Raising middle pairs

[Allinlife]

your arguement is too position-player dependent, especially short handed I think. I raise all PP if it looks like

1) buys me button
2) decent chance blinds will fold
3) my image is tight enough / opponents are passive post flop and continuation bets can expect a decent +EV when I have position.

plus, shania is cool.

I am more prone to limp pp behind a limper, or in middle/early position.

[not_da_nizzles]

[ QUOTE ]

Theres a very good chance Im stacking AQ with my 44 on a AQ4 flop no matter if I raised or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly ...

Unless the game is shorthanded the power of small PP's are in their implied odds. Get in there cheap and stack someone.

mj

[fimbulwinter]

Just compare the EV's:

raising:

added EV of hitting set (easier to get stack in on bloated pot)
EV of getting to make continuation bet on flop (against certain/most opponents flop continuation bets are +EV with no cards at all)
added EV of folding best hand (you raise 44 and 55-jj play for set value)
added EV/shania of destroying implied odds with small pfrs's. (if you only have an overpair 1/3 times, someone trying to flop a set from a 4% stack raise is losing a lot of money.)

limping:

better implied odds



basically raising them, with position mostly, gets better as stacks get deeper (as do most all position raises).

FWIW you could have just done a little math on your own using your own assumptions and avoided the need for this thread entirely.

fim

[iceman5]

[ QUOTE ]
Just compare the EV's:

raising:

added EV of hitting set (easier to get stack in on bloated pot)
EV of getting to make continuation bet on flop (against certain/most opponents flop continuation bets are +EV with no cards at all)
added EV of folding best hand (you raise 44 and 55-jj play for set value)
added EV/shania of destroying implied odds with small pfrs's. (if you only have an overpair 1/3 times, someone trying to flop a set from a 4% stack raise is losing a lot of money.)

limping:

better implied odds



basically raising them, with position mostly, gets better as stacks get deeper (as do most all position raises).

FWIW you could have just done a little math on your own using your own assumptions and avoided the need for this thread entirely.

fim

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again you prove that you are a jackass. You couldve avoided your response entirely if you had really ignored me like you promised you would.

I put the question out there to get other peoples opinions. Especially people who DO raise these pairs. They may have reasons for doing it that I hadnt considered which would make me and anyone else reading this thread a better player.

But I forgot that you know everything already. Why do you even read this board? Just go out and take all the money and stop harrassing up commonfolk.

Your obnoxiousness and assinine behaviour never ceases to amaze me.

[snappo]

[ QUOTE ]

Once again you prove that you are a jackass. You couldve avoided your response entirely if you had really ignored me like you promised you would.

I put the question out there to get other peoples opinions. Especially people who DO raise these pairs. They may have reasons for doing it that I hadnt considered which would make me and anyone else reading this thread a better player.

But I forgot that you know everything already. Why do you even read this board? Just go out and take all the money and stop harrassing up commonfolk.

Your obnoxiousness and assinine behaviour never ceases to amaze me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why the hostile response? fimbulwinter took the time to give you an entire list of solid reasons to raise medium pocket pairs preflop. IMO his response was the most informative of them all. Why insult him for giving you a helpful answer to your question?

[iceman5]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Once again you prove that you are a jackass. You couldve avoided your response entirely if you had really ignored me like you promised you would.

I put the question out there to get other peoples opinions. Especially people who DO raise these pairs. They may have reasons for doing it that I hadnt considered which would make me and anyone else reading this thread a better player.

But I forgot that you know everything already. Why do you even read this board? Just go out and take all the money and stop harrassing up commonfolk.

Your obnoxiousness and assinine behaviour never ceases to amaze me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why the hostile response? fimbulwinter took the time to give you an entire list of solid reasons to raise medium pocket pairs preflop. IMO his response was the most informative of them all. Why insult him for giving you a helpful answer to your question?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you read the last sentence? Hes mocking me and hes an [censored] who has nothing better to do. Its annoying and Im fed up with it. I dont care how much he knows about poker or how much he thinks he knows. He still an [censored] who Ive done absolutely nothing to.

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Once again you prove that you are a jackass. You couldve avoided your response entirely if you had really ignored me like you promised you would.

I put the question out there to get other peoples opinions. Especially people who DO raise these pairs. They may have reasons for doing it that I hadnt considered which would make me and anyone else reading this thread a better player.

But I forgot that you know everything already. Why do you even read this board? Just go out and take all the money and stop harrassing up commonfolk.

Your obnoxiousness and assinine behaviour never ceases to amaze me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why the hostile response? fimbulwinter took the time to give you an entire list of solid reasons to raise medium pocket pairs preflop. IMO his response was the most informative of them all. Why insult him for giving you a helpful answer to your question?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for noticing.

fim

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just compare the EV's:

raising:

added EV of hitting set (easier to get stack in on bloated pot)
EV of getting to make continuation bet on flop (against certain/most opponents flop continuation bets are +EV with no cards at all)
added EV of folding best hand (you raise 44 and 55-jj play for set value)
added EV/shania of destroying implied odds with small pfrs's. (if you only have an overpair 1/3 times, someone trying to flop a set from a 4% stack raise is losing a lot of money.)

limping:

better implied odds



basically raising them, with position mostly, gets better as stacks get deeper (as do most all position raises).

FWIW you could have just done a little math on your own using your own assumptions and avoided the need for this thread entirely.

fim

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again you prove that you are a jackass. You couldve avoided your response entirely if you had really ignored me like you promised you would.

I put the question out there to get other peoples opinions. Especially people who DO raise these pairs. They may have reasons for doing it that I hadnt considered which would make me and anyone else reading this thread a better player.

But I forgot that you know everything already. Why do you even read this board? Just go out and take all the money and stop harrassing up commonfolk.

