Let's kick this one around a little: the much-maligned minraise...

[eastbay]

is actually a very powerful weapon against weak opponents that you'll find in <= $50 PP SnGs.

The reason I think this has potential merit is that these folks play far too passively on the flop. You bet at them, and they play "fit or fold" for top pair or better. This means you can take down a lot of flops in the process along with a 2XBB+SB profit. For the big party blind structure, that adds up very quickly.

You want to make it easy for them to call because their flop play is so poor (of course, seeing the flop for free is making it too cheap.)

A 3xBB raise is not better because you'll get less than the proportional number of calls. And when you miss and they play back at you, you get away cheaper.

This is of course terrible advice against opponents who are more skilled at flop play.

Any traction with this idea?

eastbay

[t_perkin]

Well it took me about 30 minutes and an equal number of rereads to work out what exactly you are proposing. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

First up I am pretty sure you are talking about minraises PF. NOT on the flop. Correct?

What sort of hands are you talking about doing this with? as a total bluff? with premium hands?

What position? with players in play in front of you?

Give us some example hands.

Tim

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Well it took me about 30 minutes and an equal number of rereads to work out what exactly you are proposing. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

First up I am pretty sure you are talking about minraises PF. NOT on the flop. Correct?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Preflop.

[ QUOTE ]

What sort of hands are you talking about doing this with? as a total bluff? with premium hands?


[/ QUOTE ]

I would say, with any hand you would normally make a "standard" 3XBB raise with. This might be a legitimate hand but it might also be a speculative stealing hand.

[ QUOTE ]

What position? with players in play in front of you?

Give us some example hands.

Tim

[/ QUOTE ]

I am mostly talking about the mid-levels: blinds 50,100,200-ish. Enough that taking 2XBB+SB is significant, but before you're into an all-in or fold mode.

Choosing a particular hand to illustrate would be counterproductive because the hand is not particularly important. Now, I'd rather play with something that if it hits, I can play on with confidence, so raising with a deuce or a trey is probably not a good idea (and of course, you want to leave yourself the most ways to hit something worth playing.) But basically any hand where you'd normally raise 3xBB, in the right games, I think, can be played more profitably with a 2xBB raise, due to a particular kind of mistake in the postflop play (which they are much more likely to call into). That mistake is to only play on with top pair or better.

Typically I am talking about middle to late position, depending on blind size. The presumption is that you're going to get it heads-up or at worst 3-way.

eastbay

[t_perkin]

I think the first problem with it is that you are allowing a lot of 2nd best hands in after you.

suited connectors, ATs, low PPs etc.

If you are doing this with ligit hands like QQ and AK from MP then it is going to cause you a lot of problems on the flop.
The pot is bigger than with a limp, so a pot sized steal is expensive, and dangerous with players behind you.

Ok this is not such a problem for lower buyins, but you will still run into it regularly:

The other problem you run into is what to do with reraise after you? I am MORE inclined to reraise to a minraise so that I find out while it is still quite cheap if I am looking at a weak steal or weakly played big hand. Plus with a raise and a reraise the blinds are going to think hard before playing. Leaving it probably heads up with me in position, and showing the strength.
The problem in your position is what to do with that raise? it gives you far less information than a raise against a 3BB bet which you have to take seriosuly.

You will also see a lot of allins from shortstacks hoping that you are playing a weak hand that you will fold.

You also lose the chance to steal, as a fold from the BB will be rare.

I think you are getting into too much trouble on the flop. Pots are probably going to be larger and you have more players to contend with. It goes against the SnG principle of keeping away from variance.

Also you are talking about $10+1 strategy. If you are playing $10+1 and you are confident that your flop play is far better than the oppositions then you should just be playing higher buyins.

There are situations where I would use a min raise, but they usually involve some sort of read on the BB, and they are the exception rather than the rule.

But just my thoughts, others may think differently

Tim

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the first problem with it is that you are allowing a lot of 2nd best hands in after you.

suited connectors, ATs, low PPs etc.

If you are doing this with ligit hands like QQ and AK from MP then it is going to cause you a lot of problems on the flop.
The pot is bigger than with a limp, so a pot sized steal is expensive, and dangerous with players behind you.


[/ QUOTE ]

Most of these problems aren't problems, IMO. If you're getting called by inferior hands, isn't that a good thing? They aren't going to play at you unless they hit. A half to 75% pot sized flop bet is plenty to push out the "fit or fold" crowd. It's just not that expensive considering what there is to be gained by it.

