Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[Sophia]

[Benal]

I need to take a leak now...

[AEKDBet]

I'm curious to what top 3 hands are your biggest losers (BB/hand, not win%')
FYI I play NL almost exclusively. Also what are your biggest winners other than the obvious...

Biggest losers
1) A9s (1.16 BB)
2) 76s (.86 BB)
3) 32s (.71 BB).... but they were soooted

Biggest winners - EXCLUDING AA-TT, AK, AQ
1) ATs +1.31 BB
2) Q9s +.87 BB
3) J4s +.72 BB ....but they were soooted!

AA nabs me an avg of 5.65 BB/hand

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
So I just did a review of my game and I found some leaks that I am plugging now. I thought I would post them, and encourage everyone to do the same. Post a leak that you've found in your game or another's game (or many, preferrably). Sometimes we don't realize some of the most basic mistakes we're making until someone points them out.

My four big leaks from this review:

1. Cold calling an EP raise with suited connector middle cards in late position without 3+ callers in front of me. With 3+ I should probably even considering reraising though ... Um...how do I put this? How 'bout, "No." With 3+ commited to the pot, you *may* *consider* playing QJs-T9s, but not "middle cards," and you're definitely not *raising* them.

2. Failing to raise a middle pocket pair on a ragged flop when I am heads up or against 2 people and the flop only contains one overcard. Too many people come out firing on such a flop with a lesser pair. Wow, that's a mouthful...

3. Failing to raise big suited cards (like KJ, K10, Q10) when in middle position in loose games. Again, this is dependent on the actual situation and game. I wouldn't make it a rule to raise QTs and KTs from middle position.

4. Not folding enough to a surprise turn raise, particularly when that raise is called in front of me. Stubbornly holding onto top pair/no draws when an unimaginative player is telling me I am beaten. Yes, that *would* be a leak

I'll post more as I find them. I hope you do too.

[/ QUOTE ]


I've got a suggestion for a leak:

5. "Trying to come up with 'General Rules' on how to act in all seemingly similar circustances, even though each case is matter for discussion on its own."


Just my thoughts...


Adam

[Paul2432]

My biggest leak is not knowing when to check fold when the flop misses me after I preflop raise. Example: I open-raise in MP with AQ. LP calls and BB calls. Let's say I miss the flop but bet when it's checked to me and LP calls. I need to do a better job figuring when to check-fold the turn versus fire another bet. Similar situation occurs when I raise with a large PP and an overcard comes and my opponent just calls on the flop.

I have a two fold approach to improving in this area. One is to pay closer attention to my opponents and try and make a more nuanced decision based on the texture of the board. Two is to sometimes check-raise the turn with my stronger hands (a play recommended by S&M) to protect my weak hands when I check.

Paul

[Sophia]

[Perseus]

count it

[bicyclekick]

See this thread.
web page (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=smallholdem&Number=862129& Forum=All_Forums&Words=biggest%20leak&Searchpage=0 &Limit=25&Main=862129&Search=true&where=bodysub&Na me=43&daterange=1&newerval=1&newertype=y&olderval= &oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post862129)

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
Not only are your comments unhelpful, but you don't sound like a very good player (particularly if you don't understand why someone would sometimes raise with suited connectors in LP with 4 people in the pot in front for 2 bets). Maybe you should be examining your game instead of making snide comments about mine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although my comments contained elements of sarcasm, I believe they still held useful information - especially my suggested "Leak #5". The sarcasm was intended as a way of expressing my discontent for "trying to come up with 'General Rules' on how to act in all seemingly similar circustances, even though each case is matter for discussion on its own." It would be wrong of me to let incorrect "advice" be taken as gospel by those trying to learn from these forums.

Now, the fact remains that perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about.

As a little experiment, though, let's try this:

I'm going to list my reasons against "raising with suited connectors in LP with 4 people in the pot in front for 2 bets" as you have described.

In turn, you respond with your reasons "for" doing so.

MY RATIONALE:

1. Let's take JTs, for example. You are currently at the very least a slight underdog to anyone holding an Ace, King, Queen, or pocket pair in their hand - each of these possibilities is increasingly likely given that someone has open-raised, and there are 3 others who have decided their hands are worth cold-calling the raise.

