Table Image

[chipstacks]

Do you or should you play hands differently based on your table image?

I know for myself I am much less likely to raise preflop with premium non pocket pairs if my table image is a little questionable. Is this bad technique?

[AKQJ10]

It all depends on what stakes you're playing, and to an extent whether it's limit or no limit, assuming you're playing hold 'em.

At low limits, no one's bothering to watch your table image anyway. You can play one pot an hour and no one cares. At low-stakes NL people are a little more observant, at least in my experience. I can't speak for bigger games but I would assume table image becomes more important as you move up.

But assuming "premium non-pocket pairs" means AK and AQ, you should probably be putting in the first raise anyway.

[chipstacks]

Yes you knew exactly what I meant by premium non pocket pairs. Anyway I have noticed that even at lower stakes, if my table image is tight-aggressive winning most of the pots i raise or call, then if i have AK AQ AJ and raise preflop, I can pretty much raise and reraise to take the pot by making others fold out more than 75% of the time regardless of the flop. Without good table image I get called on this bluff, much more often.

[AKQJ10]

Well, sounds like the answer would be to bet as a bluff less, not to stop raising. Most of the strength of those hands comes from the flops they hit, not the ones they miss. I grant you that having that little bit of expectation from a successful continuation bet is worth something, but AK or AQ is generally strong enough to raise regardless.

[Onaflag]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes you knew exactly what I meant by premium non pocket pairs. Anyway I have noticed that even at lower stakes, if my table image is tight-aggressive winning most of the pots i raise or call, then if i have AK AQ AJ and raise preflop, I can pretty much raise and reraise to take the pot by making others fold out more than 75% of the time regardless of the flop. Without good table image I get called on this bluff, much more often.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are lots of variables at work here. Against one opponent, sure, you may have him running scared due to a recent monster you showed down. Pretty tough, though, to count on AK/AQ very soon after a string of wins. I doubt this is happening very often, but I'm no statistician.

When you have a great starter like that and miss the flop you generally come out firing with a continuation bet. If the texture of the flop is such that you are fairly certain (depending on pre-flop action) it did not hit your opponent, then you could very well still have the best hand.

I think rather than basing your decision to raise/reraise solely on your image, it may be wiser to look at the whole package: pre-flop action, number of opponents, your position, and the texture of the flop to name just a few. If you are in late position and early position comes out with a bet and then it is raised by the guy in front of you, I would have second thoughts about reraising if I missed the flop. Quietly receding into the shadows of the muck may be a better option regardless of your table image.

Onaflag.............

[Onaflag]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you or should you play hands differently based on your table image?

I know for myself I am much less likely to raise preflop with premium non pocket pairs if my table image is a little questionable. Is this bad technique?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh! Sorry for missing the original question in my reply. NOT raising pre-flop with AK, AQ is a terrible leak you need to plug right away. Table image has nothing to do with the decision to raise PF with a premium holding. You're just asking the blinds to go ahead and hit 2 pair with their 83o. You must not let them do that.

Onaflag...........

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
You're just asking the blinds to go ahead and hit 2 pair with their 83o. You must not let them do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to get too bound up in subtleties, but theoretically isn't it better if they DO call your raise with 83o and try to hit their two pair? They'll be paying you off with incorrect odds, which I'm coming to understand is what NLHE is about right?

But you certainly don't want to give them three free cards, which is what limping does, hence the need to raise.

[Onaflag]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're just asking the blinds to go ahead and hit 2 pair with their 83o. You must not let them do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to get too bound up in subtleties, but theoretically isn't it better if they DO call your raise with 83o and try to hit their two pair? They'll be paying you off with incorrect odds, which I'm coming to understand is what NLHE is about right?

But you certainly don't want to give them three free cards, which is what limping does, hence the need to raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely. I agree that if they call your RAISE, they have made a mistake and you have won money regardless of the results. I meant that by NOT raising, you're giving the blinds a free ride (especially the BB). The purpose for the raise is a) to get money in the pot when you have a premium holding, and b) to afford your opponents the chance to make a mistake by calling.

So, yeah, I agree with what you say. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Onaflag..........