Dumb minimum raises.
 

the minimum raise.

here is a play i see everyday, and i have no idea what the player is thinking?

i see it in nl play at both the high limits and the low limits. it tells me the player is clueless about the game. however, since many players do it, i wonder what they think is accomplishes?

several limpers, a late position player, or worse yet one of the blinds, makes the minimum raise possible. why? what are they thinking?
immediately think, this guy is building the pot, and has no clue, because no limper is folding to the minimum raise especially at nl..can anyone help me with their flawed thinking?

the other play i see often and think is incorrect in most instances is stealing the blinds in many cash nl games. they just are too small in relation to the stacks and the avg pot. i understand it in tournament play when the blinds are escalating , but in cash games it seems dumb most of the time

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

[ QUOTE ]
the other play i see often and think is incorrect in most instances is stealing the blinds in many cash nl games.

[/ QUOTE ]

you kinda lost credibility with that statement

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

why? i of course steal in the right game with the right hand too (and no hands sometiimes), but i see players doing it too often when there is just not enough money out there for the risk. maybe i should have explain more, my focas was on the minimum raise part of my post.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

I think it's dumb that you think it's dumb to steal blinds in a cash game.

I used to think mid-raises were dumb all the time, now I just think it's dumb most of the time.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

ok, I suppose in certain situations you don't steal, like if the BB is a maniac who will re-raise with any two half the time

But the reason you give:

[ QUOTE ]
when there is just not enough money out there for the risk.

[/ QUOTE ]

is not a good reason not to do it

The thing is, even if your steal is 'unsuccesfull', you still have position and the ability to represent a wide range of hands for the next 3 streets

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

clearly you did not read my 2nd post, nor reply to the question. usless response.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

i'm guessing the reasoning behind the minimum raise from a late position against several callers is to induce a reraise from another player and then go all in with AA or KK. or maybe the player just wants to juice up the pot and doesn't want to lose too many people. it may even be possible that the players are making the min. raise to look weak (not a good idea IMO) or they are raising with complete drawing hands like JTs. these are just some things i could think of that would explain these reasons, and i do not necessarily condone them. it depends on who your opponents are.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the other play i see often and think is incorrect in most instances is stealing the blinds in many cash nl games.

[/ QUOTE ]

you kinda lost credibility with that statement

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

all your reasons make sense. but thyese are not what most of the players who make min raises are doing.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

I can't remember ever seeing AA or KK min raise with a bunch of limpers in the pot since I stopped playing 10c/25c NL. It's usually done with a pocket pair or suited connectors or AXs to "build a pot". Dumbest thing I've ever seen, it lets any decent player narrow down their hand range. Sometimes, if it's HU after the flop these guys will min bet as a continuation bet, and think they'll get respect.
I don't know, I feel like it's an absolutely ridiculous move. And yet people keep doing it. I see it OFTEN at the 2/4 games, do you guys get it at higher limits too? Is tehre possibly something I'm missing here?

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

i see it at the higher limits too. always by the weakest players with very little understanding of the game. i was just wondering what these players think they are accomplishing.

bobby hoff did it
 

In the big UB game DaWiz minraised from the blind twice vs multiple limpers. He took the pot with a bet on the flop both times. I don't think he is stupid.

Re: bobby hoff did it
 

The mini raise in LP is bad, but if you're at a passive table and no one will re-raise in EP, then you're building the pot for when you hit your 77.

Additionally if many have limped, and BB is known frisky assclown, you mini-raise with AA, he pops it, and UTG is having none of that...well, a lot of ifs, but you get the idea.

Raising from BB and SB to steal from limpers is great. You can punish people for being passive and get paid better when you hit.

Re: bobby hoff did it
 

Are you talking about ONLY about minraises PF?

If so then yes I don't understand those except for the suited connector minraise in a 5+ handed pot. (not that I'm saying that is a move I like, but it's not god awful).

Min raising post flop a lot of people on here tend to think min raise = monster.

I don't think this is as hard and stead a rule as a lot of people advocate. I remember reading an article by daniel negreanu where he said he uses the min raise to appear as if he's trying to find out if his hand is good.

The hand in question was:

DN holds J 10 vs aggressive opponent (I think david oppenheim), flop comes down A K Q. DN checks, oppenhein bets, DN min raises. He said he min raised to represent Ace weak kicker to make it appear as if he was trying to figure out of his hand was good. An aggressive opponent would pick up on this and come back over the top of him (which is what he wants in this case with the nuts).

