PDA

View Full Version : Deep stack theory - what am I hoping to hit? (long)


FourKing Hell
02-02-2005, 02:26 AM
This might be basic stuff to some of you, but I haven't come across it before and I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this matter. I'd like to know if I'm on the right track.

I'm wondering how the size of your stack affects hand values as it grows larger. As you approach some point around 100BB - which is about 20 to 30 standard raises in most games - big cards go down and 'implied odds' hands such as suited connectors and small pairs go up. I've always taken that into account, and done well for myself. But recently, I started to wonder - is there a third stage?

The following paragraphs will mainly deal with small pairs and suited connectors. How does their going up in value translate into deeper stack play?

Example: 5/10 NL sixhanded. A good player to my right has 2300+ and opens for 30. I have pocket fours, 1800 behind. My brother is watching me play, and as I explain to him the various reasons for calling and what I'm hoping will happen, I realize that most hands the raiser will stack off with if the pot is ~70 can beat a set of fours. Many of those will be tough for me to get away from. I fold, and decide to rethink my strategy for deep stack play. Here's what I've come up with so far:

As stack sizes grow, small pairs become more valuable because it gets worthwhile to call, catch a set and go all in against hands like TPTK or overpairs. Set over set happens, but so rarely that it is made up for by the money made from lesser hands. Lesser hands that will pay you off, because they are pot-commited. If they bet the flop, you raise and they call, they will be hard-pressed to get away from their hands. Either that or you call and they proceed to make an all-in committing bet on the turn. The same holds for low suited connectors - it is near impossible for the raiser to decide whether you hit your hand hard, so he'll have to pay you off some of the time.

However, there is a point where a preflop raise and a flop bet no longer create pot-committing situations. Playing stacks that are close to 200BB, even players with AA (that don't get reraised) will plan on playing a relatively small pot unless they improve. Two pair hands will be wary of traps. Because the percentage of the stacks going in preflop is smaller, hands that are a lock to be +EV come by less and less - you can afford to have higher shove-it-in standards if the payoff is bigger.

Small sets are dangerous here. You can't afford to play a small pot with them, because they won't make you enough to justify playing in the first place, and you can't afford to play them for all your chips either. They are like big overpairs in that they don't want to play a big pot, but they are also unlike big overpairs in an important way: they don't want to play in a small pot either. Never will a pot you win with pocket aces be so small that it wasn't worth to stick your money in in the first place. But if you play for a set, the hands you win need to net you 8 times the amount your losing hands cost you. So you need to build a pot with them. But if you do that, you might build yourself a pot so large you'll be hard-pressed to get away from your hand if someone goes over the top of you with a bigger set. One such mistake can cost you more than all the medium-sized pots you do win, even if each of those exceeded 8x the amount you put in preflop.

I'm not exactly sure how suited connectors fit into all of this. It's pretty damn hard to hit a flop that's worth stacking off outright. I think most of the value lies in big draws that are rarely behind very far, such as straight flush draws or flush draws with a pair, and therefore have a lot of fold equity. Albeit to a lesser degree, those big draws run into the same problems small sets do. An eight-high flush is a good hand, but not often worth 200 big blinds.

On the other hand, if you're 2 to 1 against making your hand on the next street and you're up against a set, which most likely will pay you off more than 0% of the time, especially when you catch a straight, especially straight-flush draws can be immensely profitable - as long as you make sure not to go broke when you do catch that flush, something that's easier to achieve with position.

None of this takes into account the aspect of bluffing and hand-reading, or specific opponents. If there's a possibility the opponent is bluffing, your standards for calling him down will be lower. If there's the possibility you are bluffing and your opponents realize this, the range of hands you can profitably bet will be larger. Also, if you make a play that represents either a bluff or a set of deuces, your opponent won't try to bet you off your hand. If he does raise, you can safely fold either hand. It will be just as if you had gone all in with a smaller stack and lost. Some opponents are just plain stupid enough to desperately cling to their overpairs no matter what happens, and you can still take advantage of them playing the same way you would in a 100BB stack situation.

