike

2006/11/15

[+/-]

Micro Limit Preflop Strategy

Recently there's been discussion about effectively playing the NL$100 game. Anyone who remotely comes close to understanding Hold'em knows full well that there's no one cookie cutter strategy to playing hold'em. In fact, there's not any one "correct" method to play or playing style that applies "all of the time." Hold'em is situational. To approach hands or games with a mindset of "I'm a tight aggressive player and I'm going to run over this table no matter what" will get you stacked by someone who understands the game.

Poker is a game of mistakes. Whoever wins this battle of mistakes wins the game. I do not mean this in the sense that if you make ten mistakes in a session and I make five, I win, because that may not be the case. In order for me to win, I have to be willing to make mistakes while the pots are small, and cause you to make mistakes when the pot is big. I do this, I win...

When selecting a table, at the micro limits, I try to find the softest table possible. What I mean by softest is that I am wanting to find a table that doesn't raise preflop too often, but has a lot of players entering the pot voluntarily. Why do I want this? For starters, I want to be the strongest person at the table, but I do not wish for them to know that. Additionally, I enjoy exploiting the "mistake" of players calling or limping too often.

Now, I could theoretically put in a steal raise when there's too many limpers, and from time to time I do... But typically, I like to also limp, when the pot is small. So, quite often, I go into a hand wrong preflop... Remember, the name of the game is make mistakes in small pots, exploit other's mistakes in big pots. Players who tend to limp often at this level tend to play poorly after the flop.

Once the flop occurs, I decide if I wish to play for a small pot or build it into a large pot. I make this decision based on what I have, and what I have my opposition on, relative to the board.

For the reasons stated above, I am wanting to see a lot of flops cheaply. I'm equally likely to be limping with 7-6 suited as I am 10-10 under the gun. But, only at soft tables as described above. I understand that my money comes from exploiting mistakes post-flop, and that's typically what I plan to do.I've done quite well at it, for that matter.

Unfortunately, I'm not always able to find that table that is soft from top to bottom. There's always going to be someone coming in there who thinks they're a pro raising away... raise raise raise raise raise... Because they believe that to not raise is not manly. When these players get on the table, I tend to adjust to them, because after all, I adapt to my opposition, choosing the correct tools to get the job done. I don't play 7-6s utg because that hand doesn't like the preflop raise.

I do, however, weakly slip into the pot with monsters or monster busters when this aggressive player is still left to act and raise behind me. When he does raise in behind me, my decision is to either reraise and take position away, or to fold... It should be noted, I usually either mow these players down or they get all flustered saying crazy stuff like "hmmm, 9-9 right? I guess my eights are no good here." This is nothing more than the overly aggressive player trying to save face. His ego gets insulted when he's challenged from a substantial over the top raise. He knows that usually when he calls, he's behind. He in turn becomes the weak player, generally speaking.

Now keep in mind here, I play against overly aggressive players one way, and passive players another way... How do you catigorize me? That is the question, now isn't it...?

More on this later, as this is a topic that I'm surely not done with.

Mike

Related Posts

2006/10/22

[+/-]

Ed Miller's poker blog...

2006/09/08

[+/-]

Hands under the microscope

Filed under: Poker Strategy

All content written in the Poker Pub is covered under copyright. Said another way, unless you're at http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com reading this, then “THIS GUY IS RIPPING OFF CONTENT ORIGINALLY PRODUCED AT http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com AND MAY BE PLAGARIZING the work at the Poker Pub. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs2.5 License and may not be reproduced or utilized in a manner against the terms set forth in the creative commons license.

Hand #1

You’re heads up on the button holding Ace-six of clubs vs. an early position raiser. For the sake of assumption, the player has shown down quality hands played in position. He raises 4x’s the big blind and was second to act preflop. T

he pot contains his four initial bets preflop, your four bets, and the folded big and small blind bets. You were rather certain the big blind would have made a call if he had something playable and were originally calculating his call into your equation when you decided to call.

For simplicity’s sake, the pot contains 10 bets (we’ll just say 10). You each have stacks of 1000 remaining. The flop is rainbowed and comes Ace diamonds -six hearts -three clubs. The opponent checks to you, what now?

My thoughts are that while you “may” be able afford to give a free card here, the opponent checked to me on the flop, yet he liked his hand enough to raise preflop out of position. I’m thinking that normally, he’d continue his bet if the flop didn’t help him somewhat. More than likely, he’s got a high ace, maybe even suited. He could also be holding kings-nines, however, he’d be more apt to bet the flop out of continuation to say the least. On the other hand, I’ve been helped by this flop significantly. Top two pair at the moment and a backdoor flush draw. I’m convinced this flop helped me and also got him a piece in such a manner that he was comfortable checking to me. If I check I have two streets to get his entire stack into the center (this is now my goal). If I bet, I get to see how much he thinks this flop helped him. It should be noted, if he folds to my bet, it’s likely this flop would have produced zero for me, thus it makes little sense to give a free card. Additionally, there’s no over cards to come, so checking now with the purpose of bluffing or semi-bluffing later is not going to apply here. If he has ace-king, ace-queen, etc. he’s going to pay you off. Heads up, two pair vs. early position when this board is checked to you, I make a clear argument for betting here and will gladly await a check raise coming back at me..

Clayshooter, long time SPT vet and first quarter CheckRayz Leaderboard Poker Tour champion offers the following analysis:

1/2 pot sized bet. If he missed he won't catch up enough to pay you off big, so just take 10BB here. If he has A + anything he might catch a higher second pair so I bet to say I also hit the A plus have a kicker. Any kind of trap giving free cards hoping he'll catch a K-Q or whatever may lead to him catching higher two pair or making a set out of his pocket pair. Bet it and take it here, even if ahead you're not so far in front as to not be caught.

As you can see, Clay and I both agree betting is appropriate in this situation... I didn't list a bet size, but would be sympathetic to the 1/2 pot sized bet. Once again, if he folds, he was folding no matter what here.

