theory of pf raising in loose games

In SSHE, it is reccommended to raise from any position with AQ, ATs, KJs, 99, and better. However, pg 166 of HEPFAP says that "you shouldn't often raise with AK or AQ in spots where you would raise in tougher, tighter games." Are these reccomendations for different types of games, or are they somewhat contradictory? Did the authors change their minds? I understand that it is profitable for the best players to limp with somewhat unprofitable speculative hands, but it seems a little backwards not to push any and all advantages, even if it adds to your fluctuations (if that is an issue, get a bigger bankroll, right?). Any help is appreciated.

[W. Deranged]

Welcome, dude,

This is a pretty classic confusion. Basically, the comment in HPFAP is really a very specific, technical comment which applies to loose but very tough games at the higher limits. Sklansky is basically talking about games that are loose but filled with aggressive players who play pretty capably post-flop, not small stakes games filled with donks.

Follow Miller's advice here. Sklansky's comments about AK and AQ are based on some fairly involved theory, if I remember correctly, such as pot distortion effects, which really only apply when playing against fairly capable opponents for whom pot size differences will cause them to alter their play. FWIW, I've always thought that that comment by Sklansky was kind of strange anyway and have kind of questioned its value, at least as far as the mid-limit games I sometimes play (15-30, 20-40 and so on, which are apparently some of the games HPFAP is aimed at). I think raising AK and AQ in loose games is a pretty safe proposal all of the time, regardless of game structure. If a lot of players are calling you, some (likely "all") of them are going to be calling with worse hands. The value of that immediate raise should outweigh any later distortion effects, seemingly regardless of your opponents' post-flop capabilities.

[callmedonnie]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, I've always thought that that comment by Sklansky was kind of strange anyway and have kind of questioned its value, at least as far as the mid-limit games I sometimes play (15-30, 20-40 and so on, which are apparently some of the games HPFAP is aimed at).

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't read the book by Sklansky. But on a side note, the poker explosion may have caused 15-30 and 20/40 to no longer apply because of influx of poor players in those games. A friend of mine has played those limits for about six or seven years is says those games used to be much tougher.

[SeaEagle]

Malmuth has some excellent commentaries on AQ in his Essay books. AQ goes down in value against several players.

HPFAP assumes that if there are several players in the hand, they are generally decent postflop players and your equity edge is minor and you might want to wait until after the flop to decide if you want to pursue your hand or not. Also, with good postflop players, you sometimes want a smaller pot on the flop so that you can fold out weak draws and increase your chance of winning the pot with only a pair or even unimproved.

SSHE assumes the players are not good postflop and that your equity edge with AQ is high. It also assumes that it doesn't matter how big the pot is on the flop since your opponents aren't making decisions based on pot odds anyway.

Simply put, a loose game in HPFAP is a lot different than a loose game in SSHE.

[newhizzle]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a pretty classic confusion. Basically, the comment in HPFAP is really a very specific, technical comment which applies to loose but very tough games at the higher limits. Sklansky is basically talking about games that are loose but filled with aggressive players who play pretty capably post-flop, not small stakes games filled with donks.

[/ QUOTE ]

the loose games section of HPFAP is referring to games where players play horribly postflop

my thinking on this is that in early positions and when you dont have an army of limpers in front of you you should raise, if you are on the button with AQo and there are 4 limpers in front of you you should limp because you do not have that great of an equity edge and you can exploit your opponents mistakes more easily in a small pot, there was a very good discussion on this the other day

[newhizzle]

[ QUOTE ]
Simply put, a loose game in HPFAP is a lot different than a loose game in SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, its not, SSH also advocates limping after an army of limpers in late positions, but like i said in early positions or in more shorthanded pots, these hands are clear raises, and if they are suited they are always raises

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Simply put, a loose game in HPFAP is a lot different than a loose game in SSHE.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, its not,

[/ QUOTE ]
YES - it is. And this has been discussed at length on this forum. Furthermore, the games (loose, tight, tough, easy or otherwise) have changed incredibly since HPFAP was written. The advice is solid - but must be applied judiciously to the correct type of game.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
my thinking on this is that in early positions and when you dont have an army of limpers in front of you you should raise, if you are on the button with AQo and there are 4 limpers in front of you you should limp because you do not have that great of an equity edge and you can exploit your opponents mistakes more easily in a small pot, there was a very good discussion on this the other day

[/ QUOTE ]
In loose games where players are going to continually make mistakes whether it's PF, on the flop, turn or river it's correct to exploit your equity edge at any point in the hand. Limping AQo in late position after a few limpers is missing value. Against good players you are manipulating the size of the pot in order to force them into making a mistake later in the hand. Bad players are going to make mistakes regardless so failing to raise when you have an equity advantage is just missing out on value.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Against good players you are manipulating the size of the pot in order to force them into making a mistake later in the hand. Bad players are going to make mistakes regardless so failing to raise when you have an equity advantage is just missing out on value.

[/ QUOTE ]
nh

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Against good players you are manipulating the size of the pot in order to force them into making a mistake later in the hand. Bad players are going to make mistakes regardless so failing to raise when you have an equity advantage is just missing out on value.

[/ QUOTE ]
nh

[/ QUOTE ]

Nicely done, Crunchy. This is one of the more succinct and articulate expressions of this important difference that I've ever heard.