-- CONCLUSION

Overall, I guess if you're a good enough hand reader you can play just about anything. But these are my thoughts on specific hand types:

Big offsuits - stay the same.
You either play a small pot, just like you would with medium stacks, or you turn some sort of monster which will be good enough to go all in, just like with medium stacks. Just two pair does not qualify, but you should be able to get away from that for less than 100BB.

Big suiteds - go up
Aside from the aforementioned, you'll have the additional benefit of snapping off suited connectors that others will also be playing. They'll be hard-pressed to fold when they just hit one of their many outs and you have the Ace.

Ace-little suited - one of the most overrated hands, IMO. I don't think it's worth more with deeper stacks, because most often you'll wind up playing just the flush draw.

Medium to big pairs - go up somewhat.
They still win the majority of the small pots they play, and won't play really big pots unless they improve. When they do turn top set, they're committed, as opponents might be on a smaller set.

Small pairs - go down a lot
With 100BB stacks, small pairs gain territory on big pairs. With 200BB stacks, big pairs regain some of that territory because of the increased danger of set over set.

(Suited) connector-type hands - go up, mostly at the expense of small pairs but also bigger pairs
Everyone knows that a set is always possible. Everyone knows how to recognize boards with straight potential. However, because there are often multiple draws you could have been holding, and only one of them got there, especially small and medium straights are still the most deceptive hands out there. Of course, you'd prefer situations where you either have the nuts, or the real nuts would have required your opponent to call with a four-outer.

Kaz The Original
02-02-2005, 02:39 AM
This should probably go in Poker Theory, but I understand it being posted here.

I'm going to reply to this at length later, when I have time. Just wanted to say for now, this is excellent.

gomberg
02-02-2005, 03:09 AM
shhh - you're giving away secrets /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Excellent post - if you read C/R's book, they mention that early with small pocket pairs, when the money gets deep, they are an easy fold preflop - mainly because of the situation where it's too expensive when you lose with the set. I would agree - playing against decent above average players with 200BB or more, you shouldn't really be playing these hands.

With position, you can be looser because of the deep money aspect of intimidation and bluffing equity.

I rarely play too much where a majority of the table has 200BB or more, but it seems that it's really hard to build big pots. I really think there's good value to raising in position with suited connectors to build a pot (or high suited cards as well), then semibluff on the flop, then hit your hand /images/graemlins/smile.gif, and suddenly you may be able to stack someone off in two installments on the turn and river.

ok, i'll quit my rambling now - good post.

cero_z
02-02-2005, 03:44 AM
Hi 4KingHell,

I love this post. Very provocative. I want to make a couple of points that came to me quickly; obviously, your entire post will take a while to absorb and process completely.

1)First and foremost, the game you describe, in which "everyone realizes etc. etc.," is not as good a game as you are liable to be in these days. Bad players have a way of accruing huge stacks, whether they buy them or suck their way into them. Your statements basically apply to games filled with very good, but devoid of truly great, NL players (tough games). See below for my idea of what "truly great" means.

2) Your thoughts on small pairs with giant stacks reflect a common winning approach to NL which, though definitely profitable, is only about 1/2 of the most powerful NL strategy I am aware of. You don't need your sets to win 8 times what you lose in "non-set-flopping" pots, unless you lose each and every one of those pots. As I said above, this thinking reflects the following approach: "I mess around and take stabs at the small or medium pots, but when big money goes in, I always have the goods." This method will win you so much money, it's ridiculous. But, it won't win as much money as you should with pocket fours. And more importantly, it won't beat the players who are also employing this strategy; it will only keep you even with them.

To beat them, you need to take advantage of this type of thinking by other players. Meaning, you must become willing to play a big pot with one pair. You must be willing to take advantage of your "more solid" opponents' unwillingness to do the same, by occasionally making huge bluffs WHEN THEY KNOW THAT YOU KNOW THEY HAVE A BIG HAND. This might seem a bit paradoxical; i.e., how can you distinguish someone who plays "great like this," from a fish who can't get away from one pair, or can't resist bluffing once the pot gets very big? The answer comes down to judgement and heart; ultimately, the requisites that determine how far you'll go as a player.

