Two quick questions...raise the bring-in? move up in stakes?

If the pot is going to be multiway, you shouldn't raise unless your hand is good enough to raise for value as well as because you want to limit the field. Hands such as trips and live pairs of aces should be raised anyway.

Also raising third makes it more likely your opponents will fold if you improve or catch scare cards on fourth and fifth.

[Spladle Master]

[ QUOTE ]
Thats right, Mulit v. HeadsUp chapter says; if it looks like the pot is going to go multiway no matter what you do you should call with your big pairs and such.

But you don't necesarily do that just because the game is loose. If your the first one in or something definately put in a raise unless the people you are against are completely fearless and will call a raise with anything. You have to do what you can to get it heads up with big pairs.

[/ QUOTE ]
"You could not be more wrong. You could try, but you would not be successful."

p. 139

"if people are coming in with absolutely everything, you have got to raise with a pair of jacks simply because your hand is so much better on average than so many of the other players."

p. 143

"This concept should not be taken too far, however. Remember, the idea is that you play this way if your hand cannot easily improve to a very strong hand. If, for instance, you have <u>5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]</u>A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] you should raise or reraise, even in a multiway pot as long as all the aces and fives, and most of the hearts, were live. There is just too good a chance that you're going to make a hand that will be able to survive the onslaught of many players. The same would be true for a hand like: <u>J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]</u>J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]."

[preiserone]

I have read all of this before, but I don't know how often these games come up where a bet won't knock a few people out of the pot increasing the value of your big pairs. In this micro limit case, i'm sure it works. When i posted the last one I forgot the limits and the extreme loose nature of the games.

I still think that if a raise will scare a couple people out of the pot it has value. Its late i'll look some stuff up tomorrow.

[peritonlogon]

Most people in this forum may not agree with me, but I think one of the reasons not to raise with a big pair (without a suited and/or connected kicker or a completely live pair and kicker... i mean completely) is that it can make you make an even bigger mistake on later rounds than the school made on third. This mistake is usually calling against a strait (or flush) when you have no chance, or next to no chance to win, but often can be folding the best hand. I can't tell you how many times at 1/2 crypto I've folded kings up, or a hand similar, on the river when a 4strait board bets out after just calling, and 1-2 3strait or 3 flush boards raise and call, only to see eights up or some other garbage hand take it down. That mistake is so costly but it is a smaller mistake if the pot is smaller. Folding those kings up when they aren't good is easier to do as well. I think this falls under the category of manipulating the pot size, and I think if your big pair is not very live (1 gone or 1-2 of your kickers gone) then keeping the pot small works to your advantage in later rounds. Plus, you're more likely to get the chance to raise to drive people out on 4th or 5th when you haven't shown any aggression since the normal tendancy of those games is to check to the raiser and call. If you complete then it is quite unlikely that there will ever be a spot for you to raise to drive out players. Whereas when you drop the ball there is usually someone there to pick it up for you.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

[ QUOTE ]
Most people in this forum may not agree with me, but I think one of the reasons not to raise with a big pair (without a suited and/or connected kicker or a completely live pair and kicker... i mean completely) is that it can make you make an even bigger mistake on later rounds than the school made on third. This mistake is usually calling against a strait (or flush) when you have no chance, or next to no chance to win, but often can be folding the best hand. I can't tell you how many times at 1/2 crypto I've folded kings up, or a hand similar, on the river when a 4strait board bets out after just calling, and 1-2 3strait or 3 flush boards raise and call, only to see eights up or some other garbage hand take it down. That mistake is so costly but it is a smaller mistake if the pot is smaller. Folding those kings up when they aren't good is easier to do as well. I think this falls under the category of manipulating the pot size, and I think if your big pair is not very live (1 gone or 1-2 of your kickers gone) then keeping the pot small works to your advantage in later rounds. Plus, you're more likely to get the chance to raise to drive people out on 4th or 5th when you haven't shown any aggression since the normal tendancy of those games is to check to the raiser and call. If you complete then it is quite unlikely that there will ever be a spot for you to raise to drive out players. Whereas when you drop the ball there is usually someone there to pick it up for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have kings up in the game you described I can't see you not having pot odds to chase a boat. Not raising because it makes the rest of the hand uncomfortable is not a valid reason.

