Re: SSH and Getting The Best of It Discrepancy
 

[ QUOTE ]

I personally think that S&M's advice for loose games is their weakest part, but that it's been remedied by SSH.

[/ QUOTE ]




Pipes - Ed Miller (and many others) would argue that your top-pair will hold up against a field of 6-limpers MUCH more often than you think.

In fact, there will even be times when you can get rid of some of the field with a bet even if you whiff on the flop and end up winning the pot unimproved.
I completely agree.

Re: SSH and Getting The Best of It Discrepancy
 

Hi Bob:

[ QUOTE ]
S&M will be the first to tell you....their low-limit experience is limited.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never told anyone that. I began my poker career by playing $1-$2 limit in Gardena many years ago. The same goes for David.

By the way, today I play high limit games which are often fairly loose. The advice in HPFAP is what's applicable here.

best wishes,
Mason

Re: SSH and Getting The Best of It Discrepancy
 

[ QUOTE ]
Me too. just limping on the button with AJo or KQo against a field of limpers is REALLY going to cost you money (in most games).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ed does apparently not feel that way. See footnote on pg 73 of SSH.

Re: SSH and Getting The Best of It Discrepancy
 

My sample size in p-tracker is not nearly enough to make any judegements.
I tried filtering for AJo and KQo in CO and on the button with 4 or more players seeing the flop (note, this could only be 2 limpers to me...and then the blinds play also) and I didn't have very many.

I didn't even bother filtering for 6 or more to the flop.

someone with a larger database may have some numbers....but unless they have half-a-zillion hands the results will still be pretty inconclusive.

Ed does a very good job in SSHE of explaining why you should raise AJs in the BB against a field of limpers
and the logic is very similar for why you should do the same the with AJo on the button.


You keep insisting that AJo on the button is a garbage hand...but if nobody has yet raised the pot this simply isn't the case regardless of what Sklansky might have said 20 years ago.

It's not AA of course....but it's still likely to be better than the random holdings of your limp-fest opponents and will win more than it's fair-share....ESPECIALLY when you hit top-pair.

You don't have to win a majority of the time with this hand. If there are 6 players in the hand and you win 1/5 of the time (20%) then you'll be doing just fine and dandy with this hand.

As Mason pointed out....there can be situations where waiting until post-flop can be better....but I think the prevailing wisdom is that limping with this strong of a hand pre-flop is going to be a little bit weak-tight.


However, with AJo or KQo it's probably not drastic if you choose not to raise with it in these situations which are not likely to come up too often.
It's a PF decision that will not make or break you as a winning player in the long-run....and I even MORE agree with the general assessment that you and I are both wasting valuable brain-cells by not focusing on more important aspects of the game. LOL.

Re: SSH and Getting The Best of It Discrepancy
 

Perhaps I misunderstood something previously written.

I know that you started at the lower limits but I thought I read something to this extent regarding why Ed was more qualified to write a low-limit hold-em book.

My apologies if I misrepresented you.

Re: SSH and Getting The Best of It Discrepancy
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ed does apparently not feel that way. See footnote on pg 73 of SSH.

[/ QUOTE ]


Okay...uncle!!

My opinion on this matter is very obviously flawed.
I am the first to admit that I am overly aggressive (LAG-ish even) but I truly thought this was a good value-raise.


I was not correct and I think as punishment I shall banish myself to a thorough re-reading of SSHE as well as HEFAP.

It's an okay raise (situation dependent) but is hardly mandatory if you believe the 2+2 authors (which I do of course).


Apologies for sticking with an incorrect position as long as I did.

I could argue that if it's relatively close as Ed suggests then you can still raise not only for potential minimal value but also for your table-image as well as because raising is more fun....but that's a different issue entirely.

Re: SSH and Getting The Best of It Discrepancy
 

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps I misunderstood something previously written.

I know that you started at the lower limits but I thought I read something to this extent regarding why Ed was more qualified to write a low-limit hold-em book.

My apologies if I misrepresented you.

[/ QUOTE ]

On page 1 of SSH, DS says he and Mason didn't start at the lower limits.

Re: SSH and Getting The Best of It Discrepancy
 

[ QUOTE ]
aI was not correct and I think as punishment I shall banish myself to a thorough re-reading of SSHE as well as HEFAP.

It's an okay raise (situation dependent) but is hardly mandatory if you believe the 2+2 authors (which I do of course).

[/ QUOTE ]

That's exactly what I am doing myself after saying something moronic in the SS forum.

And as you note, raising or calling is pretty close in EV. I wonder if raising still isn't a wee bit better, as I actually raise (significantly) more hands than I limp. Though limping could add deception I guess.