Gigabet's preflop play from "Play a Hand with the Masters"

[Paul Thomson]

Is this Shania?

[ QUOTE ]
I think the second part of this is psychological. In deepstack poker, if your opponent knows that you will raise 3 limpers with: KK and AA 100% of the time, suited connectors 35% of the time and small pairs 25% of the time (just giving random percentages) - you're going to get a lot more action on your KK and AA (needless to say, from worse hands) than you would if your opponents knew that it was KK and AA 100% of the time, and AK 75% of the time, and nothing else.

[/ QUOTE ]

[MLG]

its kind of like looking at shania in reverse through a telescope, but its in the ball park.


btw, I want to credit that phrase to whoever used it first, but I can't remember who.

[Gigabet]

[ QUOTE ]
c) The goal is to get a 1 or 2 of the preflop limpers to fold so that you gain in preflop equity?


[/ QUOTE ]

The reply to this question is the main reason why I usually will limp behind with AK. I didn't realize that the quick overview that I had PMed to Lloyd was going to be posted in the thread, or I would have elaborated a little further.

The key is that I have 100bb, my table has 100bb, and the avg for the field is less. The preflop equity that you gain by raising off 1 or 2 of the limper is nullified by the playability of the stack later in the tournament. If I take down the pot preflop I will gain 4.5bb, which adds nothing to my stack presence at my current table. If I take down the flop postflop, with one caller, I will add approximately 10bb, which adds 10% to my stack, which is significant, but doesn't really give me much more leeway in putting pressure on the table.

If I really want to make the hand worthwhile, I will have to induce flop action, and play the hand very deep and very aggressive, after which, one of two things will happen.....I will take down a decent sized pot, which will allow me to take advantage of the other stacks quite liberally, or I will not take the pot down, which will force me to wait for good situations to arise for me to get involved, ie., I cannot "make" anything happen, without risking my tournament life.

Another problem with playing aggressively in this situation, is that with every chip that I lose, I may actually be losing two chips. With all the stacks at my table being essentially even, it is very important to try and stay "even" with them, if you get into a situation that will double you, every chip that you had lost before almost doubles in value, because they are not there to "double" through.

Although, all of these negatives that go with playing the hand fast only apply to my table at hand, I would still consider playing the hand deep and aggressive, if our table were even with the field. Then I would have table presence over my table, and any future table, if we broke. Because I will already have table presence at any table that I may move to, there just isn't enough long term gains that override the negatives.