Sadly (I think), the kind of fantastic theoretical analysis that you've displayed in your post will not get you over the mountain; it will only get you near the top. Judgement and heart must take you the rest of the way. And, from the discrepancy in the results of certain hugely successful players and the quality of analysis in the books authored by those players, it would appear that judgement and heart are the much heavier part of the equation (unless they are holding a lot back, or simply can't explain what they know).

What do you think?

cero_z
02-02-2005, 03:51 AM
OK, I just re-read your post more carefully, and I see that you did address these issues in the 10th paragraph. My bad for not acknowledging it the first time through.

I also wanted to add that a good way to attack tough games like you describe is to take advantage of the players who are constantly thinking about getting your ENTIRE stack in one hand. It's easy to let this get so big in your mind that you don't get the proper value from your big hands, because you go for too much.

fimbulwinter
02-02-2005, 04:23 AM
big post to digest. few insta-thoughts:

1. with proper game selection, many of these points are moot.

2. esp super deep (like 200BB or more) you don't need to take the guy's entire stack. the "lets get it all by minraising the turn and pushing the river" kind of line can be thrown out by calling down with hands that don't want the heat of being pushed on (like say bottom set). at these stack depths, taking 1/3 of a guy's stack is more than enough value from a set and getting 200 or more BB in th middle requires a lot of planning and two big hands, which is very often not the case. focusing on taking everything when you make a hand will force you to overplay certain hands; what you want is to take nice sized pots.

3. remember that if they're that aware and that good, then your money is coming from elsewhere. im speaking mostly about my play on the PP200NL 6max tables, where multiple stacks of 1K were not uncommon. My main goal there was to stay out of the way of the other big stacks unless i had a reason to tangle with them and pick off the constantly-rebuying fish. in reading NL literature, this seems to be a consensus among players like ciaffone etc. who play with top players who are better than them.

the post is well thought out, and I think cero's points are very good, but I'd be hard pushed to apply them in an online situation unless I had considerable experience playing with the opponents. I think that even he would agree that playing with a table full of fish is more profitable than being the only player with the heart he describes in a table full of good players.

fim "the fish get deep too" bulwinter

BluffTHIS!
02-02-2005, 09:45 AM
This is excellent and very advanced advice, namely that you don't always have to flop a set with a small pocket pair, even out of position to win. But to use this advice without losing your stack you have to be a very good reader of your opponent and the manner in which he plays certain hands.

[ QUOTE ]
if you read C/R's book, they mention that early with small pocket pairs, when the money gets deep, they are an easy fold preflop - mainly because of the situation where it's too expensive when you lose with the set.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very weak-tight and won't come up often enough to worry about, and if it does, it will usually not be the pre-flop raiser who oversetted you but a 3rd player who called the raise, where you could possibly consider folding bottom set though with so many players especially online overplaying TPTK and an overpair to the board it would be hard to get away from. What you want here is to have the pre-flop raiser with a big broadway pair that he will not get away from, and whether you should use Doyle's lead-into-the-raiser approach or checkraise is determined by whether you know the preflop raiser would take a stab at the pot with overcards if you checked, or would call with overcards if you bet. This quoted advice also conflicts with that in C/R that says a drawing hand needs position throughout the hand where a set does not.

The main consideration out of position is the amount of a raise you have to call from behind you, and C/R gives the answer - use the 5/10 rule - no more than 10% of your stack, though preferably less, and considering the fact that more callers increase your implied odds.

gomberg
02-02-2005, 10:03 AM
I was talking mainly about good players who will not get their deep money stack in with an overpair - so unless you really think you'll win a large pot (like 10 to 15-1) of the raise with a good player holding an overpair in position against you, I think you can fold these hands.

