The first three rounds

[citanul]

maybe he thinks that a HELL of a lot means very little, whereas the commonly used hell of a lot would mean a whole lot?

citanul

[ripped]

THe first thing I meant limping with semi strong hands like AQ and KQs. Open raising with JJ in the CO first in of course. I guess I should have clearified what I was trying to say but I also should have been in bed about 5 hours ago.

[BradleyT]

[ QUOTE ]
In the first 3 levels, I play tight both pre and post flop. Calling preflop with anything adds up fast, especially if you are forced to call a few min-raises.

Hands I usually play
1) Any pair
2) Axs
3) Two suited broadways (most 2 broadways for that matter)
4) Suited connectors
5) Few unsuited connectors such as JTo and T9o


[/ QUOTE ]

That's nowhere near tight.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In the first 3 levels, I play tight both pre and post flop. Calling preflop with anything adds up fast, especially if you are forced to call a few min-raises.

Hands I usually play
1) Any pair
2) Axs
3) Two suited broadways (most 2 broadways for that matter)
4) Suited connectors
5) Few unsuited connectors such as JTo and T9o


[/ QUOTE ]

That's nowhere near tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

what he said.

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In the first 3 levels, I play tight both pre and post flop. Calling preflop with anything adds up fast, especially if you are forced to call a few min-raises.

Hands I usually play
1) Any pair
2) Axs
3) Two suited broadways (most 2 broadways for that matter)
4) Suited connectors
5) Few unsuited connectors such as JTo and T9o


[/ QUOTE ]

That's nowhere near tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

Note, I said usually play.
1) pairs are a no brainer
2) Axs is fine, especially if you are in late. Some value here is also in flopping 2 pair because the ace is a common card to pair up.
3) I'm playing hands like KQs, QJs, and KJs early on.
4) JTs, T9s, 98s, 87s if I'm in late with a least a couple of limpers
5) JTo and T9o only in late with many many limpers if I'm feeling lucky

The above list was meant to illustrate the entire possible universe of level 1 hands.

[ripped]

pairs are a no brainer? The only hands I play here are 99 and up as well as KQs. The rest of those hands are crap. That is very loose to be playing all those hands. I think you have some holes to fix in your game.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
pairs are a no brainer? The only hands I play here are 99 and up as well as KQs. The rest of those hands are crap. That is very loose to be playing all those hands. I think you have some holes to fix in your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

he has holes in his game, but you should be playing all pairs if you can play them cheaply.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
The only hands I play here are 99 and up as well as KQs.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is pretty funny, I think you're too tight and loose at the same time.

KQs is a trap hand. And minimally, 66-88 have the same set value as 99. If you're going to play 99 for set value, then there's no reason to exclude many of the lower pairs.

[hummusx]

[ QUOTE ]
pairs are a no brainer? The only hands I play here are 99 and up as well as KQs. The rest of those hands are crap. That is very loose to be playing all those hands. I think you have some holes to fix in your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lower pairs are fine with limpers for set value only. You stand to take a LOT of chips if you hit, and it's very, very easy to get off of 66 if the flop doesn't hit you.

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]
pairs are a no brainer? The only hands I play here are 99 and up as well as KQs. The rest of those hands are crap. That is very loose to be playing all those hands. I think you have some holes to fix in your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pairs are an absolute no brainer. I tripled up by flopping a set of 4s against two players with AA and QQ the other night.