Hand #2

You have Pocket sixes in the middle position, three handed on a flop of Ace clubs -King hearts - six clubs. You have one person acting before you in the big blind and one person in the cutoff to act behind you. The big blind is a trappy player who checks to you. Pot contains 12 bets, once again everyone has 1000 chips. Once again, you’ve been helped by this flop. While the BB may be trappy, he most likely didn’t overcall with pocket aces or kings. The cutoff didn’t simply call either with aces or kings. If either of them did, you’re destined to get stacked. There’s no over cards to the board for a bluff/semi-bluff here either, which means that if they‘re not scared of this flop now, they‘re not going to become scared short of queen-jack of hearts coming on the respective turn and river. I’d be inclined to continue the bet on this flop and hope both of them want to stick around and play back at you. Once again, my goal is to get each of them to donate 1000 chips to the center of the pot. I don’t wish to appear too excited, nor do I want to play too cautiously. Betting, once again, is the clear answer.

Clay's response:

check this all the way to the river, looking to reraise if the turn doesn't bring another club - unless the king. I likely get a bet out of one of them as they are likely playing at least one A or K here, maybe even both. A flop bet scares out all flush draws and K's while a check might lead to both betting the turn. I'm waaay in front and want someone else to take lead on this hand. I won't give a free river card only if the turn is a club, save the king.

Here Clay's opinion and my opinion differ. Remember, I'm against a trappy, tough player. When against a player who plays like this, they tend to interpret bets just as they intend them to mean, for the most part. If I check this flop, I look strong to him, because he'd check a strong flop. I'd prefer to play as if I am strong, in hopes of appearing weak. Odds are, he caught a piece of this flop, and there are no bluff over-cards to come. Though, there is the flush draw, which you still have to somewhat protect against. I bet somewhere between 1/4 and 3/4 the pot here, trying to pass it off as a disguised continuation bet. I personally believe a free card, checking down is -EV.

We'll cover more of situation three and four, on Monday. Additionally, we'll move to the turn and river of these hands in the near future.

Feel free to submit feedback on these hands for discussion.

Mike

2006/09/07

[+/-]

Check it or bet it...

Filed under: Poker Tournaments

All content written in the Poker Pub is covered under copyright. Said another way, unless you're at http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com reading this, then “THIS GUY IS RIPPING OFF CONTENT ORIGINALLY PRODUCED AT http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com AND MAY BE PLAGARIZING the work at the Poker Pub. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs2.5 License and may not be reproduced or utilized in a manner against the terms set forth in the creative commons license.

Well, I had the intention of doing a regular strategy discussion, however last week I got lost. As a refresher, I'll repost the first two in the series and hopefully tommorrow I'll be ready to continue... Until then, here's the repost:

http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com/2006/08/holdem-strategy-check-or-bet.html

Finally, I've "got around to it." The strategy intro post is here... This time we’re going to go into post-flop play. I could preface this series with discussion on preflop play, but I am making the assumption that those reading this already have a somewhat sound foundation of preflop hand selection and a concept of position (meaning 2-2 is more profitable when playing from the button than when playing from UTG and should usually be folded preflop UTG).

Much confusion falls upon the felt, once the dealer executes the flop. You see the board, you reflect on how this flop helped and/or hurt you. You might correctly go a step further and ponder how the flop may have helped or hurt your opposition. And maybe you even think on how your opposition thinks the flop affected you. You might even glance down at your chip stack and examine the stacks of the players remaining in the hand. Once the flop is delivered, the planning must begin.

Playing after the flop is very cerebral in nature. You need to not only know what you’re doing, but also why you’re doing it. Everything you do should be very deliberate. Every move, check or bet, call or raise, fold or play… should have a very dedicated and known (to you) purpose. Thinking about these things, knowing what to do and why, are the difference between being a craftsman of the trade, or a drone; the captain or the crew. We want to be the master of our tables, the writer of the script, we do not want to be servants to the other player or players. Nor do we wish to be merely a character cast in a story of donation and donkeyness. We want to manipulate those around us, causing them to be characters in our screenplay on the felt. Understanding when to check and when to bet, in addition to how much we should bet is the first step of this mastery process.

Throughout this series, we are going to cover the following:

Planning your hand flop to finish;

Basic Reasons for Checking and Basic Reasons for Betting;

How to Decide Whether to Check or Bet;

Sizing one’s bets, laying and accepting pot odds;

Once again, this series is designed for the beginner and is not at all meant to be the lone source of information. Additionally, I make no claims to be thorough in my writings in this or any other strategy series. Finally, as my disclaimer, while this strategy may work well for me, I make no claims that it “will” work well for everyone else. The stuff I discuss is of solid foundation and I grasp the concepts. Not everyone, however, will be able to. This is OK. Additionally, there is more than one way to skin a cat. I am completely aware of this. Agree or disagree, I look forward to working through this topic with my readers.

http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com/2006/08/deciding-whether-to-check-or-bet-on.html

You’ve met an early position raiser’s preflop raise with a call on the button. The flop comes Ace-six-three and you’re holding ace-six suited. What do you do when he checks it to you on the flop? Or how about three handed when you’ve raised middle position with pocket sixes and the flop comes Ace-King-Six? Holding nines under the gun four handed, flop delivers 10-3-5 all suited, what then? Pocket twos in the cutoff three handed and an unraised pot with a rainbowed flop all containing low cards. So much to decide and so little time to do so. With some theory and a little thought, one can better decide what to do. In the next few minutes, we’ll look over each of the above situations and go over how one should best play the hands. Keep in mind, this is all theoretical and there are always more than one way to do things. My intention is to more so get everyone thinking about some of the things that perhaps they may not normally think about when playing NL Texas Hold’em. Please note, these three situations will be visited later on in the series. For this reason, we won’t be playing the hypothetical hand all the way through right this moment, but instead we will do so throughout the series.