2. The value of suited connectors in big, multi-way pots stems from catching a big draw and dragging a huge pot when it actually comes through. Otherwise, we want to see the flop as cheaply as possible, but easily release the hand when we miss. By raising, not only are we costing ourselves an extra bet to see the flop, but we risk getting re-raised by someone holding something like AA,KK, or QQ.

3. Further to point #2, by raising the flop we've not only cost ourselves more for the chance to pick up a draw, but we've essentially killed our implied odds of getting action when we do pick up a draw.

For example, instead of re-raising preflop, wouldn't it be nice to have just called preflop, hit an open-ended-straigt-flush draw, then have the original preflop raiser lead the flop, have all/most call one bet behind him, *then* we raise the flop, trapping everyone and building a monster pot? Alternatively, if we miss the flop, we fold.

If we had re-raised preflop, and been fortunate enough to hit the open-ended-straight-flush draw, it would suck to have everyone check to you, then you bet and only build the flop by one bet each.

Please note the differences in the above two scenarios. In the first you are seeing the flop cheaply, *then* building a pot when you have potential. Otherwise you can cheaply release your hand.

In the second scenario, we're paying a hell of a lot for the flop whether or not we even hit a draw, not to mention killing out implied odds the times we do.


Okay, now your turn ....


I am using this example only because this is the one you have put forth and challenged me with. In reality, though, this example should be of minimal concern since the instance when you should actually be cold-calling with high-medium suited connectors is a *relatively* rare occurance compared to other common, more frequent, leaks.


Oh ya, and *that* was one of my original points too: how you were incorrect in saying how *often* one should be cold-calling with suited connectors.

Adam

[Sophia]

[adamstewart]

OMG, you've made me have a revelation! I've been playing poker all wrong ...

Not only am I going to start raising and capping with suited connectors ...

... but from now on, whenever I have a gutshot draw, I'm going to JAM THAT POT, CAP IT WHENEVER POSSIBLE. I mean, I'm going to miss it 90% of the time, but boy oh boy, those times that I hit I'll drag a huge pot!

Plus, it'll totally throw an element of deception into my game.

I can't wait.... /images/graemlins/cool.gif



Adam

[DcifrThs]

well, i consider myself to be a decent mid limit player and i can tell you me and my winrate have NEVER 3bet any suited connectors other than AK after a raise early and 3 calls.

but i do call with suited connectors, middle ones if the people behind me are not too aggressive. but if you think its a winning play to 3 bet any middle suited connectors after an EARLY raise and callers you are nuts. its likely to get capped since the raiser has to have a better than normal raising hand to raise early. if you call you're already putting in 2sb's when you KNOW you're behind...but you're doing it because the bets you recoup will be 2x the size of those 2 you put in=implied odds.

further...middle pairs on overcard boards are tricky and player dependant. sometimes you FOLD THEM!

raising KTs etc. is usually a good thing in loose games but its not that bad if nobody's calling your raise to limp occasionally and let people in...further, if i very tight UTG limps you may NOT want to raise b/cyou may get limp reraised (if thats his m/o) basically these are also situation dependent.

also, folding to turn raises in low limits should be standard operating procedure and nowhere close to a "leak"

-Barron

[LImitPlayer]

nt

[James282]

Wow that link is awesome BK.
-James

[Sophia]

[LImitPlayer]

Sorry I guess i wasn't clear on that

[apd138]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, i consider myself to be a decent mid limit player and i can tell you me and my winrate have NEVER 3bet any suited connectors other than AK after a raise early and 3 calls.

but i do call with suited connectors, middle ones if the people behind me are not too aggressive. but if you think its a winning play to 3 bet any middle suited connectors after an EARLY raise and callers you are nuts. its likely to get capped since the raiser has to have a better than normal raising hand to raise early. if you call you're already putting in 2sb's when you KNOW you're behind...but you're doing it because the bets you recoup will be 2x the size of those 2 you put in=implied odds.

further...middle pairs on overcard boards are tricky and player dependant. sometimes you FOLD THEM!

raising KTs etc. is usually a good thing in loose games but its not that bad if nobody's calling your raise to limp occasionally and let people in...further, if i very tight UTG limps you may NOT want to raise b/cyou may get limp reraised (if thats his m/o) basically these are also situation dependent.

also, folding to turn raises in low limits should be standard operating procedure and nowhere close to a "leak"

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I said I was not folding *enough* to turn raises.