I have seen this particular example of the min raise used a lot. For example a hand I had where I had raised UTG PF with QQ, flop came down T 9 3. I lead out and get min raised by MP. I end up folding QQ to 88. He just wanted to see if I had overcards only and his 88 was good.

Certainly there are examples when a minraise = the nuts, but that's usually when the minraise in itself is a large amount.

Actually now that I think about it I've come to a better conclusion on what I think the minraise means. If it's a relatively small minraise, it probably denotes the person just trying to find out if their hand is good, where as if the minraise represents a large portion of the stacks it's probably the nuts.

aight peace

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

I do the min raise, I think there's plenty of value to it (if executed correctly). To make a blanket statement "it's dumb" means you obviously suck at poker. You need a bigger arsenel of tricks, my friend.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

the other day I watched a full table of people just min-raise the whole time. Pre-flop, on the flop, on the turn, and the river. it was crazy.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

it's called limit.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

i think amulet is a gimmick account

it would be even awesomer if it was mike l's gimmick account

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

I remember ZeeJustin posted asking about the min preflop raise when I first started on here, when I used to minraise preflop. From what I've seen, early position minraise can be a monster, but is typically JJ-66, AQ-AT, KQ. In later position I expect to see 44-TT, AJ-AT, KQ-KJ, Axs. Typically these players are trying to build a pot for their pocket pairs in case they hit sets, or try and show some aggression in case it checks to them on the flop, they can take down an easy pot. I myself thrive on these types of players and can't get enough of reraising them. Nothing better than having a pot-builder with a pocket pair looking to invest 2BBs in order to try and flop a set into a 8-10BB pot, and then having him pay 6BBs and trying to flop a set into a pot heads up against me. Just remembered an interesting hand from yesterday where I limp reraised aces, and a beautiful minraise setup the pot perfectly for me. Enjoy,
-Ace


Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $4 BB (10 handed) converter

CO ($298.20)
Button ($625.65)
SB ($433.25)
BB ($380.60)
UTG ($408.40)
Hero ($363)
UTG+2 ($482)
MP1 ($856.85)
MP2 ($1132.99)
MP3 ($441.65)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. SB posts a blind of $2. UTG posts a blind of $4.
Hero calls $4, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP1 calls $4, MP2 calls $4, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises to $8</font>, SB (poster) calls $6, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $40</font>, MP1 calls $36, MP2 folds, Button calls $32, SB calls $32.

Flop: ($168) K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks, MP1 checks, Button checks.

Turn: ($168) 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $25</font>, MP1 folds, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises to $100</font>, SB folds, Hero calls $75.

River: ($368) 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, Button checks.

Final Pot: $368

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
BB doesn't show.
Hero has Ad Ac (one pair, aces).
Button has 9c 2c (one pair, nines).
Outcome: Hero wins $368. </font>

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

no offense but your flop check sucks

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

[ QUOTE ]
i think amulet is a gimmick account

it would be even awesomer if it was mike l's gimmick account

[/ QUOTE ]

lmao

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

I kinda agree with the stealing the blinds thing. Not completely, but I had a tendency to do it too often in cash games and lost respect doing so. I continue to steal the blinds in cash games, but less frequently. They add up over time and if you are going through an extended period of being dealt 7-2 offsuit and crap like that, stealing the blinds after you just folded when you were in the blinds is playing the round for free.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

zeebo, given your post(s) you clearly have a poor grasp of nl. i would love a player like you in my games, except for the fact that instead of a friendly reply when you disagree, you needed to take a shot and make it personal. so instead of taking your money, i would probably end up breaking your jaw. i guess either way it would have a positive outcome.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

[ QUOTE ]
zeebo, given your post(s) you clearly have a poor grasp of nl. i would love a player like you in my games, except for the fact that instead of a friendly reply when you disagree, you needed to take a shot and make it personal. so instead of taking your money, i would probably end up breaking your jaw. i guess either way it would have a positive outcome.

[/ QUOTE ]

here we go

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

I thought this type of thing only happens in the internet forum.

Re: Dumb minimum raises.
 

[ QUOTE ]
no offense but your flop check sucks

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess I figured the odds of someone having KQ, KK, QQ, 77 were pretty decent 5-handed so I figured I would check and play a small pot(relatively speaking). I hate to bet this flop and get raised all-in so I decided to play a small pot. I also figure this check screams of a monster like KK and I may simply be able to checkdown and see a cheap showdown heads up. I realize the turn easily could have been K/Q and caused some problems, but I decided to look for a small pot anyways.