Situation one: You’re heads up on the button holding Ace-six of clubs vs. an early position raiser. For the sake of assumption, the player has shown down quality hands played in position. He raises 4x’s the big blind and was second to act preflop. The pot contains his four initial bets preflop, your four bets, and the folded big and small blind bets. You were rather certain the big blind would have made a call if he had something playable and were originally calculating his call into your equation when you decided to call.

For simplicity’s sake, the pot contains 10 bets (we’ll just say 10). You each have stacks of 1000 remaining. The flop is rainbowed and comes Ace diamonds -six hearts -three clubs. The opponent checks to you, what now?

My thoughts are that while you “may” be able afford to give a free card here, the opponent checked to me on the flop, yet he liked his hand enough to raise preflop out of position. I’m thinking that normally, he’d continue his bet if the flop didn’t help him somewhat. More than likely, he’s got a high ace, maybe even suited. He could also be holding kings-nines, however, he’d be more apt to bet the flop out of continuation to say the least. On the other hand, I’ve been helped by this flop significantly. Top two pair at the moment and a backdoor flush draw. I’m convinced this flop helped me and also got him a piece in such a manner that he was comfortable checking to me. If I check I have two streets to get his entire stack into the center (this is now my goal). If I bet, I get to see how much he thinks this flop helped him. It should be noted, if he folds to my bet, it’s likely this flop would have produced zero for me, thus it makes little sense to give a free card. Additionally, there’s no over cards to come, so checking now with the purpose of bluffing or semi-bluffing later is not going to apply here. If he has ace-king, ace-queen, etc. he’s going to pay you off. Heads up, two pair vs. early position when this board is checked to you, I make a clear argument for betting here and will gladly await a check raise coming back at me.

Situation two: You have Pocket sixes in the middle position, three handed on a flop of Ace clubs -King hearts - six clubs. You have one person acting before you in the big blind and one person in the cutoff to act behind you. The big blind is a trappy player who checks to you. Pot contains 12 bets, once again everyone has 1000 chips. Once again, you’ve been helped by this flop. While the BB may be trappy, he most likely didn’t overcall with pocket aces or kings. The cutoff didn’t simply call either with aces or kings. If either of them did, you’re destined to get stacked. There’s no over cards to the board for a bluff/semi-bluff here either, which means that if they‘re not scared of this flop now, they‘re not going to become scared short of queen-jack of hearts coming on the respective turn and river. I’d be inclined to continue the bet on this flop and hope both of them want to stick around and play back at you. Once again, my goal is to get each of them to donate 1000 chips to the center of the pot. I don’t wish to appear too excited, nor do I want to play too cautiously. Betting, once again, is the clear answer.

Situation three: Pocket nines (9c-9h) UTG raised 3x preflop, four handed, which includes the big blind, the small blind, and the person directly to your left. Flop comes 10c -3c -5c. What now? Once again, the suited board is either going to look scary or it’s not, period. If you check here, it’s going to give the player to your left an opportunity to bluff at the pot containing 12 bets (all have 1000 stacks). This time, you’re not wanting to build a pot, necessarily, instead you’re looking to weed out the players who do not have an over pair, the players who do not have a club or clubs in their hands, and the players who do not have a set. This board would be a great candidate for a check had it not been such a coordinated flop. There would be a bluff opportunity on the turn or river with an over card falling, plus the possibility of you hitting a set on the turn, but with the board being suited, I’d be likely to bet out and I’d be content getting either two handed or terminating the hand right here.

Situation four: You’ve limped into the pot preflop with pocket twos from the cutoff position. You’re four handed with 2 middle position limpers and the big blind. The flop comes 5-9-3 rainbowed. Everyone checks to you. The pot contains four bets presently, everyone sitting at 1000 chips. This flop “shouldn’t” scare anyone. You don’t have a big hand, so you do not really wish to build a big pot yet. If you bet into this flop, anyone calling or raising likely has you beat. I’d be inclined to give a free card here and check behind. If the hand is checked to me on the turn, I’d be more inclined to bet out strongly. Additionally, I’d be almost willing to represent an over card or set on the turn if the situation presents itself. Here checking behind is clearly the better move.

Next we’ll dig deeper into the “why’s” of the above. Feel free to comment, discuss, add to, and/or question anything in the above situations. Once again, there’s not any single correct answer for these problems. In many ways, the game of Hold’em is simple and easy to understand. The theory behind it‘s play, however, can be an entirely different creature, as it’s a game that can be learned in less than an hour, and mastered over the course of more than a lifetime.

2006/08/25

[+/-]

more heads up poker talk

2006/08/24

[+/-]

Deciding Whether to Check or Bet on the Flop...

Filed under: Poker Strategy, Hold'em Strategy

All content written in the Poker Pub is covered under copyright. Said another way, unless you're at http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com reading this, then “THIS GUY IS RIPPING OFF CONTENT ORIGINALLY PRODUCED AT http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com AND MAY BE PLAGARIZING the work at the Poker Pub. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs2.5 License and may not be reproduced or utilized in a manner against the terms set forth in the creative commons license.

This is the first part of the "Post Flop Play" series. The introduction to this "Post Flop Play" series may be found here.

You’ve met an early position raiser’s preflop raise with a call on the button. The flop comes Ace-six-three and you’re holding ace-six suited. What do you do when he checks it to you on the flop? Or how about three handed when you’ve raised middle position with pocket sixes and the flop comes Ace-King-Six? Holding nines under the gun four handed, flop delivers 10-3-5 all suited, what then? Pocket twos in the cutoff three handed and an unraised pot with a rainbowed flop all containing low cards. So much to decide and so little time to do so. With some theory and a little thought, one can better decide what to do. In the next few minutes, we’ll look over each of the above situations and go over how one should best play the hands. Keep in mind, this is all theoretical and there are always more than one way to do things. My intention is to more so get everyone thinking about some of the things that perhaps they may not normally think about when playing NL Texas Hold’em. Please note, these three situations will be visited later on in the series. For this reason, we won’t be playing the hypothetical hand all the way through right this moment, but instead we will do so throughout the series.