Next, if you never reraise with anything but huge hands, you're a mighty predictable opponent.

[/ QUOTE ] I assume you are playing online poker right? Do you really believe that the majority of your opponents pay attention to how you are playing enough to effect the way they play? If they are you are probably playing at a very high limit or in a bad game.

[robert_utk]

sophia the biggest leak in your game is that you have obviously not read or comprehended a good book on poker especially the ones written by the proprietors of this web site

[slavic]

Next, if you never reraise with anything but huge hands, you're a mighty predictable opponent.

Only to those that are aware, otherwise you are just throwing away money. If you in a game were people already play too loose, and go to far there is little need to do this. You aren't making money off the one aware player who might be in the game.

[Sophia]

[Bluffoon]

Sophia, the people on this site (me included) are not always polite or sensitive to other's feelings. They do, however, know what they are talking about (not so sure I am inlcuded in this group) when it comes to poker. Mixed in with all that scathing crticism is some sound advice.

It is easy to become defensive when attacked. If you don't want to be criticized and ridiculed go to some feel-good hand-holding we-all-love-you site. If you want to improve your poker get over it and listen.

[cpk]

You seem to forget that suited connectors are at worst 3.3:1 behind big pairs and have the best prospects against AA of any hand. In other words, if you fear AA, KK, or AK, you should prefer suited connectors above all other hands, provided that you have sufficient pot odds to make the call correct. If you have 3+ players in front of you, that money plus the blinds make the call justified on its own--not to mention the massive implied odds. Further, the closer you are to the button, the closer you are to closing the action. This applies to hands even as low as 65s. The trick is to not get all excited when you flop a pair. Rather, you should be in out-buying/hand-defense mode.

4+ players is an overlay. Therefore one should consider raising if it will not knock players out of the pot. Building a big pot when you have favorable odds also benefits you, as when you do win you will win yet more money as other players will chase a bigger pot harder than a smaller pot. Further, having a larger pot lets you chase later. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[cpk]

That's not really the reason to raise a lot. You should raise whenever it is mathematically appropriate to do so. This requires expansive thinking about what is mathematically "appropriate," but doing so automatically makes you less "predictable."

[cpk]

[ QUOTE ]
well, i consider myself to be a decent mid limit player and i can tell you me and my winrate have NEVER 3bet any suited connectors other than AK after a raise early and 3 calls.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can win more if you occasionally 3-bet with them in very loose games.

[ QUOTE ]
but i do call with suited connectors, middle ones if the people behind me are not too aggressive. but if you think its a winning play to 3 bet any middle suited connectors after an EARLY raise and callers you are nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should consider what the raiser is raising with, to be sure. But even if the raiser has Aces, with 5-6 people total, you still have an edge over the entire field. The EP raiser may have a LARGER edge, but you still have an edge. Therefore, you benefit from every extra dollar that goes in the pot.

This means you don't care if it gets capped, unless this would mean losing several of the limpers.

Remember, you should only make this play if it is profitable. Statistically we can guess that the larger suited connectors are an overlay at 5+ and the smaller ones at 6+ (they're marginal at 5).

[ QUOTE ]
further...middle pairs on overcard boards are tricky and player dependant. sometimes you FOLD THEM!

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's a benefit of raising--if you make the pot big enough, you won't have to make any difficult decisions postflop. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
also, folding to turn raises in low limits should be standard operating procedure and nowhere close to a "leak"

[/ QUOTE ]

Not anymore. People are bluff check-raising and overplaying in ever-increasing numbers. This decision should be based on the size of the pot and behavioral knowledge of the player. Lacking the latter, one needs a threshold for a rundown. This is proabably about 10 BB, though I am still trying to determine the real number.

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
You seem to forget that suited connectors are at worst 3.3:1 behind big pairs and have the best prospects against AA of any hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are miscontstruing a statistic here. Yes, a hand like 7,6s will fair "better than any other hand" against AA, BUT IT'S STILL A HUGE UNDERDOG. Please note the difference.


[ QUOTE ]
Further, having a larger pot lets you chase later.

[/ QUOTE ]

You said something similar to this in another response below, and it is the wrong way to think. It is akin to saying "Gee, I'm only getting 5:1 money to chase my 10:1 gutshot .... but if I throw an extra 5 BB's in the pot right now, I'll have the money to chase it down!!!" <-- WRONG WAY TO THINK.

