I still don't get this at all. Please help me understand:

[AdamL]

Preamble:

The theory is that you might give up a raise preflop to keep the pot small in order to win sklansky bucks (make your opponent play incorrectly) post-flop.

The fundamantal theorem of poker is that you win money when your opponents make mistakes. (in short.)

But it seems to me, frequently, that the mistakes the opponents make by calling raises with less total hand equity preflop outweigh any mistakes they might make after the flop.

I'm not even sure when exactly not raising preflop is correct. I have no idea how to implement this into my game. If I'm heads up, I'm often raising for any fold equity I might have. If there are multiple opponents, I'm often raising because of my hand equity standing to be better than my contribution to the pot. So whether I'm heads up or playing a field, I am raising preflop.

So that's where I'm coming from.

Now here's the main question:


I'd like it if someone could show me the math of when your equity edge might be small enough preflop to draw the line and say, "I'm not raising." I would like to see exactly how keeping the pot small when I have only a slight edge preflop actually makes me money.

I can't do it. I'm a nit. Whenever I try, I see myself coming out on top raising even the smallest edge. Because in the end, that's money in my pocket.

The only time I've been able to find NOT raising preflop and trying to wait for the flop to act, is when I don't have any kind of equity edge.

Please help this slackjawed yokal understand!

PS -- I will say, I understand the value of deception. Getting a guy to call down with top pair garbage kicker vs your top pair good kicker makes sense.

It's those "keep the pot small so he doesn't have the correct odds to chase" scenarios that baffle me entirely.

Put it this way: If he has a 35% chance of drawing out on me, I don't want the pot small. I want it to be as huge as possible -- infinitely large, theoretically, and I don't care too much if he has odds.

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
It's those "keep the pot small so he doesn't have the correct odds to chase" scenarios that baffle me entirely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically, you want your opponent to make a mistake. If you give him odds to chase and he is a 35% favorite to win, then he will get his 35% share of the pot if he goes to the end with you.

If you can make him fold, by not giving him correct odds, you get to keep his 35% too.

If he chooses to chase without the odds, he will pay too high a price, and while he may not lose everything to you, he will lose everything.

Players who know better will not cut off their nose to spite their face, but they will take favorable drawing odds. After all, that's how you make money in this game.

By the way, you can have situations where you both make money from other players. Not everything is mutually exclusive, but it is all zero sum.

[GFunk911]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's those "keep the pot small so he doesn't have the correct odds to chase" scenarios that baffle me entirely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically, you want your opponent to make a mistake. If you give him odds to chase and he is a 35% favorite to win, then he will get his 35% share of the pot if he goes to the end with you.

If you can make him fold, by not giving him correct odds, you get to keep his 35% too.

[/ QUOTE ]

65% of 2X is more than 100% of X.

I have the exact same question as the OP. He could have raided my brain for these thoughts.

If you assume your opponent will always play perfectly, then there may not be a scenario where you want to forgo a raise preflop. In the case where they make mistakes is where this is possible

[autobet]

let's say you limp with AA and get heads up against the BB.
The flop comes Q73. A player with Q6 who would have folded before the flop now bets thinking his Q might be good. You just call to string him along. Now a duece comes off and he bets again. You raise and he calls.

River 1: a 2 comes off and he calls your river value bet. You win a nice pot instead of the blinds.

River 2: a 6 comes off and he check raises you for all your dough. You crap your pants, head for Vegas, and kill Sklansky. Not as good as winning the pot, but you feel good, go scott free and never trap again

[adspar]

In the thread below, I decided not to cap AKs from the BB so that I'd be more likely to force an opponent to face 2 bets cold on the flop.
this thread

[BarronVangorToth]

Remember a lot of that theory applies to THINKING opponents. Against your traditional opposition at the low stakes (20-40 and under), just raise when appropriate, per Small Stakes Hold 'em.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com

[Leptyne]

Adam, I'm with you. I don't get this at all. I'm strictly a NLHE player and perhaps this thread has validity when talking about Limit HE, but it certainly is not applicable to no limit. Of course there concepts that apply to NLHE like "metagame" that I don't think are relavant to Limit. In any case my point is that this may be Limit Poker Theory, but I don't believe it is Poker Theory.

[Good Friar]

This is primarily a limit idea, since actual pot size is far more important (given smaller implied odds). There was a pretty good article in the internet magazine a few months ago about this topic. It is certainly very useful in stud, and it comes up freuqently in posts in that forum. The small edges you are eeking out of your opponent's mistakes preflop are small bets, when they chase, the best can be larger, and they can make the mistakes on multiple rounds.

[mindflayer]

This probably applies when the player to your left is willing to Cold call too many hands.

YOu are in the CO with 88 and it is folded to you. YOu should raise and try and either win the blinds right there Or get HU with the BB.
Now say the player to your left will Always call with any two cards ten or higher. He is only a slight underdog to your 88, BUT when he calls, he gives the BB 5:1 to call and make a hand. Now your facing 3 and possibly 4 overcards to your 88.
When the flop comes 237 and you bet, they have the odds 7:1 to call you with just 2 overcards.
go back and limp with 88 .. when everyone misses again, after you bet, if they call they are making the wrong decision to chase since the pot is only giving them 3:1 to chase with 2 overcards.

If im wrong, feel free to blast away.

[Ziggolf]

Great reply autobet