100-200 99 set oops

[mike l.]

i have 99 utg and limp in an okay 1-2 game live full table. next guy on my left raises. he is playing pretty well and has some clue. he plays no limit sometimes so he likes to make laydowns when he thinks he's beat. also he can sometimes steam when stuck but it tends to make him more weak-tight and cautious. when he's winning he pushes more and is a little loose aggressive. he respects the way i play to some extent. i have been playing tight and carefully, and winning. the game is just okay, there are some pretty tough players, and some obvious weak spots.

anyway he raises, everyone folds, the bb who is okay calls, i call.

the flop is A95 rainbow. bb bets, i raise, preflop raiser 3 bets, bb folds, i 4 bet. bb says "you 4 bet??" and calls.

i bet the turn blank and he folds AKo face up.

[andyfox]

"bb folds, i 4 bet. bb says "you 4 bet??" and calls."

I assume you mean the guy on your left says "you 4 bet??" and calls.

His fold is simply a no-limit player's mistake.

[mike l.]

yeah guy on my left said it sorry. bb was out of the picture by then. thanks.

[goofball]

in the party 15 i almost always just play it as fast as possible, but i think this sort of thing can really depend on game texture. honestly though, will he pay you off if you smooth call his flop 3bet and then raise the turn?

[Stork]

It's much easier for me to say this knowing the results, but what if you check-called the turn and then led the river? If this guy likes to make tough lay downs, it seems like your turn bet would at the very least tell him you have A9s, or a set.

[BarronVangorToth]

Mike,

What about leading the flop, calling the raise, checking the turn, checkraising it and then leading the river...?

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[TStoneMBD]

i wish you didnt post the results on this hand, cause my reply might be results oriented, but i think youre much better off calling the 3bet and cring the turn. im surprised he was able to fold his hand, but it was certainly a very good lay down.

[Avatar]

I call his flop 3-bet. Check-raise the turn, lead the river.

If this guy respects your game and is decent himself, it should be clear he was 3-betting a big ace and would value bet the turn.

[andyfox]

I'm surprised so many are saying just call and check-raise the turn. This fold the guy made is made by about 0.5% of all players. Perhaps it's different in 100-200, but I suspect, if anything, the percentage who would fold descreases. In my game, I'm much more likely to find a guy who'll raise the turn than fold it. Especially from a guy who respects my game.

[ggbman]

Yeah its a rare fold, but when you 4 bet on the flop he is only calling the turn. If you smooth call 3 bets on the flop and then lead or check the turn, there is an excellent chance you get at least 2 big bets in on the turn. Mike, your obviously a better player then I am, but i would say you played it too hard in this case. It's hugely unlikely that he is pushing a set of aces here, so he almost always has AK or AQ. There is no holding i can think of where you are not a 25-1 favorite right here. Let him take the lead in the hand. Just my humble opinion.

Gabe

[bobbyi]

Other than 99, what hands would you play this way on this board (limp and call a raise, then raise and cap the flop with this betting sequence)?

[Avatar]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm surprised so many are saying just call and check-raise the turn. This fold the guy made is made by about 0.5% of all players. Perhaps it's different in 100-200, but I suspect, if anything, the percentage who would fold descreases. In my game, I'm much more likely to find a guy who'll raise the turn than fold it. Especially from a guy who respects my game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I make this fold against Mike if I'm villain. Perhaps I'm in the .5%. It's debatable.

Secondly, Mike's line doesn't put the most money in the pot.

I just don't see how anyone could endorse that play.

[andyfox]

A-Q, A-J, A-9(s), A-5(s). Maybe even other aces. And most players would play 9-9 (or 5-5) slower.

[Kaz The Original]

I play it fast. No reason to slow play when it looks like he has an ace he likes.

[mike l.]

"A-Q, A-J"

no no no no no. i would slow way down w/ those and fold the AJ on the turn when i dont improve. but yeah id play A9s that way if i were in there with that. 55 id play the same. only other hand i might this way is 76s or 87s if i thought it would make a fold. rare though that id be that daring nowadays.