Situation one: You’re heads up on the button holding Ace-six of clubs vs. an early position raiser. For the sake of assumption, the player has shown down quality hands played in position. He raises 4x’s the big blind and was second to act preflop. The pot contains his four initial bets preflop, your four bets, and the folded big and small blind bets. You were rather certain the big blind would have made a call if he had something playable and were originally calculating his call into your equation when you decided to call.

For simplicity’s sake, the pot contains 10 bets (we’ll just say 10). You each have stacks of 1000 remaining. The flop is rainbowed and comes Ace diamonds -six hearts -three clubs. The opponent checks to you, what now?

My thoughts are that while you “may” be able afford to give a free card here, the opponent checked to me on the flop, yet he liked his hand enough to raise preflop out of position. I’m thinking that normally, he’d continue his bet if the flop didn’t help him somewhat. More than likely, he’s got a high ace, maybe even suited. He could also be holding kings-nines, however, he’d be more apt to bet the flop out of continuation to say the least. On the other hand, I’ve been helped by this flop significantly. Top two pair at the moment and a backdoor flush draw. I’m convinced this flop helped me and also got him a piece in such a manner that he was comfortable checking to me. If I check I have two streets to get his entire stack into the center (this is now my goal). If I bet, I get to see how much he thinks this flop helped him. It should be noted, if he folds to my bet, it’s likely this flop would have produced zero for me, thus it makes little sense to give a free card. Additionally, there’s no over cards to come, so checking now with the purpose of bluffing or semi-bluffing later is not going to apply here. If he has ace-king, ace-queen, etc. he’s going to pay you off. Heads up, two pair vs. early position when this board is checked to you, I make a clear argument for betting here and will gladly await a check raise coming back at me.

Situation two: You have Pocket sixes in the middle position, three handed on a flop of Ace clubs -King hearts - six clubs. You have one person acting before you in the big blind and one person in the cutoff to act behind you. The big blind is a trappy player who checks to you. Pot contains 12 bets, once again everyone has 1000 chips. Once again, you’ve been helped by this flop. While the BB may be trappy, he most likely didn’t overcall with pocket aces or kings. The cutoff didn’t simply call either with aces or kings. If either of them did, you’re destined to get stacked. There’s no over cards to the board for a bluff/semi-bluff here either, which means that if they‘re not scared of this flop now, they‘re not going to become scared short of queen-jack of hearts coming on the respective turn and river. I’d be inclined to continue the bet on this flop and hope both of them want to stick around and play back at you. Once again, my goal is to get each of them to donate 1000 chips to the center of the pot. I don’t wish to appear too excited, nor do I want to play too cautiously. Betting, once again, is the clear answer.

Situation three: Pocket nines (9c-9h) UTG raised 3x preflop, four handed, which includes the big blind, the small blind, and the person directly to your left. Flop comes 10c -3c -5c. What now? Once again, the suited board is either going to look scary or it’s not, period. If you check here, it’s going to give the player to your left an opportunity to bluff at the pot containing 12 bets (all have 1000 stacks). This time, you’re not wanting to build a pot, necessarily, instead you’re looking to weed out the players who do not have an over pair, the players who do not have a club or clubs in their hands, and the players who do not have a set. This board would be a great candidate for a check had it not been such a coordinated flop. There would be a bluff opportunity on the turn or river with an over card falling, plus the possibility of you hitting a set on the turn, but with the board being suited, I’d be likely to bet out and I’d be content getting either two handed or terminating the hand right here.

Situation four: You’ve limped into the pot preflop with pocket twos from the cutoff position. You’re four handed with 2 middle position limpers and the big blind. The flop comes 5-9-3 rainbowed. Everyone checks to you. The pot contains four bets presently, everyone sitting at 1000 chips. This flop “shouldn’t” scare anyone. You don’t have a big hand, so you do not really wish to build a big pot yet. If you bet into this flop, anyone calling or raising likely has you beat. I’d be inclined to give a free card here and check behind. If the hand is checked to me on the turn, I’d be more inclined to bet out strongly. Additionally, I’d be almost willing to represent an over card or set on the turn if the situation presents itself. Here checking behind is clearly the better move.

Next we’ll dig deeper into the “why’s” of the above. Feel free to comment, discuss, add to, and/or question anything in the above situations. Once again, there’s not any single correct answer for these problems. In many ways, the game of Hold’em is simple and easy to understand. The theory behind it‘s play, however, can be an entirely different creature, as it’s a game that can be learned in less than an hour, and mastered over the course of more than a lifetime.

2006/08/23

[+/-]

Freeroll tips for John and other heads up ramblings

Filed under: Poker Freerolls, Poker Strategy

All content written in the Poker Pub is covered under copyright. Said another way, unless you're at http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com reading this, then “THIS GUY IS RIPPING OFF CONTENT ORIGINALLY PRODUCED AT http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com AND MAY BE PLAGARIZING the work at the Poker Pub. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs2.5 License and may not be reproduced or utilized in a manner against the terms set forth in the creative commons license.

So by popular demand, we'll talk freeroll strategy. For starters, I'm often asked "Mike, how do you play a freeroll?" I don't necessarily interpret that to mean they're asking how I personally play freerolls, but instead how they should play freerolls. My advice though is almost always geared towards me, as I tell them, "along side six other cash tables and/or tournaments." The freeroll is a suppliment to my game. If I'm at a poker room that is holding one, I'll play it, but I typically don't log into a poker room just for the roll.

When playing in a freeroll, especially early in a tourney, I don't think beyond level zero. There's no sense in doing so, considering it's highly likely that as we read this the big blind just called a 10x raise on some site in a freeroll while holding Jack two suited. So, my next answer is that I take a good hand and just push with it, hoping to improve and/or be better than the obvious board. With any luck, I put in a raise and someone comes over top of me, we end up allin so that there's no thinking at all. I'd prefer to not even play post flop until hour three of a freeroll.