[ QUOTE ]

Ok this is not such a problem for lower buyins, but you will still run into it regularly:

The other problem you run into is what to do with reraise after you?


[/ QUOTE ]

Easy. You expect you have a hand that can hold up? Play. You don't? Fold.

[ QUOTE ]

I am MORE inclined to reraise to a minraise so that I find out while it is still quite cheap if I am looking at a weak steal or weakly played big hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, sure, but you don't suck.

[ QUOTE ]

You will also see a lot of allins from shortstacks hoping that you are playing a weak hand that you will fold.


[/ QUOTE ]

A very short stack is something to be aware of and usually avoid, I'd agree. Especially if they more or less have to go on pot odds. Unless you have a real hand, of course, in which case you want to get them to play with you, so the minraise makes it look like you are weak and increases the likelihood of it.

[ QUOTE ]

You also lose the chance to steal, as a fold from the BB will be rare.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not particularly, once you get to 100+. What site do you play on?

[ QUOTE ]

I think you are getting into too much trouble on the flop. Pots are probably going to be larger


[/ QUOTE ]

Larger than what? Certainly smaller than a "standard" 3xBB bet.

[ QUOTE ]

and you have more players to contend with. It goes against the SnG principle of keeping away from variance.


[/ QUOTE ]

If the table is calling behind me a lot, I'll go back to 3x. But it just isn't often the case that I'm facing more players, once the blinds are 100+.

[ QUOTE ]

Also you are talking about $10+1 strategy. If you are playing $10+1 and you are confident that your flop play is far better than the oppositions then you should just be playing higher buyins.


[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm not. My usual games is $55.

eastbay

[Al_Capone_Junior]

min raises preflop are great for when you run out of ipecac syrup and need to vomit. they're great for morons who have no clue how to play and just like to pointlessly and cluelessly raise their own standard deviation and that of those around them. This is particularly true in small games where there's virtually no chance whatsoever of a min raise changing the # of players involved in the hand. Also, a min raise has nearly no chance of stealing the blinds in anything but the late of rounds of most tournaments. If you're gonna raise, raise for a purpose other than to have a reason to vomit.

al

[sublime]

Off topic: (well kinda)

Do 50% pot sized bets accomplish anything when you feel nobody nailed the flop?

[t_perkin]

Well if you find that you can narrow the field as much and steal as often with 2BB as 3BB then great. I will experiment a bit more over the next week.

But personally from my experience of watching other players who makes minraises PF they get called or raised and get put in difficult positions which cost them too many chips.

But I will have a bit of a play around.

Tim

[Al_Capone_Junior]

post flop is another story. sometimes there could be reasons to bet 50% of the pot, tho I am not going to go into detail about when those might be. Same goes with min-raising a bettor after the flop.

al

[DrPhysic]

I have been doing reasonably well with half pot bets, with a couple of provisos: half pot doesn't do much if the pot is 60, and everybody has 700, 800, + stacks. Once the pot gets up to a reasonable number (300?, more?) then a half pot bet is reasonable to me, because a full pot bet would be more than 40% of my stack, at which time i would simply push it all in. I get lots of folds to a half pot bet, and don't get totally pot committed on the hands that i find out the other guy really does have the nuts and i have to lay it down. NOW, you have to understand that Capone will just tell you that all of the above is nothing but justification for the fact that i don't have enough guts to PUSH! FO Capone!

Doc

[tolbiny]

After reading one of Bernie's posts in the Multitable tourney section i have been experimenting with one of his suggestions- raiseing 2.7xbb as oppossed to 3x. when i am trying this i do it with both my premium hands and my steal hands. I feel like i have gotton some good results- but it is very hard to know if you are getting fewer or more calls without keeping stats, which i havent. One thing Bernie mentioned is that he suspects that the bigger stacks of the bet even though is a smaller amount of chips has a psychological value and makes people more likely to fold.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, a min raise has nearly no chance of stealing the blinds in anything but the late of rounds of most tournaments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you're starting to get it. The point is specifically NOT to steal the blinds.

eastbay

[t_perkin]

Can't you just post some hands so that we can see what you are talking about?

It doesn't even have to be a real hand, just one so that we can get a proper idea of when where you want to do this. At the moment it seems like you are saying that every raise should be a min-raise. Is that what you are saying?

