Party 10/20 6-max

[Nate tha' Great]

Hi all,

After being a regular on the Party $5/$10 6-max tables for the past couple of months, I've done some experimentation at $10/$20 recently. Perhaps you've seen me at the tables.

My first impression of $10/$20 is that the games aren't necessarily more skillful, but quite a bit looser and wilder.

Example:

I'm dealt A /images/graemlins/spade.gif 6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif in MP and open-raise. CO 3-bets, BB calls.

Flop is Q /images/graemlins/club.gif K /images/graemlins/club.gif Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif. I check, CO bets, BB calls, I check-raise, CO and BB call.

Turn is 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif. I bet, CO raises, BB folds, I call.

Turn is K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. Check, check, my hand is good. CO had J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/heart.gif.

Some naive questions:

1) How did I play the hand, knowing that CO could have literally anything?
2) Am I best off leaning toward the side of weak-tight to reduce variance in these games, or am I going to get chewed up if I'm not willing to get down and dirty on hands like these?
3) Are the hyper-aggressive players just action junkies, or does this represent something close proper play at these tables? (Yes, I've read the HEFAP section on short-handed games).
4) For those who have played both, have you found $5/$10 or $10/$20 (6-max) to be more profitable in terms of BB/hr?

[rigoletto]

1) Not to well. You keep playing into a player that playes back at you holding only A high.

2) Tight is good and weak too in the sense that you should call down these types with any piece of the flop and sometimes even with A high, but only play back at them with strong hands.

3) They are mostly action junkies that think they can bully you out of a pot. They usually have the tell: weak=strong and vice versa, since they tend to slowplay their good hands to much.

4) I don't know!

[nykenny]

your play of calling a raise on the turn with just A high looking at all the scary cards is probably a long term losing play. unless you have a solid read on the other player every time. which is hard.

Kenny

[Nate tha' Great]

I guess this gets into the question of just how good a read can really be in online play. Against 95% of opponents, I would muck here. However, he was a borderline maniacal player, not the type to slow down, and I had a strong sense that if he had a K or a Q, he would have 3-bet the flop. Since the turn card couldn't have made his hand, I smelled BS and decided to call the bet, perhaps mucking if a third flush card hit on the river.

[ QUOTE ]
your play of calling a raise on the turn with just A high looking at all the scary cards is probably a long term losing play. unless you have a solid read on the other player every time. which is hard.

Kenny

[/ QUOTE ]

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm dealt A /images/graemlins/spade.gif 6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif in MP and open-raise. CO 3-bets, BB calls.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK.

[ QUOTE ]
Flop is Q /images/graemlins/club.gif K /images/graemlins/club.gif Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif. I check, CO bets, BB calls, I check-raise, CO and BB call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bet and a call. I have Ace no kicker, wrong color. Easy fold.

[ QUOTE ]
Turn is 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif. I bet, CO raises, BB folds, I call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Give it another stab, he raises me. OK, fold.

[ QUOTE ]
Turn is K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. Check, check, my hand is good. CO had J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/heart.gif.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK.

[ QUOTE ]
1) How did I play the hand, knowing that CO could have literally anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

Terribly, in my opinion. Why go to battle with A6 against someone who has shown this much strength?

[ QUOTE ]
2) Am I best off leaning toward the side of weak-tight to reduce variance in these games, or am I going to get chewed up if I'm not willing to get down and dirty on hands like these?

[/ QUOTE ]

You'll get chewed up playing hands like this in this manner.

[ QUOTE ]
3) Are the hyper-aggressive players just action junkies, or does this represent something close proper play at these tables? (Yes, I've read the HEFAP section on short-handed games).

[/ QUOTE ]

Action junkies, for the most part. There are some very tough players who look like action junkies, though, but actually play very well. It's important to separate those two types of players.

[ QUOTE ]
4) For those who have played both, have you found $5/$10 or $10/$20 (6-max) to be more profitable in terms of BB/hr?

[/ QUOTE ]

I found both to be pretty similar, though the $5/10 was definitely lower variance.

[DocHollyday]

Hi Nata,

Without being too offensive, but you played this hand like being at the craps table. If you continue like this, you will be broke soon.

I don't like anything you've done. The most I'd do is limp with this hand, unless it's intended to be a steal. And with that flop I'd muck your [censored] faster than Han Solo's Millenium Falcon can fly. Be serious, such a play only can have a negative expectation. The only thing you can beat is a pure, pure, pure bluff and even with a bluff your hand may be beaten. There's no reason to justify all that money you threw into that pot, even if you know that your opponent was a maniac.

Keep cool

[Nate tha' Great]

I suppose that this is a reason to get a little bit more seasoning at $5/$10 before I move up. Looking back over the hand now, I see that would never have played the hand this way at my usual tables, but the maniacal, multi-way aggression threw me off my game a little bit, and I was adopting a style that I didn't feel I had mastery of.

Then again, it might have had more to do with the particular table than the limit. A couple of maniacs with a little bit of knowledge at a short-handed table is a dangerous thing.

I do think the open-raise is okay here, though.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I do think the open-raise is okay here, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

The open-raise is fine.