Quite an Odd Game

[piratesocrates]

I posted these concerns in another forum and was directed here, so hopefully someone can offer me more valuable advice.

Certainly, the game I've stumbled upon is not the mainstream version of hold'em. It is a scramble between a 2/4 small stakes game and no limit, with 25/50c blinds. Bets and raises can be made in any 25 cent increment up to $4 at a time. If and when a player desires to, going all in is permissable. So it's either up to $4, or everything you have on the table. And my opponents are agressive and very loose.

But then it gets wierd, and I've had a bit of trouble adapting to this particular variation: the last agressor of each round begins the betting on the next round. So by raising without being reraised before the flop, you open the flop no matter what position you held before it.

I am unaware how to adjust to such small blinds in comparrison to $4 bets and raises and up to $300 stacks. I know the Theory of Poker says to play tighter with small antes in comparison to large stacks, but could this combination of odd variations change that? Should I hesitate to raise preflop except for with my premium hands (despite the overwhelming looseness of my opponents) just to avoid opening the flop? How should I adjust my play of drawing hands? These are just the surface of the many issues I've stumbled over, so any suggestions will be helpful.

[Phat Mack]

Interesting. Can you go all in before the flop?

Is there much raising before the flop? I wouldn't do much hand-specific raising before the flop. If I felt it neccessary to pre-flop raise for pot-building or image purposes, I would try to do so with an element of randomness.

Position play may to be similar to pot limit hold 'em. Generally speaking, if there was a pre-flop raiser on my left, I would be more prone to playing drawing hands, thinking that I would be later to act on the flop and in a better position to calculating drawing potentials. If there was a pre-flop raiser on my right, I'd be more inclined to high cards, hoping that he would lead off and could isolate him. It's possible that this format might give you more leeway in hand selection since you wouldn't be a slave to the button in determining your position. You might also want to consider the pre-flop raising habits of your opponents when choosing a seat.

Is there much going all in? If so, on what streets?

Is there any respect for $4 raises? Can you get players to fold with them?

I've played in games that were limit before the flop and no-limit after. I played a lot of hands BTF that could flop monsters: sets, pairs with flush draws, straight and flush draws; and then think of getting my stack in if I flopped big. If I flopped a good hand, but nothing huge, I'd make smaller bets, trying to nit my way to a showdown. This might be how I'd approach this game.

[piratesocrates]

Thanks a bunch, this is some of the most in depth discussion I've had so far. To answer some of your questions:

You can go all in before the flop.
There's a little raising BTF but not much. The blinds are small and most everyone wants to gamble cheaply with their sub-par hands. Smaller raises are common, and after 2 or 3 $3 preflop raises about 2/3 of the table feels committed.
Most of the all ins happen on 4th street, some on the flop, and ones on the river are either bluffing or obviously made a big hand.

I like what you said about my relative position to preflop raisers affecting hand selection and post flop play. And I have been trying to choose my seat to the right of the most LAP in the game. I figure I gain late position for the majority of the time there.

Could you expand upon what you said about this structure giving leeway in hand selection, as far as not being enslaved by the button for position, that is. Do you mean the hands I play will be determined less by my position and more by who has been betting and what their tendencies are?

I'm pretty tight, though this game certainly can loosen me up sometimes. So my $4 raises intimidate and can reduce the field quite effectively. My opponents are a different story. They encourage loose play in each other from their fear of being bluffed off their mediocre hands. Many of them believe in luck and winning/loosing streaks. It could be a proffitable game once I get it down, so thanks again for your help.

[Phat Mack]

Do you mean the hands I play will be determined less by my position and more by who has been betting and what their tendencies are?

Right, it's still a matter of position, but position isn't determined by the button. Normally the first person to bet on post-flop rounds is the first person to the left of the button. Since in this game the post-flop betting order is determined by the last aggressor, and since in any given round the last aggresssor can't be known while the betting is in progress, but can be guessed at, it's a much more fluid situation.

Simplistically put, drawing hands should be played towards the rear. Here we never know where the rear is going to be, but if we can guess who the last aggressor will be, or even narrow it down to two or three people, it would give a better idea as to the playability of hands.

The first hold 'em game I played also had a weird format. Each player received three cards and rolled one; action was on the high card; there was a three-card flop and action was on high hand; the same with the turn and river. It was no limit, and you always had to be thinking of how to play a hand if your position were to change. I think this awareness of dynamic changes in position would have to be kept in mind in your game, too.

There are several poker games where is wise to hold back from betting in certain situations to keep out of the lead, and I wonder if this isn't the same, at least before the flop. I would be tempted to try and be the last aggressor btf with something like AK and big pairs so I could lead off with them, but I wonder if I wouldn't be giving out too much information about my hands by doing so. It's hard to say without being there. I might just always hold back before the flop and play this as a trapping game, limiting my pre-flop raises to all-ins. Sounds like a very interesting game.

[piratesocrates]

I actually feel as if it reduces the playability of many hands, mostly because, especially for drawing hands, you still won't know what position you have after the flop once you call a raise btf. Position is a big deal and in this game you don't have a clue until the ball comes to you. And once it does, you still don't unless the player directly to your left was the last agressor and everyone after them called/folded.

All of this unknown just tells me to tighten up except for in the right spots. These right spots, though, to my opponents actually do come across as entirely random as they haven't yet caught on to the concept of positional play.

When would you suggest going all in myself? I know it's a vague question, but what should I keep in mind when calling one?

[Phat Mack]

All of this unknown just tells me to tighten up except for in the right spots.

I think this is a good approach.

When would you suggest going all in myself? I know it's a vague question, but what should I keep in mind when calling one?

Calling an all-in bet is much tougher than making one, unless, of course, you are pretty sure you have the best hand. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[piratesocrates]

Ok, thanks for all this. Now when should the necessity to eliminate players preflop overwhelm my desire to avoid taking early position on the folp? Or at any other time, I suppose. Obviously it doesn't matter what position you have with aces or kings, but how about AK or smaller pairs. I guess what I really want to know is with what hands/situations should I REALLY avoid betting/raising last? Drawing hands? Many opponents? Few? Loose ones or tight? I can always check a drawing hand from first position without giving too much away in this game. But I can only guess that with many loose opponents in a hand I should avoid raising last if they are likely to stay, because combined they increase the odds of a raise if I should chose to open from my attained first position. Would you agree? I really need an alternative argument or an affirmation to help form some kind of strategy to follow.