Your obnoxiousness and assinine behaviour never ceases to amaze me.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. i can see the subjects of the threads you post. that's all i need.

2. the reason i posted here is that i saw the other responses and wanted to provide a correct framework for looking at the situation. remember, like i said before, new players have a hard time filtering the good from the bad.

3. what is your level of education? i ask this because you very often post simple mathmatical problems couched as poker questions and then cannot do the math when asked to. this can be answered with a simple EV calcualtion, just like the one i had to do for you in the KK thread (how you got your answer, i don't know, but i can't see how you could screw the math up that bad). If you can't do 12th grade level math, then you probably shouldn't discuss some of the hands posted here because much of their analysis lies in doing the math. If you cannot, there is no shame in grabbing an algebra textbook and reviewing, it will make you a better poker player and a better person.

I'll leave your thread alone. I almost want to unblock you to see your response to this. almost.

fim

[neon]

[ QUOTE ]
3. what is your level of education? i ask this because you very often post simple mathmatical problems couched as poker questions and then cannot do the math when asked to. this can be answered with a simple EV calcualtion, just like the one i had to do for you in the KK thread (how you got your answer, i don't know, but i can't see how you could screw the math up that bad). If you can't do 12th grade level math, then you probably shouldn't discuss some of the hands posted here because much of their analysis lies in doing the math. If you cannot, there is no shame in grabbing an algebra textbook and reviewing, it will make you a better poker player and a better person.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, I think that both you guys are being *really* childish. Please do the rest of us a favor and take the petty hostility out of the tone of your posts, and if you truly feel the need to bicker like small children, do it somewhere else and stop wasting everyone else's time.

Secondly, fim (and I don't know if you're even going to read this or not), but I graduated from a quite reputable college w/ honors, scored a 750 on the math section of the SAT, and still don't know how to make EV calculations. It's not a function of my level of education, or relative intelligence, it's simply b/c I've never seen a simple explanation of the mathematical formula one would use to make such a calculation. Perhaps the area I am most intent upon improving in my game is my ability to make quick mathematical intimations on the fly, and I feel like the boards here at 2+2 are the best place for me to do so.

In other words, instead of taking such a demeaning tone and insulting someone who may or may not be less intelligent than you are, perhaps take two minutes out of your day and lay out the numbers. I, for one, would certainly appreciate it a great deal.

As for raising middle pairs, when I'm playing short, I open raise w/ every pair, and depending upon the flow of the game, will sometimes reraise preflop w/ pairs 77-99 and good position. Of course, I wouldn't recommend that everyone try this, but it usually falls right in line w/ my aggro table image. At a full table, I'll sometimes pump it up preflop w/ the same hands, but not nearly as frequently, unless stacks are sufficiently deep such that the deceptive value of hitting a set after raising 55 and such in LP will pay significant dividends.

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3. what is your level of education? i ask this because you very often post simple mathmatical problems couched as poker questions and then cannot do the math when asked to. this can be answered with a simple EV calcualtion, just like the one i had to do for you in the KK thread (how you got your answer, i don't know, but i can't see how you could screw the math up that bad). If you can't do 12th grade level math, then you probably shouldn't discuss some of the hands posted here because much of their analysis lies in doing the math. If you cannot, there is no shame in grabbing an algebra textbook and reviewing, it will make you a better poker player and a better person.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, I think that both you guys are being *really* childish. Please do the rest of us a favor and take the petty hostility out of the tone of your posts, and if you truly feel the need to bicker like small children, do it somewhere else and stop wasting everyone else's time.

[/ QUOTE ]

first, you don't have to read any of this. like i've said before, what people think of an online poker persona means nothing to me for a plethora of reasons, so your complaints fall on deaf ears.

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, fim (and I don't know if you're even going to read this or not), but I graduated from a quite reputable college w/ honors, scored a 750 on the math section of the SAT, and still don't know how to make EV calculations. It's not a function of my level of education, or relative intelligence, it's simply b/c I've never seen a simple explanation of the mathematical formula one would use to make such a calculation. Perhaps the area I am most intent upon improving in my game is my ability to make quick mathematical intimations on the fly, and I feel like the boards here at 2+2 are the best place for me to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

reading one of the many posts i've made where i calculate EV is enough to learn this. simply sum the EV's of individulal options tiems their likelyhood. you can take this many levels, but the baseline is the same. estimating the likelyhoods is where experience comes in. as for your SAT score/academic justification, i really don't know what to say. If i tell you my qualifications in turn it will sound like i'm bragging or demeaning you, if i don't it will sound like i'm asking for something out of the pale of most posters, so i'll leave that one alone.

[ QUOTE ]
In other words, instead of taking such a demeaning tone and insulting someone who may or may not be less intelligent than you are, perhaps take two minutes out of your day and lay out the numbers. I, for one, would certainly appreciate it a great deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

he is less intelligent than I am. One job ii've had, for which i was paid a very large amount, is screening applicants based on essays and written answers to problems. My experience there leads me to the conclusions i have previously presented.

as for the math, i'll put it in a separate post if you'd like, as i know there are many who are avoiding this spat. again, nobody is forcing you to read any of this.

[ QUOTE ]
As for raising middle pairs, when I'm playing short, I open raise w/ every pair, and depending upon the flow of the game, will sometimes reraise preflop w/ pairs 77-99 and good position. Of course, I wouldn't recommend that everyone try this, but it usually falls right in line w/ my aggro table image. At a full table, I'll sometimes pump it up preflop w/ the same hands, but not nearly as frequently, unless stacks are sufficiently deep such that the deceptive value of hitting a set after raising 55 and such in LP will pay significant dividends.

[/ QUOTE ]

this sounds about right with the caveat that the original proposition (playing very short) is unlikely to happen in a cash game but can very often be seen in tournament play.

fim