|
|
#12
12-23-2005, 03:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK: Hero has no clue
There's no good way to play aa/kk out of position as the aggressor with 6 to 7 people to act behind you. If you don't flop a set you're gonna be facing sick decisions throughout the entire hand, as your post exemplifies.
Raise to whatever amount is gonna get you 1-3 callers or simply limp it and go for the limp reraise. This is a disgusting spot. Given your description of villian as loose but decent after the flop, I probably bet an amount on the turn the leaves me a way out of the hand without giving him too cheap a look at the river. I'm thinking around $500 and folding to a push. Of course, if villian is smart and thinks you're capable of folding a big pair here, then I'm more likely to call the push since he knows you can't have a 5 raising like that in EP and may try to push his draw representing the 5. You may just have to lose alot of chips here. Oh well. 
|
|
#13
12-23-2005, 04:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KK: Hero has no clue
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] $5/$10NL with a $400 buy in? YUCK! [/ QUOTE ] I really don't understand why people keep bashing this form of game. When you first buy-in, you're pretty much required to play disgustingly tight until you double up. Then you can loosen up depending on the other stack sizes (and player quality but the players are usually so bad that this doesn't factor into whether you should loosen up). The high blind structure is ignored by many players who play too loose, call too many raises, quickly become very shortstacked, push in with crappy hands, and rebuy. It's a great way to keep money flowing into the game. [/ QUOTE ] This is pretty much the opposite strategy you should employ. If the blinds and antes (in hold em's case, just blinds) are large relative to your stack (this case of 40bb qualifies). Then you should actually loosen your starting hand requirements and steal alot. This is str8 out of Theory of Poker.
|
|
#14
12-23-2005, 04:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KK: Hero has no clue
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] $5/$10NL with a $400 buy in? YUCK! [/ QUOTE ] I really don't understand why people keep bashing this form of game. When you first buy-in, you're pretty much required to play disgustingly tight until you double up. Then you can loosen up depending on the other stack sizes (and player quality but the players are usually so bad that this doesn't factor into whether you should loosen up). The high blind structure is ignored by many players who play too loose, call too many raises, quickly become very shortstacked, push in with crappy hands, and rebuy. It's a great way to keep money flowing into the game. [/ QUOTE ] This is pretty much the opposite strategy you should employ. If the blinds and antes (in hold em's case, just blinds) are large relative to your stack (this case of 40bb qualifies). Then you should actually loosen your starting hand requirements and steal alot. This is str8 out of Theory of Poker. [/ QUOTE ] It is straight out of TOP, but you have to take into account the game flow. If it's really loose (and live), people will generally look you up more - making your bluffs more susceptible to being called down.
|
|
#15
12-23-2005, 05:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KK: Hero has no clue
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] $5/$10NL with a $400 buy in? YUCK! [/ QUOTE ] I really don't understand why people keep bashing this form of game. When you first buy-in, you're pretty much required to play disgustingly tight until you double up. Then you can loosen up depending on the other stack sizes (and player quality but the players are usually so bad that this doesn't factor into whether you should loosen up). The high blind structure is ignored by many players who play too loose, call too many raises, quickly become very shortstacked, push in with crappy hands, and rebuy. It's a great way to keep money flowing into the game. [/ QUOTE ] This is pretty much the opposite strategy you should employ. If the blinds and antes (in hold em's case, just blinds) are large relative to your stack (this case of 40bb qualifies). Then you should actually loosen your starting hand requirements and steal alot. This is str8 out of Theory of Poker. [/ QUOTE ] The passage from ToP to which you refer pertains primarily to limit play where you MUST loosen up in a game with a large blind structure to prevent from being overcharged by the antes/blinds. However, in NL (where you make most of your money on your implied odds as opposed to the preflop equity of a hand), you're only playing two-street poker so it's best to get involved with hands that stand to be ahead preflop and on the flop. This is str8 out of GSiH.
|
|
#16
12-23-2005, 05:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KK: Hero has no clue
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I really don't understand why people keep bashing this form of game. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] When you first buy-in, you're pretty much required to play disgustingly tight until you double up. [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] I come from a limit background where tight play is the standard. In a game where I only need to START tight and actually get the chance to play crap when I have enough chips...well...it's like a carnival for me.
|
|
#18
12-23-2005, 05:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KK: Hero has no clue
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This is misquoted out of Theory of Poker. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Yes it is. I did not quote it exactly. Please explain to me why it is incorrect to loosen up your starting hand requirements in NL when the blinds are large compared to stack sizes. One sentence answers help no one.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
