why you should raise pf with nonpaired cards to get 2 callers not 1

[john kane]

in response to the thoughts of the poster with the reasons against my theory;

a) There's not really any raise that accomplishes what you are trying to do very often.

short handed id say if you have 1 limper a raise to 3xBB or on a tighter table to 2.5BB often does the trick. if you have no limpers or utg a min raise.

b) Your hand is much more likely to be good when you do flop (even when you don't), when you are heads up.

indeed, but that is of no relevance. You have taken an slightly better than even money bet (your bet vs opponent's call+blinds). You should therefore need to be ahead more often than when you are three way when you are getting more value on your money. Plus, you are more likely to know if you are ahead 3 way if you are looking to hit, as you know your cards, whereas heads up you are playing the weakness of the opponents cards, which you obviously do not know what they are.

c) You should still be continuation betting quite a bit when you get 2 callers.

if you know they are tight and the flop contains a J, Q or K, then i probably would last to act if its been checked round. but in many circumstances its a wasted bet. if you want to show a LAG style to your play its better to play your made hands aggressively and be aggressive preflop than bet into a flop pot.

d) Multiway pots are (generally) more difficult to play.

i disagree. you are playing the strength of your cards, which you know. heads up you are playing the weakness of your opponents cards, which you do not know.

e) You seem to be assuming that you always win when you flop a pair.

For simplicity yes. As i am assuming that if you miss you lose, disgarding the times you see a free turn card and hit and win. Anyway, that aside, so long as what win compared to what you lose is on average higher than the 2xwhat you put in preflop (to make up for the 2 in 3 you miss the flop and lose), which it certainly should be, you will win.

f) You are not committing yourself to continuation betting. There are many situations/reasons to check behind on the flop some percentage of the time.

and then the opponent sees your weakness, bets, and you lose, he bluffed you.

g) You are ignoring position
for simplicity yes, i didnt think people would want me to go about that as well, but of course you want to be raising in the first 4 poistions and not in the SB or BB.



Im not saying you should be strictly playing the strength of your cards, and ignoring any weakness in the opponent, but that weakness can be discovered on the turn and river betting round, not blindly firing off a continuation bet heads up making a gamble to gain 1 unit of opponents chips gambling 2 units of your own, when he should have you beat that same percentage time (hitting the flop 1 time for every 2 times he misses). So a more +EV play is to see it 3 way for the explanation of math in my first post.

[Slappz]

[ QUOTE ]

d) Multiway pots are (generally) more difficult to play.

i disagree. you are playing the strength of your cards, which you know. heads up you are playing the weakness of your opponents cards, which you do not know.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is very wrong. If your better than your opponents than heads up is the best scenerio for you, regardless of your cards. Multiway pots you cant just play your hand strength (lets say you get TPTK) and someone checkraises you on the flop, you wont have a clue what they have because multiway pots tend to get a lot more creative hands in there.

[jjacky]

[ QUOTE ]

e) You seem to be assuming that you always win when you flop a pair.

For simplicity yes. As i am assuming that if you miss you lose, disgarding the times you see a free turn card and hit and win. Anyway, that aside, so long as what win compared to what you lose is on average higher than the 2xwhat you put in preflop (to make up for the 2 in 3 you miss the flop and lose), which it certainly should be, you will win.


[/ QUOTE ]

if you assume that you win if you hit a pair, you should want to have 9 callers. do you see why?

[MaGi]

this whole post is ridiculous. sometimes when i continuation bet if i havent hit i have the best hand, if not i am hardly ever drawing dead. youre also assuming that hitting a pair gives you the nuts or something, if thats the case, why dont we want everyone at the table calling?

[KaneKungFu123]

Interesting Stuff.

just curious do you play limit? i think this type of work will get you farther in limit then no limit.

[lapoker17]

You should mix in a line break occasionally.

