Raising from the blinds--why do the experts disagree?

[mrwatson23]

Humor me here, what about the rare times it does happen?

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Humor me here, what about the rare times it does happen?

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to consider what they are more likely to be limping in with than the average idiot in looser games.

b

[mrwatson23]

I have yet to play in a mid-limit (40-80 or below) game where the hands Miller recommends raising with would not have a pot equity edge against limpers. I'm not saying they don't exist, but in the mid-limit games I have played, there are a lot of people who limp in with less than adequate values. Of course, if the two biggest rocks in Vegas limp in utg and utg+1, this would not hold true, but that exceptional case doesn't negate the issue.

[TStoneMBD]

bernie says it all best. the point is that its very situational and noone can really explain to you what you are interested in learning without writing an extensive essay because its necessary to cover all situations. in essence, you want us to teach you experience because in many of these cases the situation is not black and white. the best way to learn when to raise from the blinds is start posting hands concerning a pf blind raise preferably in the small stakes forum (even if its a 40-80 game because its a small stakes problem) unless it has other significant content worthy of high stakes.

[mrwatson23]

This is not an "it depends" question. If two successful mid limit or higher hold'em players disagree on whether you should raise from the sb with JJ after 4 typical mid-limit players limp in, then one of them has to be wrong. If you specify all of the known conditions, and there is still a disagreement as to what to do with a hand, the old "it depends" goes out the window.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
If you specify all of the known conditions, and there is still a disagreement as to what to do with a hand, the old "it depends" goes out the window.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really though, b/c everybody has their own style, and the style you play, and how you're perceived by opponents will have a pretty big impact on proper play in a lot of hands.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
If two successful mid limit or higher hold'em players disagree on whether you should raise from the sb with JJ after 4 typical mid-limit players limp in, then one of them has to be wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dan N is high stakes. Really high stakes. Probably hasn't seen a mid stake game in a year or 2.

Barry is mid stakes....(I believe. Not playing as high as dan)

Ed's book is primarily for low stakes style games.

Yes, it depends...

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I have yet to play in a mid-limit (40-80 or below) game where the hands Miller recommends raising with would not have a pot equity edge against limpers. I'm not saying they don't exist, but in the mid-limit games I have played, there are a lot of people who limp in with less than adequate values. Of course, if the two biggest rocks in Vegas limp in utg and utg+1, this would not hold true, but that exceptional case doesn't negate the issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've had to adjust my play on the online UB 3-6 and 5-10 at times. Which play much tougher than most 20-40 tables I've seen. Basically I have to use more HEPFAP than I usually do in the UB games than most live games.

I've also been in some tight ass live 10-20 games, though rare nowadays. Be prepared for when those games come around. Don't just assume all games are the same. I remember one game I was in (10-20 must move) Slavic said one couldn't pay him $20/hr to sit in. That was awhile ago. Still kind of humorous.

That said, there is lots of crossover with the concepts Ed presents. I think I said that in my inital response. It gets to the point of not just being table texture dependent, but player dependant. (i think I mentioned that too)

Sorry it's not as black and white as you want it.

b

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If two successful mid limit or higher hold'em players disagree on whether you should raise from the sb with JJ after 4 typical mid-limit players limp in, then one of them has to be wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dan N is high stakes. Really high stakes. Probably hasn't seen a mid stake game in a year or 2.



[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, Daniel has played several sessions of 40-80 at the Wynn with me, and there is no way he's not raising JJ from the SB.

As for Barry's advice, it's simply something he's dead wrong on, and as SinCity's post indicates, it's something he is empirically wrong, and it's been proven. Winning players with huge hand databases have debunked tons of weak preflop advice and this is but one example.

[Hamlet]

One important thing to keep in mind is that there is a vast difference between a multi-way pot in a game with a lot of very loose players, and a multi-way pot in a typically fairly tight game.

If you're in a very loose game where there are people calling with stuff like J2s, 97o, K6o, etc, you absolutely must raise your AKo and AQo out of the blinds. You are just giving up way too much pre-flop to even consider not raising. The giant mistake they are making pre-flop by putting two bets in with trash more than makes up for the fact that they now have proper odds to chase you post flop, when they happen to hit a piece of the flop.

However, if these people need a reasonable hand to limp (QJs, 77, A9s, etc), your pre-flop edge, while still pretty large, may not outway the positional disadvantage and suprise value of not raising. I still raise, but it is much closer when your opponents have real hands.