Finally, if you're going to bust out of a freeroll tourney, do it with a premium hand on the first hand of the tourney so that all your friends and readers can give you a hard time :)

So there you have it, my freeroll advice... I'm more focused on heads up play.

Actually, I went 5-1 yesterday playing heads up. I was asked about the min raise in heads up play and why I use it. I need to point out now, write this down, I'm not using the min raise to announce a hand. I'm not using it because I think I have the best hand. I'm using it to annoy and condition my opposition.

What do I mean by this? Well, when I am on the button (important to note this), I min raise with any two cards. To my opposition, this makes it look like I really don't know how to play a I'm making a cheap steal attempt. Sometimes, they fold because I have position, or they have hands such as 2-5o. I am wanting them to "show me" what a real raise looks like when I am not on the button. If I pick up a quality hand, such as AA for example, and they "real raise" me, I throw in that annoying min raise. Once again, I make it look like a steal on the button. Most of the players in the lower limit Heads up matches don't realize the difference, as a min raise is a min raise, so they push allin. NH GG me!

So really, what I am doing is getting these people irritated, putting resistance on them while I am getting them to push at me. When I get a hand, I simply step aside and let the momentum of their aggression do most all the work. It's as simple as that.

Tonight on the calendar, CheckRayz-Kiwi $5+.50 $100 added tourney. See you all tonight!

Mike

2006/08/22

[+/-]

Heads up poker

Filed under: Poker Tournaments, Poker Tournament Strategy

All content written in the Poker Pub is covered under copyright. Said another way, unless you're at http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com reading this, then “THIS GUY IS RIPPING OFF CONTENT ORIGINALLY PRODUCED AT http://imjusthere4thebeer.blogspot.com AND MAY BE PLAGARIZING the work at the Poker Pub. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs2.5 License and may not be reproduced or utilized in a manner against the terms set forth in the creative commons license.

So the plan of the day is to discuss my heads up play, as I've been playing a lot of heads up sit n gos over the past few days. If I were a gambling man, I would bet, however, that my readers are dying to hear how it is I donked out of the CheckRayz-Kiwi Satellite Freeroll 1st. So, to boost my ratings, I'll talk about what I wish to talk about, and then "sammich" the juicy stuff somewhere in the middle.

Yesterday, playing heads up hold'em sit n gos, I went 16-5. I was playing either $5 or $10 sit n go's. Only twice did I have to adjust my overall strategy, which when I had to adjust I was 1-1. That doesn't include the "all-in maniac." It was actually funny, he'd push allin, I'd fold. I'd min raise the blinds, he'd push allin, I'd fold. This went on ten times in a row. Then he limped from the SB. I checked, being content with seeing a cheap flop with 6-3o. Flop comes 5-4-2 (my Grandfather's lottery number). Of course, he pushes allin, I call quickly and he's down to around T100 chips. He had pocket nines and thought he'd slowplay me. Had that flop not hit me hard, I'd have most likely folded.

So, my overall strategy... irritate people with the min raise. I auto-min raise on the SB no matter what my hand looks like. Additionally, from the BB, if they limp, I min-raise more often than not. Sometimes, I do so when they raise, depending on my hand and how convincing it is. This either causes peeps to incorrectly fold to me some of the time or it puts them on tilt, but never gives them a read on me because it's the norm - I'm just wanting to play at the next blind levels.

So, I was second to act in the Kiwi tourney, and had AKo. I raised 4x to Frank, who is a relatively tight player. He calls, suggesting he has a hand. Flop hits me, but also nails him, setting his fours. He checks, I act like a smartass and push allin, figuring his check suggested weakness. He calls, and I'm beat b4 the cards even get turned over. NH, GG - back to heads up sit n go's I go.

As for the two who made me change my strategy, one player automatically reraised 3x my raise when I min raised. So, when I had a hand, I min raise, he came over top, I went over top of him (minimally), he moved allin I called, and he was playing catchup, end of story...

The other player actually played back at me. It was nearly a real heads up match. Blinds actually made it to 100/200, when these other players were not making it past 25-50, but most were losing at the 10-20 level (level two). Against the guy who played, he got allin with AQ vs my AA and the flop hit him a bit harder than it hit me. Great matchup though.

Tonight is Noble Poker Tuesday... Hope to see everyone there. $4+.40, $75 added to the prize pool in this rebuy-add/on CheckRayz private poker tourney. Password is on the CheckRayz tourney schedule page, which you must be logged in to retreive.

Mike

2006/08/16

[+/-]

Hold'em Strategy - Check or bet - an introduction?

2006/06/22

[+/-]

Instant replay for Judith

Here are some hands of note from last night’s CheckRayz Poker tournament at Noble Poker. As a side note, I need to mention that I am undefeated from a prize pool standpoint (winning either top prize - satellite seats, or first place) when on the phone with someone I’ve not spoken to in ages. Specifically, someone very special to me tracked me down after twelve years. We were conversing for the duration of the tournament. It stood to reason, with that track record, I’d be in the money.

Hand number 1

Blinds 10/20

Bob limps UTG, Judith raises 8x blinds to 160, I call cleanly, blinds fold, as does Bob. Judith should, at this point, be thinking pocket pair and/or ace king. I’m thinking mid to high pocket pair and/or ace king for Judith.

The flop comes 4-4-6. I check the flop, Judith bets 400 into the roughly 400 chip pot. This leaves her very little money to bet the turn and river, and I know it. She’d have been better off betting either half the pot, or pushing all-in here. I help “correct” things by raising all-in, as I don’t have her on quad fours, A4, or A6. She “could” have 4’s though, just as she could have set her sixes. I have most of the logical hand range beat, so easy play for me. She calls, flipping over her pocket eights, to my pocket kings. My hand holds up.

Very Next Hand...