Seems logical enough. Thanks for clearing that up.

FWIW, SSHE doesn't just "advise limping from the button." It reccomends several hands (stated in the first post) to raise from even late position because you should have a pot equity edge. It does, however, reccomend limping with suited kings, semiconnectors, etc in big pots. I do understand, though, that you are less likely to have an edge in such situations in a tough game, though, so raising and limping are not reccomended as much in HEPFAP.

[Smokey98]

[ QUOTE ]
YES - it is. And this has been discussed at length on this forum. Furthermore, the games (loose, tight, tough, easy or otherwise) have changed incredibly since HPFAP was written. The advice is solid - but must be applied judiciously to the correct type of game.

[/ QUOTE ]

This goes without saying! Any decision in HE is made based on the type of game.

[newhizzle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
my thinking on this is that in early positions and when you dont have an army of limpers in front of you you should raise, if you are on the button with AQo and there are 4 limpers in front of you you should limp because you do not have that great of an equity edge and you can exploit your opponents mistakes more easily in a small pot, there was a very good discussion on this the other day

[/ QUOTE ]
In loose games where players are going to continually make mistakes whether it's PF, on the flop, turn or river it's correct to exploit your equity edge at any point in the hand. Limping AQo in late position after a few limpers is missing value. Against good players you are manipulating the size of the pot in order to force them into making a mistake later in the hand. Bad players are going to make mistakes regardless so failing to raise when you have an equity advantage is just missing out on value.

[/ QUOTE ]

you have to keep in mind that your equity edge is not that great, and i think you need to reread your HPFAP, the loose games section of it is very clearly meant for playing against horrible opponents who make mistakes postflop, you are not manipulating the size of the pot so that good players will fold, you are manipulating the size of the pot so that bad players will make misktakes, otherwise you have no real postflop edge

[newhizzle]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, SSHE doesn't just "advise limping from the button."

[/ QUOTE ]

see page 73

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
you have to keep in mind that your equity edge is not that great... ...you are not manipulating the size of the pot so that good players will fold, you are manipulating the size of the pot so that bad players will make misktakes, otherwise you have no real postflop edge

[/ QUOTE ]
First off - you are operating under the assumption that our equity is going to change after the flop. This may or may not be true. Furthermore, since the flop is a completely random event - it's impossible to predict any (much less specifically positive or negative) equity change. Since we don't truely know what our equity is going to be after the flop we would be foolish not to take advantage of our known (or at least much more probable) edge at the current moment (i.e. Preflop).

Second - I never said that we were manipulating the size of the pot to make good players fold. I said, "Against good players you are manipulating the size of the pot in order to force them into making a mistake later in the hand".
This is a very distinct difference - and one you are quite fallacious in misquoting.

Last - The OP refers to a difference in advice between HPFAP and SSHE. The difference is obviously there and can be clearly referenced in print.

You seem to be stating that the advice given in HPFAP is correct for the B&M and online small stakes games of today. But this advice is directly contradictory to the advice given in the more recent publication SSHE. Ironically, these two books are authored by the same people. Obviously, for the same people to be giving two entirely different sets of advice, there must be some difference in the situation that each tidbit is referencing. This difference is in the quality and type of opponents that we (as the reader) are going to be confronting.

I'm not going to go 'round and 'round arguing this. Perhaps you are correct. Perhaps HPFAP's 'loose games' section is written about players who play horribly post-flop. I don't agree with that - and neither do many others who, in part, I base my comments in this thread upon. One thing, however, is for certain; If HPFAP's 'loose games' section was written in reference to players who play horribly post-flop - it's referencing an entirely different style of "horrible" post-flop play than what SSHE is referring to.

[newhizzle]

im not going to go round and round on this either, because i already did the other day, but there are a couple of points that i think you have wrong and i am going to state them here and be done with it

[ QUOTE ]
Against good players you are manipulating the size of the pot in order to force them into making a mistake later in the hand

[/ QUOTE ]

manipulating the size of the pot will not force good players to make any mistakes, if they are not getting the right odds, they will fold, it does force bad players to make mistakes, when the pot is very big, drawing to long-shot draws is not a mistake, but they will do it regardless to the size of the pot, when the pot is small, we gain from these mistakes, when the pot is big, noone gains because they are not making mistakes

you are right that we do not know what our equity will be after the flop yet, but if we miss, we will be forced to chase in a very big pot, when we can get away from our hand in a smaller one, and i think you are mistaken about just how big our preflop equity edge is with unsuited hands, AQo does not play well multiway

[ QUOTE ]
The difference is obviously there and can be clearly referenced in print.


[/ QUOTE ]

from HPFAP(page 152):
"Since the original has edition of this book in 1988, poker has undergone an explosion with hold 'em leading the way. Today there are many new players participating, resulting in much looser games. It is not uncommon, even at higher limits, to find many players who not only play too many hands, but go too far with their hands. These games, usually at the lower limits, are referred to as "no-fold 'em hold 'em""

from SSH(page 73):
"If the pot is already many-handed, perhaps five or six limpers, consider limping with AJ and KQ. Your preflop edge is relatively small against so many opponents, and your call should give you strategic advantages which can make up for small theoretical loss from not raising by allowing you to outplay your opponents after the flop"