[Shandrax]

Just bought this book recently and this specific essay caught my attention.

Here is the Story: Some guy stated (based on computer simulations) that A-8s would be playable UTG as raising hand. Mason argues against it, that this might be the case if people were reacting to it with the "standard" hand requirements against a raise from early position. The problem is, that once they notice that the guy is a loose raiser, they would adjust and reraise with more hands. Therefore raising with A-8s UTG would not be such a good idea.

Now this is where I think another concept comes into focus. That is making a suboptimal play (once) as sort of advertisement.

Let's say I raise with A-8s UTG until I have to show the hand. From then on I switch back to my regular tight raising requirements for early position. If people react to this by adjusting to my "loose" play up in front, I have set them up. They will now have much too "loose" calling requirements themselves, while I am playing absolutely "correct" again. If they notice this and re-adjust, I can raise with A-8s again. It is like the tale of the race between the hare and the hedgehog "I a'm already here!".

So what is the conclusion? A-8s is hand you can raise with UTG every once in a while as part of building an image.

The question is of course if you want that sort of image. I have read more than once that "tight aggressive" would be the best image in Hold'em, so archieving a "loose aggressive" image might not be exactly what you are aiming for.

This brings me to another point. I have the feeling that there are enough concepts floating around to justify even the most terrible play. If nothing helps you can always claim that it was a random play based on game theory [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]