Joe Tall speculative preflop quiz

[Richard Berg]

Average Party LL table. Hero is MP3 with J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. 4 limpers.

[ QUOTE ]
Again, raise preflop in LP!


[/ QUOTE ]
Now that we've got a theme going, let's be clear. For value/equity? To mix up our play? To discourage its being raised behind us (i.e. if it's gotta be 2 bets, we keep control)? To buy the button?

I like all of the above, but have a hard time justifying it as a default action. When taking 6 people to the flop for two SB each with JTs, it seems like I'd rather be in a kill game than plain old 3/6 since I'm hoping to make most of my money postflop. That's a roundabout way of saying my implied odds aren't what they appear to be by the chip values alone, since future bets are only "half as big" relatively speaking. Rationalizing out of my ass again?

[Richard Berg]

I voted 50% because I'm a pansy who can't make up his mind.

Hmm. The word EV never appears in my post. That can't be good.

[Evan]

i think it's 90% easy.

I have enough people in this pot already, I think it will usually be for value, I want the button, I want to be in control of the hand. How are those reasons?

[Fnord]

Raise ~100% because:

o We win more than our fair share
o Build a pot that allows us to chase down the likely draw we'll flop and have multiple pairish callers paying it off.
o Increase the chance we'll act last in post-flop play, setting up cheap cards and giving us the best chance of getting away from a pair of Jacks or Tens when they're no good.
o Show aggression early that might win the pot on a semi-bluff.
o Increases our PFR, so good/aware players can't fold medium-strong hands pre-flop.

[Richard Berg]

[ QUOTE ]
Build a pot that allows us to chase down the likely draw we'll flop and have multiple pairish callers paying it off.

[/ QUOTE ]
Regardless of whether I'm now convinced raising is the right play, this is the piece of logic that I've heard bandied about a few times yet I believe is wrong. The extra bets you put in here are slicing in half/third/fourth the relative value of every future street. Trying to create your own implied odds is kind of like circular logic.

Other reasons goot.

[Fnord]

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of whether I'm now convinced raising is the right play, this is the piece of logic that I've heard bandied about a few times yet I believe is wrong. The extra bets you put in here are slicing in half/third/fourth the relative value of every future street. Trying to create your own implied odds is kind of like circular logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

JTs isn't an implied odds hand in a multi-pot. It's an effective odds hand when 5 more cards are out, but not often ahead when only 3 more cards are out (might be wrong here???). Even if the raise is close to EV neutral, if it gets aware players to call with thinner holdings (because of the pot size) that don't cut into your pot equity then their calls generate value post-flop.

[spamuell]

[ QUOTE ]
o Increase the chance we'll act last in post-flop play, setting up cheap cards and giving us the best chance of getting away from a pair of Jacks or Tens when they're no good.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the pot is bigger, it's harder to get away from your hand. Of course, the idea is that if the pot is bigger then the reason you don't get away from your hand is that you win enough of the time for it to be +EV to not do so, so this doesn't matter as long as you don't just aimlessly call down because the pot is big, like lots of people do.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]

o Build a pot that allows us to chase down the likely draw we'll flop and have multiple pairish callers paying it off.


[/ QUOTE ]

What likely draw?

[Joe Tall]

Why raise w/JTs in LP?

For value/equity? To mix up our play? To discourage its being raised behind us (i.e. if it's gotta be 2 bets, we keep control)? To buy the button?

Exactly, well put.

Peace,
Joe Tall

[Richard Berg]

Good enough for me.