Simple Thought Experiment for SSNL'ers

[jjacky]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm wondering why people are saying that #5, the raise or fold option, cripples your play. You should probably be playing this way much of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

because a single opponent can reraise you indefinitely (in most cardroom. online he can make at least 2 reraises. that means he threatens all your stack with any bet).
as long as the opposition doesn't adjust properly, this one is not very bad of course.

[fathertime]

remember, other than the restrictions, this is a solid player trying very hard to win. he will play as optimally as he can against you.

1. standard PFR must be 20xBB

This guy will play fewer hands and so I feel comfortable raising more often with a variety of hands. If he is not playing tight, I'd limp/trap him and 3 bet him.

If I were this guy, I'd play tight and steal occasionally in position. If I happened to get a big stack I'd loosen up but be wary of getting limp/trapped.

2. inability to bet hands, must checkraise only (calling PF ok)

This guy will have a hard time protecting his hands and building big pots. I should be able to manipulate pot size to my advantage and get to see whatever rivers I want. If he check-raises his draws, I can 3bet to protect my hand in flop situations where he can't have a monster draw. I can VB and check down to my heart's content.

If I were this guy I'd look to checkraise tptk unless monster draws possible, good draws, monsters (unless the pot will get built without me), positional steals when I have a decent holding, some bluffs. I'll also look to check-raise in marginal situations when I think I can win.

3. inability to raise preflop

Hmmm. Cero-Z recently wrote that he prefers to play in situations where he can limp at will. If a table doesn't let him do so, he will raise more often so that he can see more flops.

This guy enables you to loosen up. So I can see more flops, especially in position.

If I am this guy, I'll play position. Limp up front only with hands I'm willing to call a raise with. I'll limp in position with a variety of hands, otherwise I'll be too easy to play against.


4. all-in or fold on flop

Play a lot of pots against this guy. Be patient and he should be very easy to bust. If he is too cautious, bluff him until he wises up.

If I'm this guy, I'll want to be very careful. I'll go all in selectively on tptk hands, on good draws, on monsters. I probably won't bluff much. I won't want to be oop.

5. can never call, must raise or fold

Against this guy, I can take stabs at a lot of pots on the flop. And so he'll be forced to raise me in marginal situtations. If he is good at doing so, I'll look to avoid him. If he is bad, I'll get involved in a lot of pots with him.

If I am this guy, I gotta look to vary the times I raise. If I'm against an aggressive player, I'll have to raise more in marginal situations and as pure bluffs; otherwise he will chip away constantly at my stack. If I am against a maniac, I'll have to beat him in a couple of pots--make a hand and raise. After that I should be able to vary the times I raise the maniac. If I'm against a weak player, I'll raise more frequently.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm wondering why people are saying that #5, the raise or fold option, cripples your play. You should probably be playing this way much of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

You limp with 56[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] in CO. Flop comes 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. Button bets. Have fun.

Someone raises PF. You have 22. Have fun.

You re-raise someone PF with QQ. He bets into you on a 24T flop. Have fun.

[fathertime]

>>Someone raises PF. You have 22. Have fun.

It is all-in or fold on flop. This one is easy to play on the flop. But if playing this way you've gotta be going all in on flop with sets and good draws.

>>You re-raise someone PF with QQ. He bets into you on a 24T flop. Have fun.

This one sucks if you both are deep. Otherwise if you've re-raised a significant amount preflop, it is probably going all-in on the flop here, whatever your playing style.

[JJJ88]

[ QUOTE ]

2. inability to bet hands, must checkraise only (calling PF ok)


[/ QUOTE ]

If no one can bet, how can you check raise?
Does your rules only apply to yourself?

[ QUOTE ]

1. standard PFR must be 20xBB
2. inability to bet hands, must checkraise only (calling PF ok)
3. inability to raise preflop
4. all-in or fold on flop
5. can never call, must raise or fold


[/ QUOTE ]

This is my first time trying my hand at a response to your brain-teasers, Fim, so be gentle on me.