Tim

[DrPhysic]

Tim,
I'll give you some hands. I play a minraise almost every time i see a drawing hand that cannot possibly win without help, to see a flop as cheaply as possible. I try not to limp, simply because of the hand i had last night. Two guys limped, i am in the BB with 82o. If anybody bets, i'm out. after the flop i have 2p and clobbered the two guys both with better hands than mine. So i try not to let the BB see 3 free cards whenever i have a hand good enough to play in the first place.

From any MP, or LP (usually not EP) i minraise with any pair smaller than 99, and with any suited connector smaller than QJ.

And i will sometimes fold after the minraise if there is an aggressive raise behind me, especially if it is from a solid player.

So eastbay is right IMO, there is definitely a place in the game for a minraise.

Thoughts?

Doc

[Al_Capone_Junior]

My philosophy is to either chit or get off the pot. Min-raising the blinds is only barely better than just giving them a free chance to beat you. If they are stupid enough to call with crappy hands they'll still call with crappy hands for more anyway.

flames----->you suck Doc!<-----flames /images/graemlins/grin.gif

al

[t_perkin]

[ QUOTE ]

From any MP, or LP (usually not EP) i minraise with any pair smaller than 99, and with any suited connector smaller than QJ.


[/ QUOTE ]

But most of these are hands that I just wouldn't play UNLESS I was trying to steal the blinds.

Ok I am going to make up a specific hand, which fits your specifications and I will tell you why I would not make a min raise.

Now assuming my normal game: 30+3 at Party during the tough(er) daytime games.

Blinds 50/100

My stack T800

I have 66 in MP

One limper in front.

If I make a 2BB raise here I would say there is less than 3% chance of stealing. Without the limper it is probably closer to 10%.
I would say there is at least a 50% chance of at least one caller behind me.
I would say that there is a 20% chance of a reraise behind me. Which probably has me beat 50% of the time

I would say that with a 3BB raise with the limper I have a 10% chance of stealing and a 30% chance without.
I would say there is at least a 25% chance of at least one caller behind me.
I would say that there is a 10% chance of a reraise behind me. Which probably has me beat 80% of the time.

I know which one I would choose already. You are heading into more multiway pots with weaker hands. We all agree that this is not what we want?

Now on the flop lets say you have the BB and a flat caller behind you. So the pot is T600

We will consider the 90% of the time that you don't have a 6 on the flop.

If you bet out half the pot and you get called or raised you have probably lost the hand. In which case you have lost >60% of your chips on a low PP. And the thing is this is not only the worst outcome - it is the most likely.

Bickering over mid size pots on the flop with semi-playable hands is just too expensive in a SnG.


I am sure that you will argue over my % guesses.


The places I *might* consider making a minraise are:

with AA or KK UTG or UTG+1 with a short stack still to act.
with AA or KK on the button with no players in before me.
with any stealing hand on the button if I have a read that the BB does not defend his blinds to minraises.
With a low or mid PP on the button in the early rounds with 3 or more limpers in front, just to juice the pot for when I hit my card.

Other than those (and maybe a few more that don't immediately come to mind) I would fold or make a proper raise. The chance to steal the blinds, or at least to make sure you are last to act is too important.


Tim

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
With a low or mid PP on the button in the early rounds with 3 or more limpers in front, just to juice the pot for when I hit my card.


[/ QUOTE ]

In tournaments this is particularly bad. you are making a high variance play for a hand that will usually not hit the flop and have to fold. perhaps this might have some place in a ring game, but certainly not tournaments.

al

[t_perkin]

Look I was trying to find somewhere to make minraises - and I had to really search!

U are right this is pretty high variance. But in the average Stars SnG with T10/15 blinds I would be happy to make it T30 with 4 players limping in front. This is probably not a great play though....but I was desperately trying to give "them" some outs for their minraise arguements! /images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Tim

[Al_Capone_Junior]

I already gave them outs for their min raise arguement - when you run out of ipecac syrup and you need to throw up!

al

[DrPhysic]

Tim,
I understand your logic, and maybe in the $33s that you are playing you get more hard raises. In the 11s and 22s that i have been playing you tend to get lotsa callers. Which is exactly what i want if i'm going to play a weak hand. (I don't disagree with you at all about the AA or KK.)

As you suggested, i will argue with your stats: the probablility of my failing to catch the trip is not 90%, it's 95.6%. (a 1/23 shot). With the 67s my odds are better than with 66 because i have more outs, but i need more cards. If i get a bunch of callers with 2bb in the pot, i collect reasonably on the hands that i do catch the trip, st, or fl. But, pls understand that these are hands i will throw away in a second if a big raise does come behind me, or if i don't hit the flop. I won't get pot committed on a weakie. There was little intention or hope of stealing unless somebody thinks that your pair is a lot bigger than it is. (which prob wont happen with a min raise)

As with everybody else, I would rather have premium hands in the first place, and bet normally. The thing i have been looking at is how can we reasonably make at least the occasional buck with the less than premium hands that are far more common.

