Post deleted by Mat Sklansky
 

Re: King Jack Suited and Small Stakes Hold Em
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ed Miller in his book Small Stakes Hold Em, says to raise with the big suited cards. Raise with A-J, A-10, K-Q, K-J, K-10, Q-J, Q-10, J-10 suited. He is very zealous with this advice. However, this is the ONLY hold em book that says to raise with these cards. Bob Ciaffone (MLLHE), Lou Kreiger(Hold Em Excellence), Lee Jones (WLLHE), Bobby Baldwin (supersystem), Jennifer Harmen (Supersystem 2), King Yao (Weighing the odds) and others DO NOT have this advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

A few things:

- JTs, QTs, QJs and KTs really aren't 'big' suited hands. You'll find that SSHE doesn't advocate raising with them very often at all.

- Most of the other books you mentioned aren't designed to help you crush the type of small stakes game that's out there today, whereas SSHE teaches a style that will agressively punish your opponents for playing way too many hands.

- A lot of that advice is positional - you aren't raising with most of those hands from any position, and though I haven't read a lot of the mentioned books, I doubt they'd say to never raise with many of those hands. The differences are probably (somewhat) smaller than you think.

Re: King Jack Suited and Small Stakes Hold Em
 

The first thing you to realized is that SSH is talking about a different style of game that MLH, HEE, SS, SS2, and WTOIH addresses. I only skimmed the 3rd edition of WLLH so I don't know what Jones currently says but he has received quite a bit of criticism around here in the past for not advising his readers to take advantages of small edges...

CORRECT UNDERSTANDING
 

when i read this i was a little worried about wide spread use of plays like this. i remain somewhat circumspect about this advice for most players. ssh is not for beginners. it is very advanced. most players will take this advice and misuse it.

the book it taking about loose games, multiway pots, and having position. these plays will increase your fluctuations as well as your expectations. it should only be used under the right conditions.

Re: CORRECT UNDERSTANDING
 

Very well stated, amulet. I suspected that myself, after my first reading, that many newer players will misuse Ed's advice. I believe the first line in his book is, "This is not a beginner's book." I don't think you could fully understand and utilize the effectiveness of the advice from SSH until you've had at least a year's experience under your belt AND are playing in the very loose, smaller stakes games.

Re: CORRECT UNDERSTANDING
 

[ QUOTE ]
ssh is not for beginners. it is very advanced. most players will take this advice and misuse it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think that addresses the OP's concern, seeing as how GSIH also says to raise with these hands (with the exception of JTs and QTs, IIRC)

Re: CORRECT UNDERSTANDING
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ssh is not for beginners. it is very advanced. most players will take this advice and misuse it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think that addresses the OP's concern, seeing as how GSIH also says to raise with these hands (with the exception of JTs and QTs, IIRC)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is something I feel strongly about, and I think you guys are being far too apologetic for other books. Bottom line is that the limit hold 'em games that 99% of people on this site play absolutely demand you to raise your suited hands AKs-ATs and KQs-KJs almost any time you get them (if you want to limp ATs and KJs first in up front, that's ok). KTs, QJs, and A9s-A8s should also often be raised.

If you habitually fail to raise these hands, you are making consistent errors. If you recommend in a book not to raise these hands, you are making a bum recommendation. There really isn't much other way to see it.

In my opinion, this is a very clear point for limit hold 'em theory and simply not worth time arguing about.

Re: CORRECT UNDERSTANDING
 

[ QUOTE ]


This is something I feel strongly about, and I think you guys are being far too apologetic for other books. Bottom line is that the limit hold 'em games that 99% of people on this site play absolutely demand you to raise your suited hands AKs-ATs and KQs-KJs almost any time you get them (if you want to limp ATs and KJs first in up front, that's ok). KTs, QJs, and A9s-A8s should also often be raised.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you - I was merely pointing out that the OP's question can't be resolved with "but SSHE isn't a beginner's book" because GSIH is, and it contains the same recommendation.

Although I must confess, I do often feel as if I am throwing money away when I raise LP in a multi-way pot with something like KTs or QJs, because what worse hands do I think will call? Perhaps my game selection is poor, but I've never really seen these mythical "rammin-jammin" games to which TJ Cloutier is fond of referring ("you don't understand, these people can't be reasoned with! K8o under the gun for four bets! Men dressed like women! Dogs and cats, living together!") - lots of times it seems you raise on the button with KTs, hit your king, and then just lose another small bet to the KJ that limped in.

A9-A8s I don't hesitate at all with in LP, though - in the games I've seen, you'll get more than enough action from a dominated ace to merit a raise with them. KTs, QJs, QTs, JTs, though, I just don't see it. I would lay dollars to doughnuts that you are correct that they should be raised, I'm simply saying I just don't fully understand why yet.

Re: CORRECT UNDERSTANDING
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


This is something I feel strongly about, and I think you guys are being far too apologetic for other books. Bottom line is that the limit hold 'em games that 99% of people on this site play absolutely demand you to raise your suited hands AKs-ATs and KQs-KJs almost any time you get them (if you want to limp ATs and KJs first in up front, that's ok). KTs, QJs, and A9s-A8s should also often be raised.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you - I was merely pointing out that the OP's question can't be resolved with "but SSHE isn't a beginner's book" because GSIH is, and it contains the same recommendation.

Although I must confess, I do often feel as if I am throwing money away when I raise LP in a multi-way pot with something like KTs or QJs, because what worse hands do I think will call? Perhaps my game selection is poor, but I've never really seen these mythical "rammin-jammin" games to which TJ Cloutier is fond of referring ("you don't understand, these people can't be reasoned with! K8o under the gun for four bets! Men dressed like women! Dogs and cats, living together!") - lots of times it seems you raise on the button with KTs, hit your king, and then just lose another small bet to the KJ that limped in.

A9-A8s I don't hesitate at all with in LP, though - in the games I've seen, you'll get more than enough action from a dominated ace to merit a raise with them. KTs, QJs, QTs, JTs, though, I just don't see it. I would lay dollars to doughnuts that you are correct that they should be raised, I'm simply saying I just don't fully understand why yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

You raise because you have a pot equity edge. Where does that edge come from? The fact that KTs wins more multiway pots than 86s or 33 or whatever else people limped in with.

Re: King Jack Suited and Small Stakes Hold Em
 

Hi Spurgeon:

You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
Ed Miller in his book Small Stakes Hold Em, says to raise with the big suited cards. Raise with A-J, A-10, K-Q, K-J, K-10, Q-J, Q-10, J-10 suited. He is very zealous with this advice. However, this is the ONLY hold em book that says to raise with these cards. Bob Ciaffone (MLLHE), Lou Kreiger(Hold Em Excellence), Lee Jones (WLLHE), Bobby Baldwin (supersystem), Jennifer Harmen (Supersystem 2), King Yao (Weighing the odds) and others DO NOT have this advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, aren't you glad that there is a Two Plus Two and you don't have to read any of those other books?

Best wishes,
Mason