Adam

[cpk]

Oh, and one more thing--raising with "implied odds" hands does not "kill" our implied odds. Rather, we convert our implied odds into instant odds. Why get paid by just 2 or 3 of these clowns when our hands come in when we can get paid, in advance, by all of them?

That's what's you're doing when you make speculative raises with marginal hands. And, what's better, is that you will get even more money later anyway. So it's a win-win.

So, in other words, rather than getting nebulous implied odds from 1 or 2 people 18% of the time, we will simply raise now and get contributions from all 5 people, and we will get paid on those contributions 18% of the time. And, most likely, we will get those implied-odds contributions anyway. Plus, because of the bloated pot, we will probably get more action, not less.

[cpk]

"Gee, I'm only getting 5:1 money to chase my 10:1 gutshot .... but if I throw an extra 5 BB's in the pot right now, I'll have the money to chase it down!!!"

The difference is that you are financing the backdoor draws with their money, not yours. You caused the pot to be capped, putting 8-10+ additional bets into the pot. Those additional bets now let you draw to trips, two pair, and backdoor straights and flushes when you flop a low pair. I don't see anything wrong with that logic, because the raises were +EV to begin with.

[theghost]

[ QUOTE ]
Next, if you never reraise with anything but huge hands, you're a mighty predictable opponent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sophia, let me start by saying that from what I have seen you are a smart, thinking player, and I like that you post/defend views that might be against the grain for a lot of the readers of these forums. Debate is a good thing.

My .02 on the above statement is that there are tons of places to raise lots of different hands, especially for a reasonably aggressive player, so there isn't much need to advertise with -EV raises - especially in low limits.

3-betting JTs preflop you're paying too much to see if you flop your draw - you don't have the pot equity to make this raise, and the added value from deception doesn't make up for it, IMO.

tg

[cpk]

I think the point is one should estimate pot equity and raise if it is > 3. Of course, one must consider what happens if it gets capped, but if you're seeing PE > 3 at that point, it will most likely be > 4 when it gets back to you after the cap. The only time it wouldn't is when multiple people get shy and then fold for two bets. If the game was so good as to make this even an issue, that's unlikely to happen.

[arkady]

I am not going to repeat the rest of the forum, but you are trying to apply more aggression to your game for no good reason. You tell us you are crushing the 3/6 game, so why would you go ahead and flip your game upside down.

Leak 1 is just nutty and should be used very rarely for deceptive purposes. If you think this is an overall strategy you are wasting a lot of money.

Leak 2 is not exactly a leak as it is circumstantial, but if you never do it - yeah u might try.

Leak 3, i hope you are talking open raising, because after limpers these hands are not all that great.

Leak 4, IMO one of the most difficult things to grasp, something that everyone on these forums is always working on.

But once again I have no idea what you are doing, actively LOOKING for leaks (that are not even leaks) in a game you are crushing. I think you read something somewhere and are now trying to randomly apply it to your game.

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see anything wrong with that logic, because the raises were +EV to begin with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please tell, again, how raising suited connectors preflop against is +EV???

Gezuz, I thought we alredy covered this and confirmed that it wasn't (see above posts by myself and others).

When describing your reasoning please pay particular attention to the first half of my last response:

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You seem to forget that suited connectors are at worst 3.3:1 behind big pairs and have the best prospects against AA of any hand.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



You are miscontstruing a statistic here. Yes, a hand like 7,6s will fair "better than any other hand" against AA, BUT IT'S STILL A HUGE UNDERDOG. Please note the difference.

[/ QUOTE ]


Adam

[MrFeelNothin]

What the suited connectors percentage versus one hand in a multiway pot is, is irrelevant. CPK mentioned it earlier, but what matters is your pot equity, how big your share is of the pot. The guy with AA has the biggest share and the most edge, but if you have 5 opponents in a loose game, your suited connector could have the second biggest share and can therefore be making money on every bet that goes into the pot preflop. Adam- look closer at cpk's posts so far in this thread with an open mind. They have been spot on, but it seems to me that you are so sure of yourself that you are unable to accept any possibility of being wrong.

Also, the whole sarcasm thing isn't funny. Its annoying and disrespectful, especially when it is repeated.