MarkGritter
07-19-2005, 04:11 PM
I came across this Michael Wiesenberg article in Card Player:
http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/showarticle.php?a_id=13018&m_id=49
He notes that in HU single-draw lowball, always limping with weak hands and raising with strong hands during HU play is not good strategy. Nor is coming in for a raise on every hand. Instead some sort of mixed strategy is called for.
The game-theoretic optimal play he suggests is to limp 1/4 of the hands you would like to raise (and reraise if raised!), and raise 1/4 of the hands you would like to limp. (Based on how your opponent reacts--- his presumably non-optimal response--- you can vary these percentages.) The reason he states that this is the game-theoretical optimal amount is the 3:1 odds your opponent is getting after you open-raise from the small blind (button).
Now, does this reasoning apply in triple draw as well? Typically I come in for a raise with any playable hand HU, or just fold. A thinking opponent can then reraise with any pat hand (rare) or 1-card draw, because on average I will have only a two-card draw, and sometimes a three-card draw.
But, the implied odds are completely different, since there are three betting rounds to come instead of one. Hand strength is considerably altered as well, since there are fewer pat hands in TD than in SD. Finally, the small blind will act last on three rounds (and three draws) in TD instead of only one round and one draw in SD. Do these factors mandate the aggressive strategy of entering for a raise, or does it make sense to consider limping as part of a mixed strategy? If so, is there a different balance that would be more appropriate?
http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/showarticle.php?a_id=13018&m_id=49
He notes that in HU single-draw lowball, always limping with weak hands and raising with strong hands during HU play is not good strategy. Nor is coming in for a raise on every hand. Instead some sort of mixed strategy is called for.
The game-theoretic optimal play he suggests is to limp 1/4 of the hands you would like to raise (and reraise if raised!), and raise 1/4 of the hands you would like to limp. (Based on how your opponent reacts--- his presumably non-optimal response--- you can vary these percentages.) The reason he states that this is the game-theoretical optimal amount is the 3:1 odds your opponent is getting after you open-raise from the small blind (button).
Now, does this reasoning apply in triple draw as well? Typically I come in for a raise with any playable hand HU, or just fold. A thinking opponent can then reraise with any pat hand (rare) or 1-card draw, because on average I will have only a two-card draw, and sometimes a three-card draw.
But, the implied odds are completely different, since there are three betting rounds to come instead of one. Hand strength is considerably altered as well, since there are fewer pat hands in TD than in SD. Finally, the small blind will act last on three rounds (and three draws) in TD instead of only one round and one draw in SD. Do these factors mandate the aggressive strategy of entering for a raise, or does it make sense to consider limping as part of a mixed strategy? If so, is there a different balance that would be more appropriate?