Preflop hand selection in low limit online NL games

[spacemonkey]

Alright, I have a feeling I am going to be accused of heresy here, but this is a point I've been wanting to make for a while.

My suggestion is that in the low limit NL games online, up to $1/2, a winning player can substantially loosen up their starting hand requirements and get away with it, and perhaps even increase their hourly rate.

I have not tried it myself much, and I am not sure it suits my game, but I got the idea from observing other players who I know are better than average. And I have seen a lot of examples. Now I realise that preflop hand selection is where a lot of a winning player's edge comes from, and for a player just starting off it is the most important thing they must learn, but I think in the typical online games I have seen, play on later streets carries a big enough edge in itself that playing a higher percentage of hands preflop may actually increase your hourly rate.

It depends a lot on stack sizes too, winning players will typically be playing with 200xBB + stacks when you can play a bit looser. I would not recommend doing this with 50xBB stacks.

Now, I'm not saying one can call raises with any two cards, but one can get in cheaply (no or minimal raise) with a lot of hands. It is about implied odds. For example, I usually play 15-30% of hands preflop depending on position and game texture, and am usually one of the tightest players in the game. One thing I like about this is that players give me a lot more respect when I play a hand and I can get away with a lot of steals but it also means I get less action as people notice I'm only playing good cards (though an argument can be made that the majority of online players don't pay attention) Recently I've been trying out playing a lot of hands in position that many would say I shouldn't, like any two suited cards on the button in an unraised pot with a lot of limpers.

I'm sure that with deep enough stacks and playing in a soft game where your postflop play is better than most, this idea would work. It comes down to getting more shots to break those players. There is an example from Sklansky's Tournament Poker which is relevant here. You are to play heads-up against a player considerably worse than you, for $1000, all day long. You can play conservatively, not pushing small edges, in which case you would win 90% of the time, but this would take you longer. Or you could gamble it up a bit, where you now win only 75% of the time, but this takes quicker. The latter option may result in a higher hourly rate, but also a greater variance.

I think that, unlike in limit, an NL player with a deep enough stack is not worried so much about losing tiny bits of it at a time, but is trying to avoid losing their whole stack at once. And they are trying to win big pots. You don't have to avoid playing trouble hands if you feel confident you won't get into trouble with them.

A lot of players with a limit education seem to think it is a major error to be playing various dubious hands preflop, but I think under the right conditions, this is not at all as important as you think in NL.

This is a dangerous idea though as it can create bad habits in a winning player, and when they find themselves in a tough game, they may find it hard to tighten up.

Forgive me if this is either totally obvious or complete nonsense. Looking forward to all criticisms.

cheers,

spacemonkey

[lefty rosen]

Yes you can but you have to do it with the monkeys money and have the table in awe of you, then you can slam into brickboards and minesweep small pots. But when you are stuck or even don't bother just play super solid. Also expect bizzaro payoffs and extremely stupid beats........

[muzungu]

Fair enough, but here's the problem. You say:

"It depends a lot on stack sizes too, winning players will typically be playing with 200xBB + stacks when you can play a bit looser. I would not recommend doing this with 50xBB stacks."

Well, getting a 200x BB stack means quadrupling up on Party or doubling up on other sites. Since many of us are playing on Party and/or table-hopping to follow the fish, this is unlikely.

Also (almost forgot): the stack sizes of your opponents matter just as much. Even if you would like to call the preflop raise with a low suited connector for 5% of your stack, if the raise is 15% of their stack you aren't getting the odds to call, since they don't have much $ for you to take if you hit.

In the end, I think what you're saying is fine, but only for a specific set of circumstances that don't occur that often on-line.

-muz

[PuppetMaster]

i agree, its all about play on the flop.

[RollaJ]

Agreed, if you read SuperSystem you can see that at times even Q-6o can be a playable hand. HPFAP hands go out the window in NL

[PuppetMaster]

[ QUOTE ]
Agreed, if you read SuperSystem you can see that at times even Q-6o can be a playable hand. HPFAP hands go out the window in NL

[/ QUOTE ]
wish i had a dollar for every time i raised 5XBB with q6o from LP, then bet half the pot on the flop blind and took it down against weak-tighties

[RollaJ]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed, if you read SuperSystem you can see that at times even Q-6o can be a playable hand. HPFAP hands go out the window in NL


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


wish i had a dollar for every time i raised 5XBB with q6o from LP, then bet half the pot on the flop blind and took it down against weak-tighties

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing, but Id suggest limping with it, when deep stacks are present. What you described can be done with any 2 cards

[PuppetMaster]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed, if you read SuperSystem you can see that at times even Q-6o can be a playable hand. HPFAP hands go out the window in NL


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


wish i had a dollar for every time i raised 5XBB with q6o from LP, then bet half the pot on the flop blind and took it down against weak-tighties

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing, but Id suggest limping with it, when deep stacks are present. What you described can be done with any 2 cards

[/ QUOTE ]
I am agreeing with you, however the main post was on "low-limit" hold'em - in this situation I would perfer to raise it and go for the steal (against tight players), than limp (smaller stacks).

[SomeName]

this doesnt make any sense. you dont want to steal blinds in NL you want to take someones stack. you raise hands like this to help with your image and to hope you get lucky. granted you will take down a decent amount of small pots, but ultimitatly the goal is a players stack. i think raising q6 off and then taking out the guy who has AA is much more fun than stealing the blinds.

[PuppetMaster]

[ QUOTE ]
this doesnt make any sense. you dont want to steal blinds in NL you want to take someones stack. you raise hands like this to help with your image and to hope you get lucky. granted you will take down a decent amount of small pots, but ultimitatly the goal is a players stack. i think raising q6 off and then taking out the guy who has AA is much more fun than stealing the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]
that is a good startegy for deep stack NL, doesnt quite work at Party's 50XBB buyin, does it?