Thoughts behind preflop play

Profit in poker comes in putting yourself in +EV spots, both preflop, and postflop. When you start playing "good" poker, your preflop play will generally follow rigid guidelines. Raise AJs from EP, but not A10s, raise KJs from MP, but not K10s. The reason for this is simple; if you didn't, then where would you stop? If K10s, then why not K9s? If K9s, then what about Q9s? Are the hands that different?

But A10s does show a profit and Q9s doesn't (usually). So the players that survive (profit wise) stick to their rigid guidelines, and the players that don't lose.

In all truth, K10s is pretty much just like A10s. Being able to understand preflop play and more than that having in your head a sort of interactive formula for when to play certain hands is very important. Many winning players (often those that despise book play) do this by feel, but it is an ability that can be learnt.

One thing that does not change is your opening standards first in. This is dependent upon game conditions and your position, nothing more. This is a perfect rigid chart. Figure out what type of game you're in (or seek out only one type of game) and select the right chart. When players enter the pot this all changes.

You are undoubtably familiar with the principal of tightening up when faced with an early raiser. Hands like A10 and KJ and 44 that might have been profitable before are not anymore. Against more rockish raisers, hands like AQ and KQ and 77 are not good. This is one of the things that many players focus on and a good discussion can be found on that already. What is missing is a clear discussion on how limpers affect your preflop play. Many weak players in low limit games regularily limp AQ and AK. Against these players you can treat their limps just like a raise, in terms of one pair type hands (A8, K9, A10). These are hands you are normally glad to limp in or raise on the button, but when they are likely dominated they should be mucked. Still it is imporant to realize that speculative hands (22, 67s) still treat these limps as ordinary limps.

More than that, when specific players limp in, players that play almost any two, but more than that bleed post flop calling with hands that have almost no chance of winning, you can radically drop your preflop standards. You can actually play hands that you WOULDN'T PLAY if these players had not limped into the pot. Hands like K4s, Q6s, 109o can all become playable in certain spots against certain opponents. And the joy you get from showing these hands down (and the possible tilt effect on your opponents) is great.

As your postflop play improves, your preflop play expands. Certain hands are not profitable IF you do not have a certain level of postflop expertise. Three betting hands like A8o is going to cost you money even if your opponents medium hand range is K4o if you are not playing at least as well as them postflop. As your postflop expectancy increases, hands that are -.08BB/hr can increase to +.02BB/hr (or something like that) simply because you play better postflop. Of the thousands of different combinations that occur after the flop you make more on the ones where you are ahead and get out quicker or cheaper on the ones where you are behind. Mostly this is not folding when you are ahead without a pair and folding when you are behind without a pair. Not easy to do, but that's poker.

Like all things worth doing in life, designing preflop matrixes on the fly isn't easy, but it's worthwhile.

[callmedonnie]

I think I understand what you are getting at but I have to say I disagree with some of the tenets of your argument.

[ QUOTE ]
When you start playing "good" poker, your preflop play will generally follow rigid guidelines.

[/ QUOTE ]

To a certain extent, yes, there are things you learn to not do like not cold call a raise w/ KJo. But what I think your post neglects to note is that playing good poker sure, you learn basic guidelines and principles that keep you winning. But what is more important than that is that you learn to recognize when the correct time to depart from these rules and make a play is. Good players know when to three bet w/ AJ to isolate the maniac, or when to value bet there pocket 55's UI on the river to someone's AK, etc.

I know playing almost mechanically can yield a profit but 1)its not as much fun, 2)it won't work against perceptive players, and 3) it won't get you any better at playing poker.

For the most part, against poor players you can stay within the "rigid guidelines" more or less, but there are still times when the right play isn't necessarily textbook. Personally, my favorite thing to do is when I am at a generally fishy table and I notice another good player. On the few occassions I love to be able to trick them and outplay them because there are moves that only work against perceptive players. But even more I like winning, and I find knowing my oppponent is what deteremines the play, not some "rigid" code.

[ QUOTE ]
I think I understand what you are getting at but I have to say I disagree with some of the tenets of your argument.

[ QUOTE ]
When you start playing "good" poker, your preflop play will generally follow rigid guidelines.

[/ QUOTE ]

To a certain extent, yes, there are things you learn to not do like not cold call a raise w/ KJo. But what I think your post neglects to note is that playing good poker sure, you learn basic guidelines and principles that keep you winning. But what is more important than that is that you learn to recognize when the correct time to depart from these rules and make a play is. Good players know when to three bet w/ AJ to isolate the maniac, or when to value bet there pocket 55's UI on the river to someone's AK, etc.

I know playing almost mechanically can yield a profit but 1)its not as much fun, 2)it won't work against perceptive players, and 3) it won't get you any better at playing poker.

For the most part, against poor players you can stay within the "rigid guidelines" more or less, but there are still times when the right play isn't necessarily textbook. Personally, my favorite thing to do is when I am at a generally fishy table and I notice another good player. On the few occassions I love to be able to trick them and outplay them because there are moves that only work against perceptive players. But even more I like winning, and I find knowing my oppponent is what deteremines the play, not some "rigid" code.

[/ QUOTE ]


I am not sure you read my post completely, either that or I gave you a completely different impression than I wanted to make. My whole post was about learning how to depart from rigid preflop rules (as was yours, I believe). It is as important to change your "rigid code" against poor players as it is against good players. Your point about post flop changes against "good players" is duly noted.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
In all truth, K10s is pretty much just like A10s.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
One thing that does not change is your opening standards first in. This is dependent upon game conditions and your position, nothing more. This is a perfect rigid chart. Figure out what type of game you're in (or seek out only one type of game) and select the right chart. When players enter the pot this all changes.

[/ QUOTE ]

This might be semantics but you're going to be talking about a very complicated chart here. Opening standards are going to be based on all the players behind you who have yet to act, along with how the other players view you at the time. If you're saying this can be put into a rigid chart, then you could also make a complicated chart to deal with play after limpers.

[ QUOTE ]
Many weak players in low limit games regularily limp AQ and AK. Against these players you can treat their limps just like a raise, in terms of one pair type hands (A8, K9, A10). These are hands you are normally glad to limp in or raise on the button, but when they are likely dominated they should be mucked.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a lot of things wrong with this part. I'll see if you can figure them out.


So basically your post was about getting away from rigid preflop standards, but you used bad examples.

If K10s is not almost like A10s (and I guess it isn't, because it's beaten by all the aces as well as KJ KQ) one can easily say that A9s is just like A10s and the point is the same.


Your point is also well taken on the second issue, that it is not merely a factor of position and game type. Perhaps what would more accurately reflect my position is that this type of preflop action is more 'chartable' than raising limpers. I argue that your image is not really all that important in most low limit games, but it certainly becomes more important the higher up you go (as a factor of playing better players).

In addition, how the players play their hands in general is covered in 'game type', and I don't believe that how players play their hands in specific should influence your open raising standars. That last thought could be wrong, I have not examined it seriously, but on the surface it appeals to me.

At any rate, you raise some interesting objections.