Biggest Online Winner (BOW) Strategy

[PokerFink]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it your opinion that Semibluffing and table image aren't high priorities in SSNL?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's pretty much a fact. Things like starting hand requirments and learning to value bet properly are MUCH more important.

What I mean is that you can be a consistant winner in SSNL without ever semibluffing or paying attention to your own table image, two concepts that are linked for obvious reasons. Since your opponents are using Level 1 thinking ("What do I have?"), table image is not that important.

Also, as TWP has said, players in SSNL call down too much. This makes semibluffing MUCH less profitable, since your fold equity is drastically reduced.

Also, even if you only ever overbet the pot with the nuts, people will still call it, whereas in MHNL you have to mix it up by overbetting the pot on a draw sometimes.

Just finished reading Phil Gordon's Little Green Book and I was very intriged by the BOW section. Based on his mathematical explanation of why it works, it looks like a sound strategy. However, it only seems effective against stronger opponents. I can't see how it would work against the donks who play the SSNL tables. You'd get called too much and lose the FE. Also, many of those calls would come from better draws than yours which just happens to be one method to beat this strategy as Phil notes.

[scrapperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Like the idea, hate the example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please elaborate as to why you hate about the example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who do you think calls this bet? The majority of the time this bet is called AK is gonna loose. You are pushing off weaker aces that would put a reasonable amount of money in and only getting hands that will beat you to call.

If the example he gave was TJ4 with a flush draw and you have a set of 4's you might get called by AA, KK, QQ, J10, maybe even AJ or KQ with the open ender and overs. You might get called by someone with the flush draw as well. There are a ton of worse hands that might call a huge overbet. With your set you are gonna be a favorite over all these hands. That would be a better example IMO.

[Benholio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Like the idea, hate the example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please elaborate as to why you hate about the example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who do you think calls this bet? The majority of the time this bet is called AK is gonna loose. You are pushing off weaker aces that would put a reasonable amount of money in and only getting hands that will beat you to call.

If the example he gave was TJ4 with a flush draw and you have a set of 4's you might get called by AA, KK, QQ, J10, maybe even AJ or KQ with the open ender and overs. You might get called by someone with the flush draw as well. There are a ton of worse hands that might call a huge overbet. With your set you are gonna be a favorite over all these hands. That would be a better example IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the example (as posted, anyway, I don't have the book), you have TPTK and are FACING a push, not pushing yourself. I think the point they are going for is that by overbetting the flop you can get TPTK to lay down. Of course, thats the last thing you want TPTK to do if you have a set, so its kinda contradictory.

[ QUOTE ]

After the flop the pot is 500.00
BOW has 5,000.00
I have 5,000.00 and Ac Kd
The flop comes down: Ah 7s 6s
BOW moves all-in


[/ QUOTE ]

[mayesie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Like the idea, hate the example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please elaborate as to why you hate about the example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who do you think calls this bet? The majority of the time this bet is called AK is gonna loose. You are pushing off weaker aces that would put a reasonable amount of money in and only getting hands that will beat you to call.

If the example he gave was TJ4 with a flush draw and you have a set of 4's you might get called by AA, KK, QQ, J10, maybe even AJ or KQ with the open ender and overs. You might get called by someone with the flush draw as well. There are a ton of worse hands that might call a huge overbet. With your set you are gonna be a favorite over all these hands. That would be a better example IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, we don't know BOW's cards in the example I gave. In the example, I have AK, and am put all-in by BOW on the flop.

Do note that Villain is moving in, and Hero has AK in this example.

If Villain does this with big draws or monster hands only, Hero has to fold.

If Villain does this with big draws, monster hands and occasional air, Hero has to decide what the odds are of each, where he stands on each, etc.

I think in large part this is based on game theory. Villain may move in under a particular set of circumstances (a flop with 13 outs, a flop of top two or greater, or occasional flops as total bluffs). I think the game theory aspect of this play makes it hugely +EV. Hero knows villain might be bluffing. Villain knows hero knows this. And hero knows....

[scrapperdog]

Ohh facing a bet... hmm I need to get the book. If you do this a lot though it seems you will get picked off sooner or later. BTW when I overbet it is to get the most amount of money in the pot when I have the best hand and when I think other people might call.. it is not to get them to lay anything down unless I am on the bluff.

[mayesie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Like the idea, hate the example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please elaborate as to why you hate about the example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who do you think calls this bet? The majority of the time this bet is called AK is gonna loose. You are pushing off weaker aces that would put a reasonable amount of money in and only getting hands that will beat you to call.

If the example he gave was TJ4 with a flush draw and you have a set of 4's you might get called by AA, KK, QQ, J10, maybe even AJ or KQ with the open ender and overs. You might get called by someone with the flush draw as well. There are a ton of worse hands that might call a huge overbet. With your set you are gonna be a favorite over all these hands. That would be a better example IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the example (as posted, anyway, I don't have the book), you have TPTK and are FACING a push, not pushing yourself. I think the point they are going for is that by overbetting the flop you can get TPTK to lay down. Of course, thats the last thing you want TPTK to do if you have a set, so its kinda contradictory.

[ QUOTE ]

After the flop the pot is 500.00
BOW has 5,000.00
I have 5,000.00 and Ac Kd
The flop comes down: Ah 7s 6s
BOW moves all-in


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

This strategy forces you to play your sets in the same fashion as your strong draws. If you're pushing everytime you catch a strong draw, TPTK is highly unlikely to fold then you push with a set.

There a (3) things about this strategy that intrigue me:

- The amount of deception created from pushing monsters and strong draws

- The potential to put opponents on tilt, making it easier to win more money (esp. if running good).

- The "intimidation factor"



I see (3) significant problems w/ this strategy:

- The swings will be horrendous (as mentioned in the book)

- Good Opponents will adjust (also mentioned in the book)

- Amount of Fold Equity lost in SSNL Games because of calling stations

[tommo]

I think its amusing that phil gordon makes it extremely obvious that he's talking about spirit rock.

[PokerCat69]

Does the book suggest you move all in with TPTK/OverPairs/2pair?
in addition to big draws and sets.