[mike l.]

"No reason to slow play when it looks like he has an ace he likes."

i think this thread proves that there is a reason. basically i had my normal 20-40/40-80 game on and it wasnt good enough against this tougher field and i lost money as a result.

that said, those of you who are saying checkraise the turn are wrong. that would scare him away as well. i dont think he'll check behind on the river unless the board gets scary and weird so i think the play is to call the flop 3 bet, check-call the turn, and then go for the river checkraise. it will be really hard for AK to get away on the river for one more bet.

oh one more thing. the initial flop raise is the biggest error in the hand because it blows bb off his hand and reveals immediately that im not worried about what preflop raiser might have. it's very bad.

[ggbman]

True, but don't play it this fast. Most players wont fold the turn after the 4 bet on the flop, but they will only call. You call smooth call 3 bets on the flop. You are going to get AT LEAST 2 big bets on the turn by letting him take the lead in the hand. Given the action, i would re-iterate that i cant think of a hand that mike isnt a 25-1 favorite against. Don't tell him you flopped a set when you havent even gotten to the expensive streets.

[ggbman]

I like your analysis of your own hand mike. I almost never raise with middle set when an ace is on the baord for this reason, you don't want to chase off hands that are drawing near dead. That said, we've all been runner-runnered enough times to make us want to play our hands very straight forwardly, but i like you line of calling the BB on the flop and letting MP player raise you both, keeping the BB in the hand.

[BarronVangorToth]

Mike,

So you're saying you would call the flop, call the raise from the third guy (assuming the BB doesn't reraise, which seems unlikely given the action), then call the BB on the turn assuming he bets, or simply call the third guy if he does ... and then check raise the river?

Definitely would've been a lot more profitable, especially since, you're right, there's no way he can drop his hand to the river checkraise.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Stork]

I think leading out on the river would be better because given the aggression you've shown, I think he would check behind many of his marginal and somewhat strong holdings, and I think he could fold to a check-raise because it is (in my experience, which certainly doesn't cover these limits)way too rare to see a check-raise bluff on the river after so much aggression has been shown throughout the hand.

[roy_miami]

Yes I agree I hated the flop raise too. If the villain had a hand like KK or QQ your flop raise blows him off or if villain has a big A like he did, he 3-bets and knocks off BB. I think, even against tough players, you just go for the old fashiond smooth call on the flop and checkraise villain on one of the big streets.

[Michael Davis]

Showing AK was a really bad move. I think you should have showed 99 and raped him about a month from now.

-Michael

[SA125]

I agree that smooth calling the flop and a raise is better than playing it fast, but I wouldn't risk losing a BB on the turn on the slim chance he checks it through. A lead out on the turn wouldn't scare him off like a c/r. He'd have to call the bet.

[andyfox]

Instead of "would you play," I answered the question as if it were "would one play."

[andyfox]

Hmm: I always raise with a set when there is an ace on board. That ace usually scares off action, unless the actionee has an ace anyway.

But my game is the very lively, very aggressive Commerce 40-80 game. I'm basing my conclusions on that game, plus the 100-200 game I've watched there and read Mike's posts about. Not only is it unusual for A-K to fold here, it's a bad mistake.

[TStoneMBD]

mikel may be right about waiting till the river to checkraise in this situation, but i think its very player dependant. to just assume that this player will fold AK on the turn with the reads youve given me is impossible.

[Gabe]

[ QUOTE ]
that said, those of you who are saying checkraise the turn are wrong. that would scare him away as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if you look like two pair.

[andyfox]

"Not if you look like two pair."

Which the fast play on the flop would tend to indeed make him look like.

[fearme]

theres always gonna be situations when, u could of checkraised the turn to get more money in, it happens, i "usually" like to play my hands real fast, hoping for more raises, think if he pops the turn, then u get 3 in, plus the money on the flop, then again u could have slowed down, then i like calling 3 on the flop and craise the turn

[Gabe]

95 UTG?

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
i bet the turn blank and he folds AKo face up.

