|
|
#1
12-12-2004, 09:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
\"snapping off\" limpers from the blinds
Hey all, first time, long time.
Ive been lurking for about a year, almost solely in this SnG forum, and play nothing but. I consider myself pretty decent, so take the "newb" post-count with a grain of salt. I'd like to throw out a situational play for discussion/comments/disagreements, etc. Im sure it has been previously hashed over, but not recently that i am aware of. I also dont claim to have invented this myself or anything, just that its been of great use to me since implemented in my toolbox. The situation: Those SnGs that for whatever reason, have few KO's early, and no dominant chipleader. The blinds have increased to significant levels (i.e. scooping 2 or 3 limps has enough value to justify the risk of running into a limp/re-raiser) You are in the SB/BB. Your actual card holdings are not of great importance. Several limpers. P/F action comes around to you unraised. Depending on your stack, you either push, or raise it up big (5BB+). You KNOW they are limping cause their hand is "pretty good, not great". Well, your fairly sure anyways. Remember, THEY want to steal pots too. Its so likely that their plan is to hit a nice flop for cheap, THEN they have confidence in their hand. They are iffy right now. How often do you take this pot uncontested... my guess is over 75%. Of the remainder, when someone does call you, you still have a gamblers chance of outflopping. It seems to me that this play is not part of most ABC player's toolbox, but given the frequency in which SnG's come down to a blind steal here and there as the bubble approaches.....i feel it is applicable, and under-discussed. I want to call this "snapping em off". I think i remeber it being refered to as that. If i have the vernacular wrong, pls enlighten me. Other random considerations: -This is useless when a limper has little more in his stack...he will call. You dont want calls. Likewise, you need a stack yourself. -Far too risky to attempt with blinds below, say, 100-200 (?) YOu are trying for a 1-hit scoop that is WORTH THE RISK -Your card holdings....You hope it wont matter...but id prefer to do this with mid-suited connectors...they fight best with the hands that will call you (premium). Refence a Strassa post re: bubble bully, from back in the summer -Not to be abused (overused). I doubt i identify a good situation more than once every couple tourneys. That all for now, hope my first post stirs up some interesting dicsussion, and and "knowledge entropy" i good. THeres more i want to write on the subject, but this post has gotten mighty long, and frankly, i am interested to see which of the "A-list" posters brings up certain arguements. I have some hunches, wink [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] 
|
|
#3
12-12-2004, 10:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: \"snapping off\" limpers from the blinds
I use this little tactic myself in SNGs, and find it's pretty effective, not to mention MUCH more lucrative than simply stealing a couple of blinds.
Love a table full of limpers..I figure most are calling trash (as is usual at my level)--and the few who aren't are probably on what I think of as "half hands" (big card crap kicker). The ones most dangerous are the small PPs..they often limp in, but will defend their wired 3s to the death! As you say--it's best not to overdo it... But it's my revenge against the all-in set..I hate those guys..lol...risking their whole stack to pick up 45 in chips?? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#4
12-12-2004, 11:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
New Title: Picking up limp-bets from the blinds
[ QUOTE ]
"Snapping off" usually refers to calling somebody's (presumed) bluff. In the context of SNGs it's used to refer to calling somebody's preflop steal raise. [/ QUOTE ] Ahhh. I see. Is there a different, yet equally catchy name to be used instead?
|
|
#5
12-12-2004, 11:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: \"snapping off\" limpers from the blinds
[ QUOTE ]
I use this little tactic myself in SNGs, and find it's pretty effective, not to mention MUCH more lucrative than simply stealing a couple of blinds. [/ QUOTE ] Totally. Sucessful blind steals net only 1.5 big blinds. Here we get integer amounts..2,3, maybe 4BB. Also, the traditional blind steal is done blind...you are betting into unknown strength, whereas here we are acting AFTER the prey has shown the strength (or lack thereof) of their holding [ QUOTE ] The ones most dangerous are the small PPs..they often limp in, but will defend their wired 3s to the death! As you say--it's best not to overdo it... [/ QUOTE ] True, but, its nothing to be afraid of, our crappy mid-connectors are still coinflipping...this "unsucessful" situation is still posEV, due to the pot-sweetener limps in there.
|
|
#6
12-12-2004, 11:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: New Title: Picking up limp-bets from the blinds
Don't see why not. Poker can never have too much jargon. What we need is something completely incomprehensible to newbies. How about one of these?
Threading the fishing line Riding the elephant Sweeping the floor Juicing the orange
|
|
#9
12-13-2004, 07:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: New Title: Picking up limp-bets from the blinds
I think of it as the Hoover Maneuver [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
(because you're vacuuming up all that trash on the table) lmao about poker jargon: no kidding! Pocket Rockets, Cowboys, Motown, Snowmen, Ladies,...when I heard there was a hand called "Montana Banana" I cried....enough already!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
