Re: looking for discussion on argument against open-completing
Wynton,
I don't see the advantage of open-completing and then auto-betting the flop in most situations. Might as well take the initiative right away. But it would be good where you have my image at a table. Tighter, doesn't auto-raise the blinds in position, but definitely goes strong with a piece. If you have this at a table, then open-completing and auto-betting has merit...villain will "know" you have a piece, and if he doesn't, he'll likely give up right away. But then you won a tiny amount, so I don't know...
The other thing I was going to say is to expand upon the concept that David Sklansky talks about, I think in HEPFAP, where he says against blinds that ALWAYS defend and go too far with their hands, it's often correct to open-limp with hands like A3o. The reason being that you really need an ace to flop to beat 2 guys who are going to the river every time. Well, applying that here, when I have a total fish in the BB, with hands like 97s I'll open-complete, and I knkow if I flop anything decent, he'll pay off to the river with K high, but conversely, I can get out cheaply if I miss. So here, I find open-completing better and this situation happens more often.
M
|