Alter your play for donks - early game? - Page 3

the_joker · #21 11-09-2005, 12:34 PM

So you don't agree with SonnyJay's analysis below? There may be a time to raise with suited connectors - even Harrington's book recommends this to mix up your play. Maybe at the 1000 chip level to mix up your play against people you play with a lot. Maybe at the WSOP. I don't think an 800 chip Party SNG is the place for it.

Do you have PokerTacker? Do you have real data to back up this theory? If you really get this good of implied odds with raising with suited connectors that's awesome, but honestly I don't believe it.

#22 11-09-2005, 12:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the Harrington on Hold'em books are great advice for post-flop play. Raising with suited connectors from EP is a bad idea, IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

HOH has great advice, especially if you like to play tight. But raising with SC in EP is the correct thing to do - this is a technique of loose players like Erik Lindgren, who specifically recommends the raising EP with SC. But you have to know how to play postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both Dan Harrington and Erik Lindgren play multitable tournaments. They are often working with deeper stacks against larger fields, which requires different strategy than online SNGs. Just because online SNGs are tournaments doesn't mean that multitable strategy is universally applicable.

-SonnyJay

[/ QUOTE ]

True. That's why I only do this rounds 1 or 2 when blinds are small. It's not like I'm commiting 1/2 my stack. It's requires extreme care but it's +EV.

SonnyJay · #23 11-09-2005, 01:10 PM

Any reaction to my (or anyone else's) other analysis?

Other question: when you say it's +EV are you doing it based on net chips (+cEV) or on its effect on your prize pool equity (+$EV)? I have a feeling your play loses you more than it wins you from a $EV perspective.

Lastly, this isn't necessarily directed towards you, but it's on the forum a lot...just because something is +EV doesn't mean it's the optimal play. You could be showing a +EV result with this play (though I suspect that this isn't the case if you have a substantial sample size and software to track it), but that doesn't mean you can't do better than that.

It's not correct to think "it's +EV, so I'll do it" and not think about other, more +EV options. If that's how you think, if you were forced to take 2 options, one with an EV of -$1 and one with an EV of -$5, it wouldn't matter since both are -EV. Likewise, finding a +EV answer doesn't make it correct simply because it's +EV.

-SonnyJay

#24 11-09-2005, 01:17 PM

By +EV, I mean: assume I'm a 4 to 1 dog against premium PPs. If flop is good for me, I make 800, since AA or KK usually give up all their chips. If it's bad I lose 100 4 times (since I'm not committing anymore than 100). Plus, often, a bluff works when scare card comes since I was EP raiser (this is assuming I wasn't reraised pf).

I don't believe there is a big difference between 800 and 700 chips in levels 1 and 2. But I'm sure others will disagree. I get back up after going down to 700 when I lose.

Cactus Jack · #25 11-09-2005, 01:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Oh give it up already. Do you want me to post hand histories? It's a no brainer. Try it sometime. You'll be pleasantly surprised.

[/ QUOTE ]

With all due respect, this is the kind of response I see all the time from guys who have just won a hand that they shouldn't have played. People who are results-oriented aren't thinking of how to play the game, only whether they win or lose, which in the long run is not the right attitude.

I'm sure posting hand histories is easy. I'll definitely try it sometime. No doubt it's a no brainer.

CJ

#26 11-09-2005, 02:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Oh give it up already. Do you want me to post hand histories? It's a no brainer. Try it sometime. You'll be pleasantly surprised.

[/ QUOTE ]

With all due respect, this is the kind of response I see all the time from guys who have just won a hand that they shouldn't have played. People who are results-oriented aren't thinking of how to play the game, only whether they win or lose, which in the long run is not the right attitude.

I'm sure posting hand histories is easy. I'll definitely try it sometime. No doubt it's a no brainer.

CJ

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the complete opposite of ROT. It's +EV. Move on. If you want to continue to play Group 1 hands only in Level 1 and 2, no prob. I'll do what I do and continue to make money.

gildwulf · #27 11-09-2005, 02:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the Harrington on Hold'em books are great advice for post-flop play. Raising with suited connectors from EP is a bad idea, IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

HOH has great advice, especially if you like to play tight. But raising with SC in EP is the correct thing to do - this is a technique of loose players like Erik Lindgren, who specifically recommends the raising EP with SC. But you have to know how to play postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both Dan Harrington and Erik Lindgren play multitable tournaments. They are often working with deeper stacks against larger fields, which requires different strategy than online SNGs. Just because online SNGs are tournaments doesn't mean that multitable strategy is universally applicable.

-SonnyJay

[/ QUOTE ]

True. That's why I only do this rounds 1 or 2 when blinds are small. It's not like I'm commiting 1/2 my stack. It's requires extreme care but it's +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF happened to this forum?? It's like the twilight zone for advice...

#28 11-09-2005, 02:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the Harrington on Hold'em books are great advice for post-flop play. Raising with suited connectors from EP is a bad idea, IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

HOH has great advice, especially if you like to play tight. But raising with SC in EP is the correct thing to do - this is a technique of loose players like Erik Lindgren, who specifically recommends the raising EP with SC. But you have to know how to play postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both Dan Harrington and Erik Lindgren play multitable tournaments. They are often working with deeper stacks against larger fields, which requires different strategy than online SNGs. Just because online SNGs are tournaments doesn't mean that multitable strategy is universally applicable.

-SonnyJay

[/ QUOTE ]

True. That's why I only do this rounds 1 or 2 when blinds are small. It's not like I'm commiting 1/2 my stack. It's requires extreme care but it's +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF happened to this forum?? It's like the twilight zone for advice...

[/ QUOTE ]

No it's not. Believe it or not, you can raise EP with more than just Group 1 hands during Levels 1 and 2. And often, the pot you win is more than if you raised with Group 1 hands.

#29 11-09-2005, 02:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]

This is the complete opposite of ROT. It's +EV. Move on. If you want to continue to play Group 1 hands only in Level 1 and 2, no prob. I'll do what I do and continue to make money.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol please tell me youre trolling. this is so basic its not funny.

SonnyJay · #30 11-09-2005, 02:50 PM

If I were you I'd probably just let it go. You aren't winning this one. The dissenters are doing so based on solid SNG theory that many have used to make pretty good money. It's true that there are different interpretations, but raising trash from EP without some serious metagame reasons will not go over well.

These people use theory and can back it up with results. You've made few arguments that back up your arguments, and those that have involve assumptions that range from gross oversimplification to wrong:
[ QUOTE ]
If flop is good for me, I make 800, since AA or KK usually give up all their chips. If it's bad I lose 100 4 times (since I'm not committing anymore than 100). Plus, often, a bluff works when scare card comes since I was EP raiser (this is assuming I wasn't reraised pf).

[/ QUOTE ]
First, I mentioned why this "win 800 once and lose 100 4 times" argument is wrong earlier in the thread. Second, you're comparing it to AA and KK then assuming you weren't reraised preflop but he'll fold if some scare cards come. Then you can get away from it for nothing more than 100 but you'll sometimes bluff at it when you'll frequently be OOP. I could keep going with these but I'll stop here.

I don't mean this to be overly harsh, and I certainly can't stop you from doing this (many actually hope you continue to do so), but when you're going against tried and true theory you should have something to back it up and, when people make logical arguments refuting it, shouldn't take the
[ QUOTE ]
I'll do what I do and continue to make money.

[/ QUOTE ]
stance and expect people not to flame. We're all here to become better players, so make your stance and, if people go against it, think about what they said and respond to their concerns.

Best of luck finding the best way for you.

-SonnyJay