[/ QUOTE ]

A Mirage regular playing in California? /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[shaundeeb]

A9s A5s

[flytrap]

Maybe this is off subject, but why not raise 99 utg? I play as high as 50-100, and at least in the game I play, a raise will win the blinds or get it heads up. Can you explain why calling is better than raising?

[BarronVangorToth]

There is no "always" scenario as if you "always" do something, people will read you easier -- perhaps Mike sometimes raises, sometimes doesn't.

In this situation, regardless, it was one of the "doesn't" variety. Regardless, it doesn't change the hand as the raise probably won't push AK off the hand.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Michael Davis]

Not that it really matters because this particular situation doesn't happen that much, but if he raises 99 preflop there's no way this guy folds AK when he did.

-Michael

[BarronVangorToth]

Agreed 100%. Mike would absolutely extract another SB given a pre-flop raise. But I still contend that you shouldn't always do anything and even if I think raising PF is fine, I think we can all agree that sometimes limping is fine, too, and this is one of those times when it was obviously fine for Mike to do in his mind.

The real kicker to the whole problem is what he pointed out, that all the flop raising scared out the BB, which shouldn't've happened as many more bets could've been extracted from him.

Seemingly simply situation -- but not.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm surprised so many are saying just call and check-raise the turn. This fold the guy made is made by about 0.5% of all players. Perhaps it's different in 100-200, but I suspect, if anything, the percentage who would fold descreases. In my game, I'm much more likely to find a guy who'll raise the turn than fold it. Especially from a guy who respects my game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree 100%. The call the third flop bet and checkraise the turn line of play has validity but it would have been better if mike didn't reveal results.

~ Rick

[andyfox]

I've never worried about always doing something. You get 9-9 UTG about once every two thousand hands. I don't really think it would hurt my game very much if I always raised with it or always limped with it.

I'm not so sure the flop raising scared out the big blind. If he had an Ace, he might well have continued on anyway. And with him betting the flop, it lowers the probability of the 3rd guy having an ace, so mike shouldn't have been worried about that 3rd guy 3-betting and thus scaring out the big blind. And if the big blind folded on the flop to the 3-bet, I'm not so sure "many more bets" could have been extracted from him anyway.

I think the bigger mistake was the flop 4-bet. Once this no-limit player 3-bets, we can safely put him on a big ace and he'll fell better about it once the big blind drops, leaving him head-up with a pre-flop limper, who's likely to have a weak ace. I like mike's line of check-calling the turn and then check-raising the river.

[rory]

This is a good opportunity to check-call, check-call, check-raise.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
His fold is simply a no-limit player's mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]
Given the range of hands that mike says he would play this way, the fold was not a mistake.

[andyfox]

It's a mistake unless he read mike's post first.

[cpk]

So you're saying that....

...obviously, going fast on the flop sucks becauase this guy is a "super reader."

...check-raising the turn is a delayed 4-bet, and anyone playing above the 20/40 level for a profit is aware that you were doing a stop and go.

...if you call the original flop and check-raise the turn, he might run down a semibluff, plus you get more money from BB. Let's see--BB bets, you call, PFR raises, you both call, $400, check-raising the turn gets you at least $400 and maybe $800. Possible gain: $1200.

...since you made the FR anyway, $400 flop, $200 turn, $400 river = $1000. Probably works out the same, though, especially if the BB doesn't give up a bet on the turn or the PFR doesn't call down. So perhaps the flop raise wasn't so bad. Still, the uncoordinated board made this hand ideal for a slowplay.

[roy_miami]

If I was in villains shoes I would have Mike on A5 (or maybe A9) based on the action. There is no way in hell he can put him on a set of nines. I think it was a bad fold simply because he probably has the pot odds to try to outdraw mike on the river especially if the turn card was higher than a 9.

[cpk]

Playing a "Abdul-like" limp-reraise strategy rather than an open-raise strategy allows you to be more judicious with your policy on 99. At that point, it doesn't matter whether you open-raise, limp-reraise, or limp with it so long as your strategy is coherent with respect to EV balance and deception.