Doc

[t_perkin]

[ QUOTE ]

As you suggested, i will argue with your stats: the probablility of my failing to catch the trip is not 90%, it's 95.6%.


[/ QUOTE ]

I am not looking for trips - I have 66 already in the example I gave so just need the set (or better) which the odds of making on the flop are 11.8%

[ QUOTE ]

With the 67s my odds are better than with 66 because i have more outs, but i need more cards. If i get a bunch of callers with 2bb in the pot, i collect reasonably on the hands that i do catch the trip, st, or fl. But, pls understand that these are hands i will throw away in a second if a big raise does come behind me, or if i don't hit the flop. I won't get pot committed on a weakie. There was little intention or hope of stealing unless somebody thinks that your pair is a lot bigger than it is. (which prob wont happen with a min raise)


[/ QUOTE ]

So if you are not looking to steal and you are looking for lots of callers and you don't think you are going to get any raisers then why on earth are you raising at all? why not just limp?

[ QUOTE ]

The thing i have been looking at is how can we reasonably make at least the occasional buck with the less than premium hands that are far more common.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is what stealing is about.




Tim

[T0asty]

Does anyone use 2.5BBs, I've found them to be effective in the lower level tourneys on PP once the BB hits 100+. A min riase can work a lot of the time at this level but you still have callers with marginal hands and of course the BB feels that he has 200 already in its only 200 more.

I find this to have produced a higher steal success % and its checked to me a lot more on the flop if someone does call.

Also, if it doesn't have to succeed as much as the 3BB to make a profit and you don't lose as many chips if you are raised all in.

Any thoughts, I'm probably wrong would, but would like to be enlightened as to why. I only play the $10s $20s btw.

[t_perkin]

2.5BB and 2.7BB (fossilman is a stong advocate) raises are much more acceptable. Yout are giving the BB a much easier laydown, making blind steals far more likely.

Tim

[Lori]

Does anyone use 2.5BBs

Why are you all looking for a formula.

Raise an amount that is appropriate to the situation.

That is consider: position, cards, opponents, stacks, number of players in and your previous raises in similar conditions (IE: Mix it up)

Poker is a game, it requires thought and imagination, there is no magic formula, only guidelines.

Lori

[t_perkin]

I think at stakes high enough that you see the same people regularly there is value in mixing it up just for the sake of mixing it up.

At lower stakes (online) where you rarely see the same player more than once or twice there is little value in mixing things up for the sake of it. SnGs are too short.

That does not of course mean that there is no value in varying the size of your PF bets. If you can exploit a weakness in a particular player then of course do so.

Obviously there are lots of exceptions as with everything in poker, but I think this thread was originally about "general rules"

just some thoughts

Tim

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]

Obviously there are lots of exceptions as with everything in poker, but I think this thread was originally about "general rules"

just some thoughts

Tim

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it was. It was about the "general rule" that a minraise preflop is (nearly) always wrong, which many here claim.

My point was that it's not wrong as often as many think. So I was attempting to show exceptions to general rules, not make them.

eastbay

[t_perkin]

So what are these exceptions?

going back to your original posts you seem to be condoning doing this with almost all hands that you play when the blinds are 50 - 200 in MP or LP.

that seems pretty general to me.

Can't you just post a few hands so that I (we) can see how you are playing these 2BB raises through the whole hand?

I am open to suggestion and I am always looking for different approaches to PF play as I think it is particularly important in NL SNGs. At the moment I remain unconvinced though.


Thanks

Tim

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
So what are these exceptions?


[/ QUOTE ]

I've already listed them.

Consider a player on the BB who will fold everything to a 3xBB raise but will fold nothing to a 2xBB raise.

This same player will fold any flop that he doesn't hit TPTK or better.

Now, no matter what cards you hold on the SB, what is a more profitable play, raising 3xBB or raising 2xBB and betting the flop (and getting away from a re-raise unless you hit).

This is a charicature of the player who you want to make this move against, but it highlights the reasons why 2xBB makes sense against these tendencies.

eastbay

[WarmonkEd]

What if he just calls your flop bet? Do you fire again on the turn?