Poker Essays III - Ace Eight Suited UTG

[Shandrax]

Just bought this book recently and this specific essay caught my attention.

Here is the Story: Some guy stated (based on computer simulations) that A-8s would be playable UTG as raising hand. Mason argues against it, that this might be the case if people were reacting to it with the "standard" hand requirements against a raise from early position. The problem is, that once they notice that the guy is a loose raiser, they would adjust and reraise with more hands. Therefore raising with A-8s UTG would not be such a good idea.

Now this is where I think another concept comes into focus. That is making a suboptimal play (once) as sort of advertisement.

Let's say I raise with A-8s UTG until I have to show the hand. From then on I switch back to my regular tight raising requirements for early position. If people react to this by adjusting to my "loose" play up in front, I have set them up. They will now have much too "loose" calling requirements themselves, while I am playing absolutely "correct" again. If they notice this and re-adjust, I can raise with A-8s again. It is like the tale of the race between the hare and the hedgehog "I a'm already here!".

So what is the conclusion? A-8s is hand you can raise with UTG every once in a while as part of building an image.

The question is of course if you want that sort of image. I have read more than once that "tight aggressive" would be the best image in Hold'em, so archieving a "loose aggressive" image might not be exactly what you are aiming for.

This brings me to another point. I have the feeling that there are enough concepts floating around to justify even the most terrible play. If nothing helps you can always claim that it was a random play based on game theory [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Ghazban]

Image plays are vastly overrated for a few reasons. One is that, for the image play even to exist, you have to show the hand down. If you raise your A8s UTG and end up folding before the river, you gain nothing in advertising value but still lose the money you put into the pot.

Another is that image players only work on medium-strength opponents. A good player will notice that your one advertising hand was a deviation from your normal playing style and correctly come to the conclusion that you were advertising. A bad player won't even notice you did it because he can't remember who raised preflop in the hand he's currently playing, let alone whether or not you raised a marginal hand in bad position half an hour ago. You need players that are good enough to notice the play but bad enough to not recognize that you might have been making an image play.

Finally, player turnover in a game kills advertising benefits. If you make an advertising play and everyone who was at the table when you made it leaves within an hour, you probably didn't gain enough image for your dollar. This is particularly noticeable online where players are constantly switching tables.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
I have the feeling that there are enough concepts floating around to justify even the most terrible play. If nothing helps you can always claim that it was a random play based on game theory

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that is the concept created by the WPT. Every garbage hand that they edit in worked, so therefore it was a "Brilliant in My Opinion" play by Sexton and V V P.

Maybe in limit you can play marginal hands early, but in NL you'll get hurt. However, in NL you could limp in LP with marginal hands and throw them if you miss the flop. Also, if you really have a limp fest game going, you could play marginals in EP or MP. It all depends...

[Shandrax]

It seems to me the philosophical problem of A-8s is the cathegory it falls in. If someone claims, it is playable for value every time you are UTG like AKs, that would be just wrong (and this is basically what Mason's essay was all about).

If you treat it as a semi-bluff hand to randomize your game or to make an advertisement play, which means you play it only every once in a while, it should be ok.

The real question is: Which one is the better hand for this purpose, 6-5s or A-8s?

[benkahuna]

In no limit, I definitely like 65s better. It's more deceptive so it has better implied odds.

In limit, I'd like a8s a little better esp against tight opponents b/c you might get people to fold better aces.

You can randomize your play with a wide variety of hands and against stronger opponents that figure out your style, you must.

[Shandrax]

The way I understood the essay, it was about limit Hold'em. Nevertheless 6-5s has an important and obvious advantage over A-8s. You will simply end up in a dominated position less often.