With 185 chips remaining, blinds still 10/20, Judith is dealt ace king UTG. She pushes all-in, which is a move I like given the chip stack and the fact it’s a reload tourney. She’s called by 88, fails to improve and reloads.

Later in the tournament...

Judith put in her infamous “min raise” with AK offsuit in the SB, allowing Bob in the big blind sufficient odds to call with ace eight off. The hand is checked down, and Bob takes it down with the pair of eights. A larger raise, to include an all in bet would have been best here, as a steal at these levels (blinds 100/200) would have worked out fine.
Judith’s last hurrah comes with pushing all in with pocket fives for $200 above the BB. Easy call all around. Dan takes it down from the small blind with his king four off.

No Judith, I’m not picking on you, just throwing the replay up there for conversation later in the day. And by the way, by all means, keep the hands and the questions and the debates coming!

Talk to you soon!

Mike

2006/06/21

[+/-]

Who was slow playing whom?

I have two poker stories from last night. One of which is an actual poker story, the other is an “it’s not about poker, but really, it is all about poker” story.

I played in a weekly event at one of the local taverns last night. For reasons unrelated to this post and story, I will not be playing there for quite a long time due to the piss-pour way the event is run. Nuff said there. That’s not to say that the play was not interesting. One hand in particular was a “double slow play” of sorts.

I am sitting on the button, action folds to me and I see queens. Blinds are T500/1000 at this time. The small blind has my roughly 8500 chips covered, and the big blind has 2500 on top of his posted big blind. I limp, hoping for a raise from the BB, that doesn‘t come. Flop comes J-10-3. Small blind checks, big blind pushes all-in. I think for a while, going through the motions of counting my outs, hoping that the older gentleman would reraise me when I weakly called, as he was an aggressive player. He calls cleanly. Turn gives me my set of queens. He checks, I bet slightly, as I want to drag him into the pot. He comes over top of me pushing all-in. I’m smelling a semi-bluff, as I found it possible, but unlikely he was holding a straight, specifically ace king, he could be holding 9-8, maybe K-10, but more than likely he is playing either a pair or two pair, though he could be “betting the ace.” Either way, I am calling, and have chance to redraw on the river IF I am behind.

He proudly flips over AK suited from the small blind. And such a brilliant slow play it was. I too flip over my slow play attempt, showing QQ. He laughs and tells me I am drawing dead. I remind him the queen of hearts has not been seen yet, and I have three outs each with jacks, tens and threes, so I am not dead, nor as bad off as he may believe, but I am in fact behind significantly (77%-22%, underdog to be exact). My three hits on the river. I was dead but not buried. We laugh about slow playing each other and found it rather amusing.

That was amusing to me, but not nearly as amusing as the events that unfolded later in the evening. I head to the “local” watering hole (read: stumbling distance from my house). I was not ready to call it an evening, so I walk literally a block to said establishment. Its there I run into “bartender” who is doing what his Poker Pub nickname suggests.

“Bartender” points me to a gentleman at the other end of the bar, who he says will make a great addition to our weekly game. He suggests we go over there and he gives me an introduction. So, I go over and say hello. We “talk shop” for a little bit, regarding this weekly tournament when this rather intoxicated older gentleman “seems” to interrupt. I say, “Seemed” because things were not exactly how they appeared to be.

This older guy was immediately “familiar” to me. The minute he opened his mouth, I knew who he “was.” I did not know his name, though I did not really care to know it either. But I do recall the name I “gave” him once upon a time when last our paths crossed.

Official Poker Pub Flashback:

“I see what he's doing. He comes here thinking he can buy it. I don't think he realizes that the reason IIIIIIII play limit is so that I CAN'T be bluffed out of pots." He re-raises, we end up capped seven deep. Flop (A-5-7) cap, turn cap (2), river (K comes) cap. My AQ loses out to K2 --- shit you not. Despite my showing the AQ down, with top pair mind ya, he tells the entire table, "I told ya this bum was trying to steal. He's not gonna steal shit from me." - “Waldorf” tells the entire table when proudly showing down his King two, which he runner runnered against my “bluffing” hand of ace queen.

I now also recall the man seated on the other side of the dealer from him, which was directly across from me (during the poker pub flashback). I was introduced by “bartender” to this person initially. As I said, things were not how they seemed.

“Waldorf” comes up to me, and “interrupts,” calling me “shit talker” (apparently in reference to my invite I extended to his friend to what I believe will be the biggest and best tournament in my town). He continues, asking me if I want to “gamble.” I tell Waldorf I have no interest in gambling. He throws two dollar bills on the table and tells me he will bet me $200 that the serial numbers on his right hand beat the ones on his left hand. I politely decline. He makes some racist remarks to me, attempting to challenge my ego. No dice. The person I am talking to suggests to him that he mind his own business and “go back to where he came from.” The guy is trying to act as if he is on my side.

Twenty ego-insulting attempts later, Waldorf challenges me, telling me that he is sure that he’s gambled more money in the last year than I have in my entire lifetime. I tell him that I am sure he has, and asks him if he saved his receipts from his losses for his accountant. He makes some more attempts at insulting my ego and me (still I do not think he remembers me from the casino), and tries to get me to bet with him. Of course, I carry little if any cash on me, so even if I wanted to gamble, I would not be able to.

Waldorf goes on to inform me of how a man is defined by how much cash he carries. The other person starts in asking me how much I have in the bank. I’m still not giving a straight answer, and doing the little pamper Waldorf’s ego trick while at the same time slapping him in the back of the head with the same commentary. He goes totally nuts when he tells me the conversation is over once I said that I carry no cash. It is obvious that he is a gambler and I am not. I inform him that I could never “out gamble” a man of his status and that even an idiot with a stated bankroll similar to his could very easily become fortunate over an apparently broke, “non gambler” such as myself. Then I shut my mouth, because according to him, the conversation was over when I stated I was “cash broke.”