[punter11235]

I used to think in the same way as you do when I was starting my poker career.
Now I dont care about stuff like that.
Its not important at all. Just make whatever your standard raise is and play whatever poker gods require from you, pot vs 1 , 2 or maybe 5 opponents...

Best wishes

[john kane]

thanks again for the replies. I just think the maths element of poker is far too ignored when consider the amount you bet to the amount of opponent money to win with the % of yourself and your opponent hitting.

to reply to the aboves:

[ QUOTE ]
This is very wrong. If your better than your opponents than heads up is the best scenerio for you, regardless of your cards. Multiway pots you cant just play your hand strength (lets say you get TPTK) and someone checkraises you on the flop, you wont have a clue what they have because multiway pots tend to get a lot more creative hands in there.


[/ QUOTE ]

likewise if you get check-raised on the flop heads up. neither you know where you are. but you are far more likely to be betting the flop with weak cards heads up than in a 3 way flop, and so your defense heads up against a check raise is less than 3 way, as you are more less likely to of bet with a strong hand.

[ QUOTE ]
if you assume that you win if you hit a pair, you should want to have 9 callers. do you see why?

[/ QUOTE ]

i am not basing my assumption that i will win if i hit a pair, i am basing it on the very high % that i will be ahead vs 2 opponents. If i hit top pair vs 9 other players, clearly the % that i will be ahead is far lower, and so i would not make the same assumption, i would instead assume i am ahead if i have flopped the nuts. The reason i assume i am ahead is that if you have hit top pair there are only 2 cards out of 47 in the deck out of the 4 cards your opponents they can hold to equal your top pair (although obviosly theory points that they are more likely to be holding these high cards), and even if they also have top pair then you will quite likely have them out-kickered, or they may call with their mid pocket pair they called your raise with preflop.

[ QUOTE ]
this whole post is ridiculous. sometimes when i continuation bet if i havent hit i have the best hand, if not i am hardly ever drawing dead. youre also assuming that hitting a pair gives you the nuts or something, if thats the case, why dont we want everyone at the table calling?


[/ QUOTE ]

thats a bit harsh 'ridiculous', im applying a lot more thinking both maths and theory wise in my posts than you are in that reply.
i have explained above why hitting top pair very good kicker is far better 3 way(in terms of much higher % to you are ahead) than 9 way, it is all basically maths of your opponents holding cards and the %s to hit different hands on different flops.

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting Stuff.

just curious do you play limit? i think this type of work will get you farther in limit then no limit.



[/ QUOTE ]

thanks. i began with no limit, went and learnt to play what id like to think decent limit, and switched back to no limit due to the much higher profit hourly rate and better players have a much better edge imo.
i agree it works with limit, just that in limit it is often tempting to throw in a bet on the flop as that is the maximum you can bet, and that if the flop comes ace high, its can be worthwhile to bet that single bet as that also represents the most you can bet, whereas to represent the ace in no limit you have to bet proportionally much more of the pot than in limit (risk more proportionally to the pot to win the pot with the risk being equal in both limit and no limit, that neither opponent has an ace). So yes that is actually a reason why it is better in limit. But then limit i just find too frustrating the lack of flexibility and robotic nature with the play.

[ QUOTE ]
You should mix in a line break occasionally.


[/ QUOTE ]

i agree, ive tried with the last two posts.

[ QUOTE ]
I used to think in the same way as you do when I was starting my poker career.
Now I dont care about stuff like that.
Its not important at all. Just make whatever your standard raise is and play whatever poker gods require from you, pot vs 1 , 2 or maybe 5 opponents...

Best wishes


[/ QUOTE ]

i agree you should be capable of playing against any number of opponents, just that in a game we always aim to maximise our hourly rate, maximise EV, considering this is a fundamental part of the game, the preflop raise, i dont think enough is analysised of it compares to 'how to play aces preflop etc etc'.

Those are my thoughts and thanks for the replies, further thoughts are most appreciated,

chris

[Chaostracize]

I would say 80% of the pots I win I have absolutely nothing. Are you forgetting Shania?