Am I Right? SSH Concept

[Haupt_234]

I'm about halfway through SSH (yea yea, my copy came late), but I just want to make sure I am following a certain section correctly.

Example:

Table is loose or unknown.

Hero is dealt [2 /images/graemlins/club.gif, 2 /images/graemlins/heart.gif] and is UTG+2.

UTG folds, UTG+1 raises, Hero calls .

According to SSH, this is correct?

I am finding it hard to believe, so maybe I am just way off??

Haupt_234

[Evan]

I'm not done with the book yet either. But coldcalling an EP raise with 22 doesn't make any sense to me.

[mike_sharpe]

I think it's a fold, unless it's guaranteed that several others will cold call the raise (w/o anyof them 3 betting it).

Your 22 will need to improve for you to win this hand and you need the callers to make it a profitable play. In this position, unless you have a good read on the table, you do not know if you will get the callers you need.

[BassMan712]

I didn't read the book as of yet, but if it's a really loose table with 4-6 to the flop even with a raise in EP, then this is a call. If you don't hit your set, fold.

Again, you must be 90%-95% certain that there will be 4-6 players seeing the flop for 2 bets each.

[Haupt_234]

[ QUOTE ]
Again, you must be 90%-95% certain that there will be 4-6 players seeing the flop for 2 bets each.


[/ QUOTE ]

But what confuses me is the fact that you should treat a new, unknown table as a loose one until proven otherwise. So I can never be certain.

Haupt_234

[Victor]

This is fine if you can expect the pot to be at least 4 handed (preferably 5). The main problem is if it gets raised behind you then you are investing a lot to hit your set. So, you would like the players to be aggressive post flop too. Calling 2 cold here is very tough and can put you in a tough situation before the flop but the idea is that you will make enough out of your loose aggressive opponents after the flop to make up for preflop disadvantage.

Of course if you were on the button and UTG+1 raised and 3 people called cold then it is a very easy decision to call.

[MoreWineII]

If you're on Party, assuming that an unknown table is loose isn't a terrible assumption. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[StellarWind]

I'm sure somewhere there is a game that justifies coldcalling.

In my online play I've never seen such a game. You cannot expect to get enough additional callers on average. You may easily get reraised and have to call additional bets.

It should also be mentioned that your postflop position is terrible. You are directly behind the PFR which will make it very hard to maximize your set because your raise will confront everyone with two bets.

[busguy]

What he said.

marginal hand, bad position, 2 bet cold call, no read on table . . . . . . . no go

/images/graemlins/crazy.gif busguy

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Again, you must be 90%-95% certain that there will be 4-6 players seeing the flop for 2 bets each.


[/ QUOTE ]

But what confuses me is the fact that you should treat a new, unknown table as a loose one until proven otherwise. So I can never be certain.

Haupt_234

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think treating the table as "loose" is the problem. Treating the table as "passive" might be. If you just sat down and have 2 LAGs to act behind you, you're going to be blindsided for 4 bets pre-flop.

[colgin]

What limit and site or cardroom. What is typical for thos tables. If you are talking about a table (anywhere) that you know to be loose and passive pre-flop then I would call. If you were talking about an unknown Party $3/6 table then I would fold (I would want to already have knowledge that it is loose and passive pre-flop). If you were talking about an unknown microlimit table anywhere on the internet then I would call (I would need a specific reason not to call at that particular table since I am assuming a loose-passive table until shown otherwise).

Edit: Oh, I blew this one. It is two cold to you in EP. I am almost always folding here. I need to have reason to believe that at this particular table there will be several other cold-callers behind me and lose blinds. Sorry for not reading more carefully.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
But what confuses me is the fact that you should treat a new, unknown table as a loose one until proven otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]
No! Those of us who play online poker should assume that a new table is similar to other tables at the same site with the same limits and stats. Time-of-day is also useful to consider.

[Jeff28]

I think the guys said hardly ever cold call many times in the book, I think he said maybe 2x per B&M session in one example.

So this would be a fold.

--Jeff

[Ed Miller]

But what confuses me is the fact that you should treat a new, unknown table as a loose one until proven otherwise. So I can never be certain.

From p.67
[ QUOTE ]
Small Pairs (66-22)...If it has been raised in front of you, to play you need to be almost sure the pot will be five-handed or more.

[/ QUOTE ]

From p.76
[ QUOTE ]
These recommendations are not rigid. View them like training wheels for preflop play: When you feel lost, look to these guidelines for a decent default play. An expert player who fully understands preflop and postflop concepts will frequently deviate (correctly) from these suggestions.

[/ QUOTE ]

From p.77
[ QUOTE ]
[S]implicity was a top priority when we developed these recommendations. Correct play is inherently complex, but we have simplified wherever possible. Specifically, if two choices ran close in value, but one allowed us to simplify the system to make it easier to learn, we used the simpler choice, sometimes at the expense of a small amount of expectation.

[/ QUOTE ]

In other words, use of brain is required when using the charts. Look how simple the charts are. It's impossible to cram an expert preflop strategy into four pages of chart. Thus, you can expect to find lots of examples where the "chart" play is not the expert play. This is one of them.

Having said that, if you did call in that spot, it would cost you money, but it wouldn't call you a fortune. That's the point of the chart. If you rigidly adhered to the chart play at all costs, you'd do ok. Not great, but ok. And you'd do much better than a lot of your opponents.

If you rigidly adhered to the charts and played expertly postflop, you'd be a significant winner in almost any game up to and including $20-$40 live. But if you modified the chart where appropriate (and it's often appropriate) then you'd make even more.

[Nottom]

This call is very table dependant, at an unknown table I fold. I really want to be sure I'm gonna be getting 3-4 callers behind me.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]

If you're on Party, assuming that an unknown table is loose isn't a terrible assumption.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unknown party tables aren't this loose.

[stir]

Correct in my experience.

[ddubois]

As I understand it, the book is more geared towards ultra-loose live games (LA cardrooms being the proto-typical example). Party is tight compared to these games.

[MoreWineII]

I've yet to play in an LA cardroom, but.....

[arkady]

[ QUOTE ]
In other words, use of brain is required when using the charts.

[/ QUOTE ]


That is what happens when you make assumptions, everything goes to hell.