Late limping and mini-raising

[fnord_too]

I have noticed people try to limp or mini raise some late in STT's. I am coming to believe that these actions are typically weak, which surprises me since usually when I do it I am strong. This is at the 50+5 level. In your experience are these typically weak, strong, or about 50/50?

[zambonidrivr]

i see this all the time on the $10's. I love to min raise aces on the $10's as some assclown will always come over the top. for me, this is typically read dependent, which can be hard to do when 8 tabling. I run a software called pokeroffice, which overlays a variety of metrics such as flop%'s and agression factors, which can help me in a tough spot. i folded aq and jacks to a min raise last night, only to see someone come over the top and either have the min raiser fold, or call with something like a9 utg at a table of 10. IMHO, you will see a variety of play on $10's.

[tminus]

i play the 10's but im begining to think there isnt that much difference between them and the 50's

I reserve a play like this for that rare situation when I have AA or KK HU and the other player is loose aggressive. Aside from that I dont see the point in it.

Counter strategy to this, on the other hand, is something I think about. There's a pretty wide gamut of weirdness out there but for the most part the players are predictable and Ive always wanted to go back through all of my hands and track what kind of cards people usually do this with. Call me kooky but I love data mining.

[fnord_too]

To be more clear, when I say weak, I see people folding a lot when someone comes over the top, and occasionally making a crying call with some cheese (which is exactly what zam has observed).

I have gone through a transition lately, mainly in MTT play, where later in the tournament I vary my opening raise some. Specifically, if I am first in from MP or later I will sometimes make a mini raise with AA/KK/(less often with)QQ to encourage action. It works. Man, I have been giving people way too much credit for way too long. I am turning into a value whore late in MTT's now, but it hasn't hurt my stealing any yet. My mini raises have so far gotten a lot of respect the few times I have tried them in STT's.

[tminus]

[ QUOTE ]
Specifically, if I am first in from MP or later I will sometimes make a mini raise with AA/KK/(less often with)QQ to encourage action.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could justify this if they were super aggressive early in the game. What's interesting is that as the blinds climb people start getting trigger happy, even the really tight passive players will push here when they're short.

[ QUOTE ]
My mini raises have so far gotten a lot of respect the few times I have tried them in STT's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Related to this is min raise blind stealing. In the past when its folded to me on button/sb I would steal by raising pretty hard, this usually works but it's risking more than necessary to do over and over. I say this because after a couple folds I could safely assume that this particular player is a bit on the passive side. So recently, if Ive already established this about him, I'll back off on the amount I raise to steal so it looks like a min raise.

Its ironic really, a min-raise might look like a steal to an agro player but to passive player it looks like a decent hand (unless they're shortstacked).

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
I have noticed people try to limp or mini raise some late in STT's. I am coming to believe that these actions are typically weak, which surprises me since usually when I do it I am strong. This is at the 50+5 level. In your experience are these typically weak, strong, or about 50/50?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a mistake to think that others will act like you. The only real sign of a monster (or hand that wants to race) that I've found is a limp from a short stack that SHOULD be pushing to steal or a limp (not even a mini-raise) from a super big stack.

[tminus]

[ QUOTE ]

It's a mistake to think that others will act like you. The only real sign of a monster (or hand that wants to race) that I've found is a limp from a short stack that SHOULD be pushing to steal or a limp (not even a mini-raise) from a super big stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if you've identified the player as someone with similiar playing style as your own? This is something i think about alot, King Yao writes about this and dubbs the player as a 'HoldEm Brain' if he can, "understand how other s view him or her". I look for ways to do this but often wonder if the other playera are thinking about me at all.

[AliasMrJones]

If you see me min-raising or limping on the button late in a STT, be very afraid. But, when I've seen others limp or min-raise at any point in a $55, including late they've mostly been weak and folded when I come over the top. Once in a while there will be a tricky player open-completing in the SB with AQ or something, but mostly it shows real weakness from my experience.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It's a mistake to think that others will act like you. The only real sign of a monster (or hand that wants to race) that I've found is a limp from a short stack that SHOULD be pushing to steal or a limp (not even a mini-raise) from a super big stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if you've identified the player as someone with similiar playing style as your own? This is something i think about alot, King Yao writes about this and dubbs the player as a 'HoldEm Brain' if he can, "understand how other s view him or her". I look for ways to do this but often wonder if the other playera are thinking about me at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't you say you play the $10s? If so, you are absolutely over-analyzing this game. I seriously doubt even 1% of the players at this level are thinking more than level 1. I say this with the utmost respect. Other players are not thinking about you yet. I haven't read King's book, but I'm certain it's intended for opponents who you know are thinkers/players/skilled. The $10+1s are full of gamblers. Learn to understand the gambling mentality, and then move to the $22s.

Edit: Level 1 thinking (in case you didn't know). "Wow, my cards are pretty."

[AliasMrJones]

[ QUOTE ]
I look for ways to do this but often wonder if the other playera are thinking about me at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can stop wondering. 85% of the time the answer is no. If you're playing anything less than $33's it's 99% of the time.

[tminus]

I know this to be true and I also know that most of what I read is not applicable at the tables I play. I must say that there is the rare occurence where you end up playing with someone decent and have an opportunity to explore these ideas.

How much better is it at the higher levels (55, 109, 215) and can you employ tactics like these there ?

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't read King's book, but I'm certain it's intended for opponents who you know are thinkers/players/skilled.

[/ QUOTE ]

The book in general is not for playing against any specific skill level. It (so far, I ~ half way through) is fantastic. It's for limit HE ring games, but his general approach is very good and he shows how EV changes for actions when your assumptions about the opponent changes. (That is, he will say do an EV calculation given some assumptions, then say "but what if your opponent only does something x% of the time here instead of the y% we assumed, then the EV looks like this...")

Jeez, I'm hijacking my own thread. Great book, I'd reccomend it if you play ring games or would like a nice presentation of a lot of the fundamental tenets of good poker. Also, you can get a feel for the way he thinks by reading his posts. He posts some in the HUSH forum, and his posts almost always entail math.