1. Standard PFR must be 20xBB.

Q: Is he allowed to call a standard 4xbb raise ahead of him? Or are his choices there reraise to 20xbb or fold?

Well, we are short-handed, so I think that is almost as much of a limitation as the pfr of 20xBB. Or at least they work together to complicate my play. If you are acting after the player who has to PFR 20xbb, it seems to me that the major adjustment you have to make here is to eliminate hands that rely on implied odds to justify a call. So suited connectors and low pocket pairs, say 88 and down, are now folds most of the time when the player has raised 20Xbb. I think you lose in this situation, long term, if you call with these hands and then fold when you don't flop a monster draw/2pr (SCs) or a set (small pp). It should be a corollary, then, that paint will go up in value, and you would rather have, say, KQ than 66. Each raise is for 20% of a buy-in, so, depending on stack sizes, the implied odds just aren't there for speculative starting hands.
I would revert to something closer to normal calling standards as my position improved, on the thory that other callers ahead of me are improving those implied odds.

If I am acting before the guy who has to PFR 20xBB, then I think I basically want to trap. I tighten up and play basically only hands that I can re-raise with. Is that too tight? If he's playing TAG except this restriction, it probably is, so maybe if he is playing TAG I maintain my normal opening requirements, eliminating some of the more speculative hands as above. If he is allowed to simply call a raise ahead of him, I think I open for a raise with hands I would like to play for a call, at least sometimes.

2. Must Checkraise.

You can exploit this restriction when you have a draw, obviously, by checking behind. And since he is going to checkraise anything he would otherwise bet, well, I'm going to bet into him only with solid hands that I can reraise with when he raises me.

This restriction sounds very -EV to me.

3. Inability to raise pre-flop.

You mean I get to play any two cards against AA? Woohoo! Did I ever tell you about the time my AA lost to 72o? I think I LAG it up a bit here, but there are two other players to think about, so I don't go crazy. But my VP% goes up, without a doubt.

4. All-in or fold on the flop.

Q: If he is HU on the button, and his opponent checks, is he then required to push?

If I am the OOP opponent, and this is the case, then you simply have to lead out everything but nearly the nuts (which you would then check with to compel a push).

If I am the OOP opponent and he is allowed to check behind, then I would check my best and worst hands and lead with everything else.

If I have position on him, I fold to him until the first time I have TPT/GK, and then I make a stand.

When I am HU against him, all my bets would at least gradually become minimum bets, since he can only fold to any bet or push. So once I educated him that my bets were getting smaller because of his strategy, HU I would make only minimum bets.

This strategy also affects preflop play--you would really need a monster draw to get in against this strategy. In addition, since he is unconstrained preflop, I would raise much more aggressively preflop.

5. Can never call; must raise or fold.

Q: He can't even just call a reraise?

Postflop, this is going to play about the same way as the all-in or fold strategy, since the pots he likes are going to get really big. Eventually, all the money is going in much more frequently. I play it about the same as the all-in or fold restriction, except I don't automatically reduce all my bets to min-bets.

Preflop I have to tighten up when I act before him, and only play hands I would call a reraise with (basically my EP starting requirements minus a few speculative hands).

[ QUOTE ]
there is one piece of logical deduction in the question i asked. anyone find it yet?

fim

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, sorry to be the grammar nazi, but I can't even find a question in your original post. Gonna go back now and see if I can deduce what the question is so I can then try to deduce the deuction.

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[DoomSlice]

God forbid you ever fold a flush draw or a small pair preflop... or even raise with a small pair preflop.

The cure to this ailment is to play hands that can draw to the nuts with position.

[bkholdem]

Keep in mind that this is 4 handed and there will be 2 other opponents in the game. I presume they will be trying to win also.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
God forbid you ever fold a flush draw or a small pair preflop... or even raise with a small pair preflop.

The cure to this ailment is to play hands that can draw to the nuts with position.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, god forbid indeed. How can you play a pocket pair preflop to a raise if you have to raise or fold? Not to mention the fact that agressive players will kill you by constantly betting into your mediocre holdings.