[flytrap]

I didn't mean to make my questioning of his pre-flop play sound like I disagreed with it, but was just wondering the thought process. Perhaps sometimes he raises, sometimes he limps. I was more concerned with why he chose it, so I can incorporate the advice into my own game. I tend to limp/raise a hand like this about equally, but wasn't sure which was the better line.

[MicroBob]

Interesting hand.


[ QUOTE ]
Showing AK was a really bad move. I think you should have showed 99 and raped him about a month from now.

[/ QUOTE ]

and this is VERY interesting.

I am fine with playing this fast as you did. He made the nice little fold there...bully for him.

If you get matched-up with him again ANd get fortunate enough to hit another big hand then try to play it as fast as possible AGAIN imo.

He'll think that you have read him as a guy that you can push-out and hopefully he'll out-think himself and pay you off the next time around.


Anyone think this is a valid approach on how to tangle with this guy on future hands or is he still likely to lay-down AGAIN if you play at him fast? It's hard for an outsider to say since we don't know him and we certainly don't know specifically how he will be reading you in the future.

[bobbyi]

Mike is too good a player to have limped in early position with A5.

[BarronVangorToth]

I've heard people say you should fold preflop with 99 (I don't agree), I've heard call and raise ... I don't know the exact percentages (I only play live, and far less than most of you probably play as I only get to Foxwoods a few times a week on average) but it's probably 50/50 for me with 99.

Sorry I wasn't clear with what I was saying ... far be it that I know the exact precise thing you should do either in every situation. My guess is that sometimes it's X and sometimes it's Y and maybe it's always X or Y.

I'm not crazy about always doing something a certain way, or else you'll get to be like the guy I play at the Woods who, if he raises under the gun, I know for an absolute fact he has Aces or Kings as he will limp UTG with Queens or AK-suited. Being THAT predictable is bad.


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[bunky9590]

Hey Mike, hows about a smooth call the three bet and checkraise the turn? Would he call you down? If no, check call the turn, lead the river. I don't know if he;'s good enough to lay down for 1 bet on the river.

[andyfox]

But does (do) his opponent(s) know this?

[mike l.]

i would limp in some games with A5s but definitely not this game in particular.

[mike l.]

"I was more concerned with why he chose it, so I can incorporate the advice into my own game."

tighter tougher game where i dont want to be put to the test with a preflop 3 bet and then have the inevitable overcards come, 99 is a limp in ep, and the great snakehead says 88 is a fold utg and the more i play bigger games the more i see how right he is. maybe 99 is a fold for him too, who knows?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing a "Abdul-like" limp-reraise strategy rather than an open-raise strategy allows you to be more judicious with your policy on 99. At that point, it doesn't matter whether you open-raise, limp-reraise, or limp with it so long as your strategy is coherent with respect to EV balance and deception.

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I've heard Abdul now lives in Europe and I'm not even sure he plays "Abdul-like" anymore but when he wrote (mostly on RGP) over a period of several years my understanding of "Abdul-like" was to put the tougher mid to high stakes games in two basic categories when opening the action in early position.

The first type of game or game condition features substantial blind stealing equity and very little chance of multi-way action. In this type of game or situation always open raise, and here you must open raise with some weaker hands with middle cards (e.g., A8s and 88) in order for your opponents not to easily pressure or steal from you when it flops all middle to small (since you won't often have the overpair when you open raise).

The other type of game features a bit more multi-way action and less chance at stealing the blinds. In this type of game he advised limping with many hands covered by limp-reraising with many (or was it all?) pairs of aces and kings along with AKs and some of the middle pairs (I'm pretty sure of 99 and maybe TT or 88) in order to protect your overall set of open limping hands from too much isolation raising.