It all comes down to having good judgement about your opponent. Just the other day, someone limped in, I made a decently large raise behind him with QQ, and he called with a low pair getting great implied odds against me. But I can tell you what, there's no way I was going to lose a huge pot with QQ in this spot aginst an average player. Needless to say, I took him set over set and he lost 175 BB at 3-6. I think it was an awful call for him preflop, as his implied odds against ME were not that good. These are the situations where your judgement of other players is very key. Of course, if the other player is good / aggro / tricky, I could end up losing a big pot if I'm outplayed.

start_to_finish
02-02-2005, 10:13 AM
Lots of good points - It is a much different game with huge stacks - 200x the BB and higher, as opposed to 50x - 100x stacks. Playing with super deep stacks requires much more skill, and provides many more bluffing opportunities, than with average stacks...

Dr. Strangelove
02-02-2005, 06:20 PM
These guys might do well to consider these points.

Hand #4061904-4842 at Brooklyn Park (No Limit Hold'em)
Powered by UltimateBet
Started at 21/Jan/05 08:18:18

magicpitch is at seat 3 with $12054.50.
Far is at seat 4 with $11080.
dickholdem is at seat 6 with $33315.50.
Aplusgame247 is at seat 7 with $25863.
The button is at seat 7.

magicpitch posts the small blind of $25.
Far posts the big blind of $50.

magicpitch: -- --
Far: -- --
dickholdem: -- --
Aplusgame247: -- --

Pre-flop:

dickholdem raises to $175. Aplusgame247 calls.
magicpitch folds. Far folds.

Flop (board: Jc Kc 5h):

dickholdem bets $425. Aplusgame247 raises to $3100.
dickholdem re-raises to $5775. Aplusgame247 goes
all-in for $25688. dickholdem calls.

Turn (board: Jc Kc 5h 6h):

(no action in this round)


River (board: Jc Kc 5h 6h 9c):

(no action in this round)




Showdown:

Aplusgame247 shows Jd Kh.
Aplusgame247 has Jd Kh Jc Kc 9c: two pair, kings and jacks.
dickholdem shows 5s 5d.
dickholdem has 5s 5d Jc Kc 5h: three fives.


Hand #4061904-4842 Summary:

$2 is raked from a pot of $51801.
dickholdem wins $51799 with three fives.
----------------------------------------------------------------

mcb
02-02-2005, 07:01 PM
Excellent post. I often find myself playing poorly when I build up a stack over 200bb. I try to get a lot of the money in when I have a marginal at best hand.

Usagi_yo
02-03-2005, 01:47 PM
I think as your stack grows that hand values don't go up per se like in limit poker as you move to later later positions. I think as your stack grows, your propensity for risk goes up and you'll play hands you might not otherwise play.

Rococo
02-03-2005, 03:26 PM
Extremely interesting. I have two comments. First, I think that you have to pay attention to what the standard opening raise is in the deep stack game, because the key to the analysis, particularly with respect to the baby pairs, is the average size of the pot going into the flop as compared to the stack sizes. I have played in games where the opening raises creep up as the stacks get deeper.

Second, more often than not, the stacks are not uniformly deep. Some players may be 100BB while others are at 250BB. If someone with 100BB raises in early position, it can be tricky to determine whether to play 44 in MP with 200BB, especially with deep stacks yet to act behind you.

GFunk911
02-03-2005, 04:40 PM
Great Post. Here's some stuff I was thinknig about after reading your post.

The reason that low pairs flopping sets lose some of their hand value in very deep stack play is tied into the reason sets are so powerful in "normal" stack play.

A low pocket pair defines itself fully on the flop. While a suited connector flops a lot of draws that are X% to fill on the turn or river (and therefore require a lot of semi bluffing to make profitable against decent players), a LPP either flops its hand or doesn't. The flop fully defines the hand. In a game where a significant percentage of the money is going in on the flop, this is huge.

As the stacks get deeper and deeper, and a lower and lower percentage of the money goes in preflop and on the flop, the value of defining your hand on the flop goes down as well.