How does Kill affect strategy?

[VBCurtis]

Morongo's 3/6 HE game is full kill, which I've never seen at such a low limit. Should I be more aggressive when the pot is killed? Is there any reason to loosen up to become the killer? How does game texture change this? For example, I've seen tables where 6 see the flop most hands fold around to me when it's killed, and tables where nothing changes. (when nothing changes, I assume you just play your usual game on kill pots).

Seems there's little discussion of kill strategy in most HE books.. is the feature that uninteresting to not merit discussion?

[midas]

What is the kill criteria - 2 winning hands in a row or pot size? The 2 wins in a row rarely happens, so strategy adjustment is not necessary. Pot size may produce more kills and put some people out of their bank-roll comfort zone but if they're sitting they know the cost to play. I'm not a big fan of pot size kills because of the wild pot swings. I would just play your normal game.

[Bremen]

One thing you have to remember is that if you're going to have to post a kill if you win a pot then the pot is essentially smaller by that ammount. So if you're on the end and with the nuts and someone bets into you, it isn't worth raising if that would cause it to be a kill.

Ok, that isn't going to happen very often. But you get the idea :0)

[Al_Capone_Junior]

full kill games are more the norm than not in southern california, starting at 3-6.

There is little strategy change necessary, except when you are "leg-up." Here, you're going to have to post a kill blind if you win the pot, thus you must subtract that forced kill blind from the size of the pot you are now in (meaning your pot odds are smaller than the appear). This also means playing slightly tighter preflop when you have the no-kill or leg-up button.

Also, the presence of a kill blind might slightly alter your normal preflop odds, but usually not by much.

Other than that, it's no different than simply playing another hand, albeit at twice the stakes.

In southern california, the object for most players when they have the no-kill button is TO MAKE IT A KILL NO MATTER WHAT. Then, the object when there is a kill pot IS TO PLAY EXTRA-STUPID. Adjust to that.

al

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
In southern california, the object for most players when they have the no-kill button is TO MAKE IT A KILL NO MATTER WHAT. Then, the object when there is a kill pot IS TO PLAY EXTRA-STUPID. Adjust to that.

al

[/ QUOTE ]
Excellent assessment.

[callydrias]

In addition to what Al said, you need to adjust to the play of the people around you. I find that there are always a couple of people at the table that tighten up a lot in kill pots (they don't want to risk the extra money) so you can be more aggressive and push them off hands. There's also usually one or two people who become more aggressive in kill pots, probably recognizing the weak-tightness in the first group. Just play your regular game and make adjustments when you see how your opponents play.

[VBCurtis]

Thanks for the replies!
The kill criterion is two pots in a row, with first above $40 (at 3/6). Only once did I see the leg-up not passed to someone, meaning the pots were always over $40.

The kill happened about a dozen times in the 5 hours I played, with 2 people who clearly loosened up when possessing the leg-up; it seemed backwards, but I thought I might be missing some advantage other than LAG pride for killing. The killer at this room always acts last preflop, which I can see as a significant advantage when cutoff or button, especially for a LAG.

What is the reason to have a kill? I thought it was intended to stimulate action, but that's clearly not necessary at SoCal 3-6 tables. If the necessary adjustments are small, why have it at all? That said, I like it, since it seems to cause my opponents to alter their game much more than I do, often in obvious ways.
-VBCurtis

[Bremen]

[ QUOTE ]
What is the reason to have a kill?

[/ QUOTE ]
Because the fish like it. They want to gambool it up and are afraid to actually sit at the higher limit table. Good players also like it since some fish play fishier in kill pots.

[guidoguru]

Al's comments are spot-on. Also, Bremen makes a good point that good players like kill games because the fish do play fishier in them. My regular B&M game is 3/6 full kill(2 pots in a row to trigger), and it SIGNIFICANTLY increases my hourly rate. Not just because once in a while the stakes will be higher, but because when the stakes are higher the fish play even worse than usual.
This brings up an interesting question which i have asked on several forums before, but never gotten a good answer for: How should one calculate their hourly rate when playing in a kill game? If im playing 3/6 full kill, is the big bet $6 or $12?

[nightlyraver]

I've only played at a kill table once - I much prefer normal stakes. I was at the Aladin (awsome poker room IMO) and the only seat available was at a 3/6 Full Kill table whereby the pot was killed by simply winning 2 in a row regardless of pot size. People were not playing stupidly to create a kill, so strategy did not change really, but the rise in stakes was not convenient. Personally, I make the play that is the best in the long run (at least I try to :P). Thus, if the rest of the table is playing the same, I will to. However, there is a reason I'm playing 3/6 and not 6/12. The fact that I only had $200 is a pretty good reason. I hate taking the fluxuations with a stack that CERTAINLY cannot support it and I'm not gonna play uber-tight just because the stakes change. In such a spot, getting lucky or getting moved are the only two things that will make me happy.