Online deep stack: how do you handle this common situation?

[ML4L]

Hey craze,

Basically, this is what I was getting at.

When you talking about why you should raise, you characterize your opponents as poor. The hypothetical opponents limp up front with mediocre hands, call large raises out of position with those hands, and then proceed to let the raiser slap them around postflop: folding when the raiser shows aggression and paying off when the raiser makes a hand.

Then, when you talk about limping, you characterize your opponents as good. They don't pay off with top pair, two pair, or even a straight or a non-nut flush. They read hands and will move you off a draw (how they know you have a draw is beyond me).

So, the illustration seems a little silly to me...

That having been said, I agree whole-heartedly with the general point of the original post, which is that the preflop raise is not only fine, but possibly better than a limp if the raiser plays better than his opponents after the flop, as you and cero generally do.

ML4L

[craze9]

Maybe I exaggerated a bit, but I dont think I characterized the opponents who limp and call a raise as bad players necessarily. It is just that the dynamic of a raised pot is extremely different from that of an unraised pot.

Preflop raisers are given respect. I think many "solid" players will play in the manner I described, limping early and mid with hands like 66, KQ, T9s and calling raises. And if they dont hit the flop they arent playing. And when there is some action, you will have the advantage. This isnt just conjecture, this is what happens again and again in my game.

If I limp early or mid position, I will play like this most of the time. And I dont think there is a more profitable alternative. Playing back at the raiser with bad hands or trying to look him up a lot is just stupid poker imo.

I give other raisers a lot of respect, and I get respect in return. And then I raise a lot. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[creedofhubris]

I'm one of the people who posted that raising with weak aces is a bad idea. I understand what you're saying about raising cards with position. However, I think that these two *specific cards* are bad ones to raise with position.

Let's say you raise and get one or two callers. You bet the flop and get one caller. You have one of the following hands:

1) Nothing.
2) A strong draw.
3) A monster made hand.
4) An ace.
5) A nine, top pair.
6) A nine, middle pair.


I suggest that in cases 4-6, it's difficult to play your ace-nine, because you can't be sure that your pair or your ace is any good, but they MIGHT be.

Now let's think about 64s. Six-four has as many chances to make a "monster" as ace-nine, (more, because of its straight value) and you're not going to have any trouble playing it if you hit a pair on the board. It makes very few second-best hands, and you're not going to need to pay off any bets with them.

I find it much easier to raise hands where I'm sure where I stand postflop.

[vegas]

I believe table image is a very important factor when you determine whether or not to raise with these hands. If you convey a solid image then raising preflop allows you to pick up many pots. Of course, there are times that you might want to limp but that to would depend on peoples' image of you and how many ppl are in the hand already. My style of play definitely says raise more often then not. Most often if I get called and flop an Ace the hand is mine. If I get played with you can always slow down and maybe not raise those hands at that table against that player.

[craze9]

I'm a big fan of 64.

But I think most of the good reasons for raising with hands like 64 apply to raising A9 also.

[ QUOTE ]
I suggest that in cases 4-6, it's difficult to play your ace-nine, because you can't be sure that your pair or your ace is any good, but they MIGHT be.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see what's so difficult about these scenarios. Most of the time I'll just check behind turn. More difficult is if youre checkraised on a weird flop.

However, I dont really disagree with you. No doubt limping with A9 and hoping to really hit something is easier than raising. Maybe 64 is easier to play as a raiser than A9.

But not being easy doesnt mean it isnt profitable or the best play for good postflop players. That said, even very good players have different styles and I'm not saying that everyone should raise here every time. My original post was objecting to people characterizing cero's play as bad and trying to give reasons for why I think it's actually good.

[creedofhubris]

With ace-nine is that you often have to pay off one more bet than with 6-4. Bet flop, check turn, opponent value bets river... you have just enough hand to call with a loser. Or opponent check-raises flop, you take one more off, fold on turn. Doesn't really happen with 6-4.

It all depends on whether the steal value is enough to pay for the extra bets it can trap you for.