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never worried about always doing something. You get 9-9 UTG about once every two thousand hands. I don't really think it would hurt my game very much if I always raised with it or always limped with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your early position opening strategy with this and similar hands should be very game dependent. There are certain types of games where you always open raise when first in after the blinds entering the pot. Such a game would feature 1) tight, aggressive play, 2) blinds that won't over defend, and little multi-way action. This may have been one of those games.

If so, you need to find some hands with middle cards worth open-raising with in early position - hands like A8s and A9s along with middle pairs. Anyway, I'm sort of paralleling the other post I just made but I think you get what I mean.

[ QUOTE ]
I think the bigger mistake was the flop 4-bet. Once this no-limit player 3-bets, we can safely put him on a big ace and he'll fell better about it once the big blind drops, leaving him head-up with a pre-flop limper, who's likely to have a weak ace. I like mike's line of check-calling the turn and then check-raising the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given he open-limped, I do too.

~ Rick

[tolbiny]

Any chance that you can c/r the flop, call the three bet and lead out on the turn? Would he ever raise AK there? Would he ever fold?

That's a common line for me at 10-20 heads up, don't know how it applies to this game though.

[tolbiny]

"leaving him head-up with a pre-flop limper, who's likely to have a weak ace. I like mike's line of check-calling the turn and then check-raising the river."

Ok- what about calling the three bet on the flop and leading the turn. Looks like you are trying to get the showdown cheap without giving free cards to KK, QQ or JJ. What i see in some players here is confusion- they see you call the three bet and assume their hand is good, and get ready to bet the turn- whne you bet out their action will often turn into a raise- and then you can c/r the river, or a call, and then you can... c/r the river.

[Lawrence Ng]

Mike, I think your biggest flaw here is being unable to put your opponents on a hand. When BB bets, you know he very likely has an Ace right? So you know it's highly highly unlikely that your opponent to the left (who is a somewhat good player via your description) has AA. Thus, this absolutely ensures and warrants slowplaying your flopped second set.

A big part of improving my limit game has not only been putting opponents on hands pre-flop, but what to do post flop when certain boards come up and whether or not I think I am ahead or behind.

Playing it fast and furious screams a set or top 2 and thus your opponent correctly laid down his A-Ko reading you for a set. The key is that you put him on Ako and for him to make you think that he has you beat, not you have him beat. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Lawrence

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
There are certain types of games where you always open raise when first in after the blinds entering the pot. Such a game would feature 1) tight, aggressive play, 2) blinds that won't over defend, and little multi-way action. This may have been one of those games

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think the first part of the second condition here is a requirement. If my opponents are tight and aggressive such that there are hardly any multiway pots and virtually no one limps, I would never open-limp, even if the blinds over-defend. If I raise, I will most likely take the flop heads up against a blind. If I limp, someone behind me will likely raise to isolate the limper, and I'll take it heads up against him (or three-handed with a blind calling as well). At best, everyone folds and I end up heads up against the big blind anyway. So nothing good can come of me limping. Instead of playing heads up with position and initiative against a guy who likely has very crappy cards, I play heads up (or in the middle of three-way pot) without initiative or position with whoever has the best cards behind me. Whether the blinds over-defend is signficant in that it affects the range of hands with which I would open. Since I have more blind stealing equity when they fold too much, I can profitably raise more hands. But once the blinds start over-defending, the lower end of the spectrum turns into folds, not limps, if the game is tight aggressive with no multi-way action.

[bobbyi]

This is a very good explanation. As a small addendum, he advocated limp-reraising with aces and kings not only to cover for your weaker limping hands, but also because your equity with these hands is much more than the blinds, which means that open-raising with these hands and stealing the blinds is a "disaster".

[BarronVangorToth]

Ideally he wants to get at least 4 BB out of the villain (while suckering in the BB for X random BB's) -- this is probably only done by calling the flop from the BB (and the eventual raise), checking and calling the turn, and then going for the checkraise on the river.

Mike, is that what you were thinking as well, now with hindsight being 20/20 and all.

It's still an amazing laydown by your opponent, one that I can't make (yet).

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[mike l.]