[preiserone]

[ QUOTE ]
This mistake is usually calling against a strait (or flush) when you have no chance, or next to no chance to win, but often can be folding the best hand. I can't tell you how many times at 1/2 crypto I've folded kings up, or a hand similar, on the river when a 4strait board bets out after just calling, and 1-2 3strait or 3 flush boards raise and call, only to see eights up or some other garbage hand take it down.

[/ QUOTE ]

This shouldn't really effect your third street play all that much, besides in these spots with a quality hand against a scary board it is almost mandatory to call down unless you have a really good reason not to. People with 6789 bords are going to bet at you if they have the straight or not and kings up will win enough of the time to be profitable against unknown players, at least at these stakes.

When I play at these micro limit tables I limp everything that I play. Split/wired pairs, rolled up, 3flush, 3str8 all limped. I find it gives me deception which pays off on fifth street when I really start pushing my hand.

So if limping allows you to punish chasers on later streets wouldn't it be beneficial to raise when you have a draw, a high 3 flush for example, so that you could manipulate favourable pot odds for later streets?

Or should I just learn how to get free cards more efficiently when I'm drawing? It seems to be an awfully important part of this game from what I can gather so far. Not quite as easy as hold'em where position is fixed so I'm still not comfortable with it.

By the way, your posts have been very helpful so far! You've all given me several things to think about away from the table that I think will help me develop, so thank you.

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
When I play at these micro limit tables I limp everything that I play. Split/wired pairs, rolled up, 3flush, 3str8 all limped. I find it gives me deception which pays off on fifth street when I really start pushing my hand.

So if limping allows you to punish chasers on later streets wouldn't it be beneficial to raise when you have a draw, a high 3 flush for example, so that you could manipulate favourable pot odds for later streets?

Or should I just learn how to get free cards more efficiently when I'm drawing? It seems to be an awfully important part of this game from what I can gather so far. Not quite as easy as hold'em where position is fixed so I'm still not comfortable with it.

[/ QUOTE ]


Something basic: With big pairs and high 3-flushes, you have a pot equity edge on 3rd (on average of course). So if you fail to raise, you are costing yourself $$$, on that street. Nevertheless, you should sometimes sacrifice that edge to increase you overall expectation on the hand - keeping the pot small magnifies the errors of your opponents but allows you to lay down a hand, make successful isolation raises etc.
There is some good discussion on this in Getting Started In Hold’em I think. For instance, KQo after several limpers… you should have an equity edge preflop, but it’s probably better not to raise…

Now I take it from your post that you are using this approach… way too often. If you are limping in with premium pairs all the time, you are costing yourself money; use it more selectively.
Also, you mentioned deception. That’s not a good reason to sacrifice big edges. Deception is wasted at a micro table.

Next, you said something about raising with drawing hands on 3rd to give yourself the odds to draw. This is, of course, a bad idea. Sure, if you build a big pot early you’ll have the odds to draw with some marginal hands you would have had to fold in a smaller pot, but you paid for that privilege by putting in $$$ when you didn’t have an edge.
That said, 3-flushes frequently have an equity edge on 3rd. Say you are in late position with a small but live 3-flush and six people limp. You should probably raise. You have an edge. On the other hand, you might decide to limp with a pair of queens in the same spot. You have an edge with queens too, but whereas flush draws love big multi-way pots, queens hate them. You get it.

Lastly, you mentioned getting free cards. Don’t worry about it too much. Sure, your opponents are passive, so if you need one and see a chance to get one, do it. But you shouldn’t be constantly thinking about ways to manipulate your opponents into giving you free cards or something. Just take what they offer you. They’ll offer you plenty.

Signal to Noise Ratio as Andy_B says in the FAQ


I must admit .. This forum stands high above the rest ... It quickly becomes home

I've played tons of hands and progressively from 04/.08 through 5/10. It seems to me I noticed a change in play at every level and the adapting/learning was always relatively expensive.

18BB/100 hands. This is astoundingly high! Maybe I should go play there.

On the raising of high pairs at micro-tables. I know that, at times, I'll only call with them at a bigger loose table. But I think that at a micro-table, where the looseness and errors are obviously at the extreme, I'd be tempted to often jam at 3rd and lay down fast on the following streets because you cannot outplay the villains.

I also agree that deception is nearly out of the question at these levels compared to how effective it is at higher stakes. However, villains will have some short-term memory. For example, if you burn seat 3, you may have a certain amount of control over this player for a few hands.