He went absolutely nuts. I knew he would though. He needed for everyone in that bar to know he was “a gambler.” He had the uncontrollable urge to show ME he was. I did not feel I needed to show him anything. I was and perhaps still am slow playing the hell out of him though.
Turns out, he is one of the bigger homebuilders in my town. He built my parent’s home, as a matter of fact. He is a “whale” from a bankroll standpoint. Combined with his need to show people “who he is “ it stands to reason he probably did lose more money last year gambling than I’ve played for in my lifetime. That was a bet however; that I was not confident he would be able to prove one way or the other anyways. Besides, it did not really matter to me anyways how much he has won or lost for his career.

What does matter is that this person may make it down to our weekly game. Eventually, he and I will end up going to the casino at the same time, because he will not be able to resist. And what will matter at that time is how much money he loses to me then. He will not have any of his buddies helping him on that table when the time comes. He has a far deeper bankroll than I do, and money means less to him than it does to me. The difference is though, my ego is not the least bit engaged. I do not need to prove anything to anyone. He does…

Mike

Poker Stories
Thoughts on Poker

2006/06/20

[+/-]

Found my “target audience”…

Well, Judith obviously saw the “Ode to Judith” post, where I discussed the min raise. Her paraphrased responses are as follows:

“OK teach - This was among the first things I read. You do make a very strong case as usual - and I really do understand and agree for 95% of the time. However (just so you remember I love to discuss/debate as much as you do) how about the following ideas: (I know you will kill them with some big bang but here it goes anyway)

1)- I want to increase the pot a bit at a minimum cost to me as I see potential in my cards - in other words - I risk 40 call it lost leader - pot will increase 5 - 6 times that if I get my cards I got extra chips from more people - if not - I did not lose anything that really matters.

2)- I hope to obtain some level of "respect" from other players that I can build on.

3)- I think I have a decent hand but I am too low on chips - to risk preflop 3-4 x the blinds - it takes too much out of my stack .... (this last one I probably can argue your point for you lol)

CHEERS

PS - my eyes are improving in leaps and bounce my spelling is not”

I should note, I ran spell check before posting, so spelling is not an issue J

“Oh yes and one more comment/question would you should you raise hard preflop with say AK - as you put it it only can beat a bluff - then why risk so many chips on it? This is a very honest question - I am not cheeky or something - but what is the best thing to do? limp? or put out the bet and if flop misses you... retreat? or pretend? Here is an other Q I meant to ask you for some time now - when I see (in a all in situation) say a 44 against a AK or a 77 against an AK if I remember correctly the 77 has higher odds then the 44 - why? Or am I just having vision issues? LOLCheers teach”

So Judith, let us break down the above scenarios and put this min raise theory of ours into the grinder.

In response to number one, you want to increase the pot at minimal cost. I am assuming that you are putting in this “min-raise” being the first person to open the pot. Typically speaking, while you may “build a pot,” you will not be successful in knocking players out of the hand. Typically, they will treat this as a limp, thus they will limp with the hands they would normally limp in with and raise with the hands they would normally raise. So, if the soul purpose of this min-raise is to begin to build a pot, it would be “acceptable.” My guess though is that if you do this often, will be reraised by “better” players with a larger hand raise, who is doing nothing more than making a positional play on you.

Additionally, it should be noted that many a player “complains” about how the best preflop hand in limit poker “rarely” holds up (I do not necessarily agree with this). A big reason why hands don’t necessarily hold in limit is because raises can only be put in by increasing from the previous bet (10/20 - first raise is 20...). This generally offers the blinds sufficient odds to play if they have somewhat of a hand, and there are callers between raiser and blind.

No limit, on the other hand, allows us the luxury of pricing in chasers or buying them out pretty much when we feel like it. I cannot think of many hands where I would purposely want five callers AND be raising from the early position. One might argue that hands such as 9-8 suited would not mind five callers. Do we really play that hand when we are in the early position?
If we are in the late position putting in a min raise, we are not fully utilizing our positional advantage. Anyone who has entered the pot will call, and we risk a re-raise if someone has put in a limp, with hopes of a raise behind. More often than not, one’s ego gets stuck and runs into a monster. Additionally, how can we get a read on our opposition’s hand ranges with a min raise. If they will limp with any “playable” hand (from position), we really do not know what our opponents might have. For these reasons, I am still not a fan of the min raise.

As for number two, “you plan to obtain some level of respect from other players you can build on.” I hate to be the one to say this, but the Beer Guy has a real hard time respecting a min raise. In fact, I would be inclined to come over top of that min raise more often than not, providing I had position and was in a position to at the very least hold up (+EV) heads up. So honestly, I am not sure how one would plan to build respect with a min raise.

And for the third point you made, Judith, I think I have a decent hand but I am too low on chips - to risk preflop 3-4 x the blinds - it takes too much out of my stack .... (this last one I probably can argue your point for you lol). Go back and read my endgame series. If your chip stack is too low, you are in all-in or fold mode. You have no post flop betting power at this time, so you might as well maximize the impact of your bet. Push all-in or fold!

The AK ordeal

As for your commentary on the AK ordeal, I believe you took my quote entirely out of context. If I recall correctly, the board missed you completely, while you were holding AK. A face card did flop (queen, I believe). Your opposition pushed all-in, you called. The only hand you could beat at the time of the call was a bluff. Any pocket pair beat you, any pair beat you, and any set beats you. You cannot “correctly” make the call on that particular bet unless you are deep stacked and your opponent is short stacked, generally speaking.

77 is 54-45 heads up vs. AK. 44 is 53-46. Quickly, the reason that 7’s are ever so slightly higher than fours heads up vs. AK is because fours stand a slightly better chance of being counterfeited than sevens do. There are five values that help neither sevens nor AK but are higher than sevens (q, j, 10, 9, 8). There are eight values above fours that help neither the fours nor the ace king. It is more probable, mathematically speaking that the fours get counterfeited (board such as 10-10-5-5-2). The board missed the fours and the ace king, and the sevens and the ace king. 4’s vs. AK = AK win (by virtue of the ace kicker - 10-10-5-5-A, vs. 10-10-5-5-4). With 7s vs. AK, the sevens hold up (10-10-7-7-2 vs. 10-10-5-5-A). See why?

