PDA

View Full Version : 5-6 handed or less...checked to you in SB...limp for information?


climber
12-31-2004, 04:47 PM
This is not something I've read about before or seen anyone post about and I tried the "search" feature with no luck.

Later in a Party 10+1, 20+2 SNG. I'm in the SB--its checked to me and I have rags. Not 96o rags but 24o or 53o--really nothing. I just complete--no fold no raise to steal. What do you guys think about this?

This is maybe a 30-50% of the time move for me. I'm pulling this move anytime I have total rags and a stack of 900TC or more. My goals are two-fold. First I want to steal on the flop almost no matter what hits. If they play back preflop I usually am folding unless its a min raise and they are really weak players overall. If the flop comes with an A and a K and they check to me I'll check and bet the turn to steal then when a 7-J comes out and I represent a middle pair. I bet 2/3 the pot on the flop or turn when I make my steal attempt.

I steal the blinds a lot preflop so people tend to get annoyed and start playing back at me eventually. Also I feel like my 3-4x BB raise doesn't get that much respect after they've seen me do it 5 of the last 10 hands at later stages. This seems to me like a nice way to mix it up a little and steal the blinds from weak players with less risk.

The second purpose behind this move is to gain information about how the player plays HU. Its nice to know who will get too much of their ego involved in protecting their blind and really pay you off when you pick up a monster. Even if I just do this once against a super aggro player and fold when he plays back I'm setting myself up in his mind as a weak tight player and then I can really take advantage of that when I'm dealt a real hand later.

I usually make this move at about Level 3 when the blinds are at 25/50 or sometimes 50/100 if I have a bigger stack and it doesn't cost much but seems to do wonders for establishing a weak image, inducing bluffs by aggro palyers and letting me mix up my stealing methods. It also adds another level of deception.

What do you guys think? This works well at 10+1 and I've had some success at 20+2 but less people will let me steal this way. At 20+2 it seems more useful for gathering information cheaply and early than as a stealing method.

Does anybody else do this? Am I deluding myself that this could be a profitable play.

climber
12-31-2004, 07:37 PM
bump...

Noone has an opinion on this one?..at least tell me its a bad move if you think so.

This is my first attempt at a strategy post--a new years resolution of mine. Posting Hands is another one but this is too general to really include a hand with.

(my name it is) Sam Hall
12-31-2004, 10:36 PM
Well, IMHO this is a bad play for two reasons. One, if the player is paying attention at all, you get raised right there and have to fold your limp. Two, if he does check and flops something (anything at all if you've got total rags) AND is too stupid to know you're representing a middle pair (or whatever you think you're making him think) you'll get called (Yeah it's a weak play to call, but people will do it and in this case it burns you since you seem to need a raise before you'll give this plan up) and lose a showdown. This seems like the perfect setup for disaster. Can you not gain the same information on blind defense while maintaining some fold equity (raise preflop)?

Sam

raptor517
01-01-2005, 02:25 AM
why even waste your chips on lvl 3? wait till lvl 4, then start stealing.

climber
01-01-2005, 03:52 AM
Thanks for the feedback--probably a good reality check for me. My game clearly has problems and this is prob just another one of those examples of the newbie outhinking himself thinking he is so clever.

I have a 22% ROI over my first 100 Party 10+1 SNGs and a negative ROI on my first 25 20+2s. I've dropped back to the 10+1s to get my game a little more fully in place before tryign the 20+2s again.

As the two inital comments seem to indicate I guess I should probably forget about "making a play" anytime in the first 3 levels and probably most of the time in general at these levels. OK--I hereby pledge to play tighter.