"When BB bets, you know he very likely has an Ace right?"

not necessarily. he could be making a mini-move against preflop raiser and me by trying to represent.

[mike l.]

"Mike, is that what you were thinking as well, now with hindsight being 20/20 and all."

yes of course i wanted to get the most out of them. what happened is i went into my normal 20-40/40-80 pound pound pound mode and this guy saw right through it and made a nice laydown. he knew i wasnt stupid enough to do that w/ AQ against him and that's the hand just beneath him so he made a simple read and it paid off for him.

"It's still an amazing laydown by your opponent, one that I can't make (yet)."

i agree. i thought the initial post would be interesting just on that alone. and posters ask me a lot what the difference is at the higher limits so i thought this hand was interesting example of me failing to make an adjustment for a tougher game and getting punished for it.

[andyfox]

I agree that one's pre-flop decisions with good but not great hands should be game-dependent. I "never" cold-call, but when a 2+2er open raised UTG in a game not long ago, I found myself cold-calling twice (with pocket queens and with pocket jacks). I'm pretty certain this was the proper play both times.

But I honestly don't think it will make very much difference in one's game if one decided to "always" limp or always raise (or even always fold) with pocket 9s UTG. Reminds me a bit of basic one-deck blackjack strategy. You're supposed to hit 14 against a ten, but not when you have 7-7 (the deck now containing only two 7s reducing your chance of making 21 to the point that it shades the decision to a stand instead of a hit). You get 7-7 so rarely against a dealer's upcard ten, and the EV of standing vs. hitting is so close, that worrying about it is minimally important.

Regards,
Andy

[andyfox]

"It's still an amazing laydown by your opponent, one that I can't make (yet)."

If it was a spot-on read, it indeed was excellent. If it was a "safety first" too weak-tight laydown by a player used to playing no limit, then it wasn't excellent. In most situations, the fast play on the flop means the fast player doesn't have a set.

[mike l.]

"a player used to playing no limit,"

youre overstating the no limit thing. the guy doesnt play no limit primarily. he just plays it as well as bigger games. id say i see him playing no limit half the time and 1-2 half the time.

[BarronVangorToth]

It is a terrific example, Mike, and, for the record, thanks for posting up these examples from the higher limit games that most of us don't (yet) play.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that one's pre-flop decisions with good but not great hands should be game-dependent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sometimes the game situation is borderline. Here strategies for opening in early position can change when for example, a certain type of player normally acting behind is walking or certain players are in the blinds.

[ QUOTE ]
I "never" cold-call, but when a 2+2er open raised UTG in a game not long ago, I found myself cold-calling twice (with pocket queens and with pocket jacks). I'm pretty certain this was the proper play both times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your anti-cold call mania is somewhat off topic but I've been meaning to look you up on this anyway. /images/graemlins/smile.gif I frequently cold call. For example, in a typical good game I believe it is correct to cold call an early raiser and a few other cold callers with middle pairs up to about JJ or even QQ (lower pairs and suited connectors can be added with enough opponents). If the early raiser is timid and predictable (e.g., doesn't play AK or AQ well on semi-whiffs), those who have already cold called loose, and those yet to act tight, then three betting is best with the upper middle pairs (TT thru QQ) along with the otherwise marginal big offsuit cards (of course you three bet for value with the two or three biggest pairs and big suited cards).

Of course I'm playing more no limit lately. There "cold calling" raises can be very scary to the raiser depending on the hands and stack sizes.

[ QUOTE ]
But I honestly don't think it will make very much difference in one's game if one decided to "always" limp or always raise (or even always fold) with pocket 9s UTG.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think all this discussion is about UTG open raising with pocket nines per se. OTOH, I think it is very important to identify games and situations where it is never right to open limp and adjust hand selection accordingly, or if one does find oneself in such a game, recognize the need to cover weaker open limps with limp reraises with stronger hands. This isn't needed in the extremely soft, unaggressive games, but you won't find extremely soft unaggro games in 40/80 on up.