Keep asking questions and I will do my best to explain, discuss and debate!

Mike

Poker Strategy
Small Stakes Holdem

2006/06/16

[+/-]

Why min raises are -EV… or “Ode to Judith”…

Judith, this one’s for you while you are recovering from your eye surgery. May the first page you read when you are “back” be this article.

I am not very sure why anyone (Judith) would make a “min-raise” when playing Hold’em in a tournament or a ring game. We raise pre-flop for the following primary reasons:

1. For value - We are confident we have the best hand and wish to charge our opponents for the right to draw on us.

2. For isolation - Our hands stand up best against few opponents, we want to narrow the field down to 1-2 players.

3. To steal the blinds - We wish to take the pot uncontested without seeing a flop.

4. As a semi-bluff - We are not sure we have the best hand, but we have a decent hand, so let’s raise and see if we can knock players who have already entered out (in addition to the blinds).

5. As a total bluff and/or to deceive - Usually later position, with suited connectors or “the hammer”

6. To manipulate pot size - To try to build a bigger pot that will psychologically commit players to the pot upon the flop.

I propose that a standard raise of between 3-5 times the blinds can “usually” accomplish raising for value, isolation, stealing, bluffing or semi-bluffing, and pot building. Specifically, a “standard raise” usually charges players “too much” for the right to draw, as they are not getting the proper pot odds to “play garbage.” At the same time, it is also typically allowing for only those hands who will make suitable “second best” hands will be playing (Axs, pocket pairs, etc). For this reason, you get a read on the probable hand range you are up against.

As a hypothetical, you are under the gun and are holding AK suited. Making it simple, blinds are 10-20, everyone has a stack of 1000. You put in a raise of 80 (or 4 times the big blinds). You are raising because you feel you have the best hand pre-flop and wish to charge others for the right to draw on you. Now the pot is 110, it is costing 80 for anyone to play (70 for the small blind, and 60 for the big blind) - assuming there’s not a re-raise. What hands can “correctly” call with those pot odds? Can the guy on the button with king-three suited who would “really love to see a flop with this” call you correctly? How about the small blind with Queen Jack “not suited?” Are they making a mistake by calling with those hands? Do we want to force our opposition to make mistakes, even if they are unaware of the fact that they are making said mistake?

Now, let us replay this scenario, and we will just put in the min raise. Blinds 10-20, everyone stacking 1000. UTG, you are dealt AK suited. You place the minimum raise out there of 40. Now the pot contains 70, it costs 40 to stay, which is close to 2:1. Suddenly, QJ “not suited” from the small blind is playable for 30 (even though the field is getting 2:1, keep in mind, the blinds get in cheaper because they’re already partially involved), and the big blind is now justified in calling with his pocket twos, as he’s getting nearly 3:1. In fact, if he had the hammer, and the small blind called, he would be correct in calling. Furthermore, you have not made the blinds define their hands. They could be playing with any two cards. Later positions and button “could” be as well.

This means that on the flop, we are going to have to bet out to figure out what we should have began to determine pre-flop. The min-raise neither defines our hand, nor helps us to determine a hand range our opposition is playing. This of course, means that we have no idea where we are at in the hand. Supposing we have four to five callers in the min raise scenario, and a pot of 200, how much do you think it will cost us to find out where we are at under the gun? It might be relatively simple if the flop comes AK2 to know where we are at, but what about a color coordinated flop away from us, where we have top pair (A-J-10 all of clubs).

If we bet ½ the pot, we are risking an additional 100 chips MINIMUM (a bit more than 10% of our stack) to find out if we have the best hand. With four players, we can pretty much count on anyone who has the K or Q of clubs to stay. We can count on any Kings or queens to most likely stay, especially if there are already players calling your ½ pot bet. Furthermore, how about any ace now, specifically AJ or A10? My guess is that for ½ the pot, even the big blind with pocket twos also stays, especially if he has a club. We are no longer truly ahead on this board, and we did not charge proper odds for anyone to have the right to catch up to us. Additionally, we have no “cheap” way of determining whether we are truly ahead in the hand. A pot size bet or an over bet would tell us, but then the problem becomes that five handed, we are most likely beat, so there is really little to nothing that is +EV for us to do. Check is -EV and tells us nothing, any size bet tells us nothing, an over bet is called only when we are beat. See the dilemma here?

If we throw out a standard raise, we get one or two opponents. We have a pot size of roughly 200. Same flop comes A-J-10 all of clubs). This time, we have 1-2 players to bet into instead of four or five. We throw out a continuation bet of half the pot. We remain confident that this flop is scary to the one or two opposing players and we will only be called by hands that contain the king of clubs, the queen of clubs. Odds are Ax will fold, unless x is clubbed, at which time, they will call. A set will likely re-raise here, fearing the fourth club. With this continuation bet, we know better where we stand and stand a better chance (due to bigger raise, fewer opponents, and same pot size).

More on this in the next few days. I am confident that I didn’t go through everything as thoroughly as I would have liked. I am of course blaming this on the quitting smoking gig, which is making me more scatter brained than normal. My point though, Judith, min raise is not good. Hope you do well with your surgery today.

Mike

Poker Strategy
Small Stakes Holdem

About Me

Sponsors

Labels

On Tap at the Poker Pub

2007/02/14

2007/02/11

2006/11/26

2006/11/22

2006/11/16

2006/11/15

2006/10/22

2006/09/08

2006/09/07

2006/08/25

2006/08/24

2006/08/23

2006/08/22

2006/08/16

2006/06/22

2006/06/21

2006/06/20

2006/06/16

PPA Widget (90 x 468)

Blog Archive