Regards,

Rick

PS Haven't been to Las Vegas in so long I forgot how to play even basic strategy blackjack so no comment there /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[mike l.]

"I frequently cold call."

this deserves it's own thread and i predict it will be a BIG one.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
"I frequently cold call."

this deserves it's own thread and i predict it will be a BIG one.

[/ QUOTE ]

It may have been done before (not by me). If not it might have to wait a while until I have a day or evening where I'm home with Internet access. This type of thread sputters out if you don't have time to stay on top of it and respond in a timely manner. That's why people like Andy Fox (and in the past skp) who seem to find a way to post every twenty minutes all while supposedly at work have such an advantage. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

BTW, when I say "I frequently cold call" I'm not talking about cold calling with dominated hands and so on. Nor am I saying "pump it (i.e. reraise) or dump it isn't often correct. What I am saying is that three betting is often overdone. My take on when it is overdone will have to wait (that said, others can take up the slack).

~ Rick

PS Discouraging news. The pool room at HWP closed down so no ping-pong breaks /images/graemlins/frown.gif.

[mike l.]

"It may have been done before"

it has but since sshfap came out it deserves rethinking, given the advice in there on the topic.

[andyfox]

Wouldn't you think, though, that a guy who plays no-limit about 50% of the time would be more apt to fold A-K on an A-x-y-z board when pressured than a player who plays strictly limit poker?

[Rick Nebiolo]

bobbyi,

Good response. Anyway...

I (Rick) previously wrote " There are certain types of games where you always open raise when first in after the blinds entering the pot. Such a game would feature 1) tight, aggressive play, 2) blinds that won't over defend, and little multi-way action. This may have been one of those games.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think the first part of the second condition here is a requirement. If my opponents are tight and aggressive such that there are hardly any multiway pots and virtually no one limps, I would never open-limp, even if the blinds over-defend. If I raise, I will most likely take the flop heads up against a blind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree, although you will also sometimes be facing a reraiser acting behind. You want to open raise with an appropriate range of hands in order to maximize blind stealing equity (or the equity gained by playing decent hands against a blind with position). At the same time you can't drop down so low in value that the three-bettors acting behind destroy you.

[ QUOTE ]
If I limp, someone behind me will likely raise to isolate the limper, and I'll take it heads up against him (or three-handed with a blind calling as well). At best, everyone folds and I end up heads up against the big blind anyway. So nothing good can come of me limping. Instead of playing heads up with position and initiative against a guy who likely has very crappy cards, I play heads up (or in the middle of three-way pot) without initiative or position with whoever has the best cards behind me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well stated and I agree for the type of games we are discussing. Open limping should only be used in the softest games or in medium tough not so aggressive games covered by open limps (and limp reraises) with strong hands.

[ QUOTE ]
Whether the blinds over-defend is significant in that it affects the range of hands with which I would open. Since I have more blind stealing equity when they fold too much, I can profitably raise more hands. But once the blinds start over-defending, the lower end of the spectrum turns into folds, not limps, if the game is tight aggressive with no multi-way action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very good point. I just bookmarked the complete set of bobbyi posts for later viewing /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Regards,

Rick

[mike l.]

"Wouldn't you think, though, that a guy who plays no-limit about 50% of the time would be more apt to fold A-K on an A-x-y-z board when pressured than a player who plays strictly limit poker?"

good point. i guess the only other guy i could imagine making this laydown is tommy. not face up of course.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
"It may have been done before"

it has but since sshfap came out it deserves rethinking, given the advice in there on the topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is discouraging to realize that so much I've thought through before needs rethinking. This may be why so many older poker players get crushed as they age - they no longer are capable or willing to rethink.

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
"It's still an amazing laydown by your opponent, one that I can't make (yet)."

If it was a spot-on read, it indeed was excellent. If it was a "safety first" too weak-tight laydown by a player used to playing no limit, then it wasn't excellent. In most situations, the fast play on the flop means the fast player doesn't have a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. It is also a good case for playing many sets fast on the flop since most opponents won't give you credit.

~ Rick