Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > General Poker Discussion > Beginners Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-08-2005, 07:20 PM
beekeeper beekeeper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 155
Default Something that\'s worked for me

A couple of weeks ago I posted that I was thinking of trying this, and I just wanted to post about how it's worked for me.

For the last couple of weeks, whenever I have a small pocket pair (<99) in early to EM position, instead of calling, I've been betting out 2-4x bb as a way of randomizing my play. The result has been that about 1/2 the time I've won the pot preflop, the other half the time I've been just-called, and of those times, twice I've made trips.

I'm probably going to go away from this strategy for a while since there are a couple of observant guys at my game, but I thought I'd pass this on. I should mention I play 2 nights a week in home tournaments, 4-6 tournys/week max.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-08-2005, 07:28 PM
JunkHead JunkHead is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 3rd Stone from the Sun
Posts: 39
Default Re: Something that\'s worked for me

Hell, if the times you win the pot pre-flop pay for those times the flop misses you then good on ya'.

Myself, I usually play low PP dirt cheap hoping to flop a set, and if I don't I'm gone. Standard stuff, I know.

Of course, I'm a wuss... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]


JunkHead
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-09-2005, 01:45 AM
tripdad tripdad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: east central indiana
Posts: 291
Default Re: Something that\'s worked for me

keep in mind the size of the blinds when playing pairs this way. early on when the blinds are small, it is often correct to simply fold small pairs in early and early middle position.

now, once the blinds are up there, you must battle for them, which means you should normally lower your raising standards.

the whole point of a tournament is to outlast your opponents. if you can do that by only winning one hand the whole tourney, that is what you should do. (i know this is impossible, but the theory is correct....in fact, i've actually won a small home tourney without ever having to show a hand except the last one)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-09-2005, 02:30 PM
beekeeper beekeeper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 155
Default Re: Something that\'s worked for me

[ QUOTE ]
keep in mind the size of the blinds when playing pairs this way. early on when the blinds are small, it is often correct to simply fold small pairs in early and early middle position.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's interesting that you say this because I was wondering how smart a strategy this is early in a tournament, if I end up showing down a few times. What I really want to do is take the pot down right there.

I still kind of like it as a way of randomizing play--I'm thinking of Harrington's point in his first book. I'm trying to play against my reputation for being tight and only raising with premium hands. However, like I said, now that I've used it for a few tournaments, I'm going to switch to something else for a while.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-09-2005, 04:37 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Something that\'s worked for me

I, like you, have found many HOHE randomizing strategies useful. If you have not read HOHE vol2 yet--it is a great, especially in dealing with progression of a tournament from the beginning (when blinds are small in relation to chip stack) to the final stages (when blinds and antes constitute a significant portion of one's stack.)

Interestingly, according to Harrington the lower-mid pocket pairs are playable at both ends of the extremes (when your chip stack is over 20x the starting pot is AND later when your stack drops below 6x the staring pot.) However, when your stack hovers bewteen 10-20x the starting pot, Harrington recommends avoiding playing low-mid pairs and suited connectors.

I am giving a rough paraphrase of Harrington's zone indetifications, Q and M theory'; others could provide a more articulate explanation...but the concept, as you have alluded to, is truly intriguing.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-09-2005, 06:27 PM
beekeeper beekeeper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: wisconsin
Posts: 155
Default Re: Something that\'s worked for me

[ QUOTE ]
I, like you, have found many HOHE randomizing strategies useful. If you have not read HOHE vol2 yet--it is a great, especially in dealing with progression of a tournament from the beginning (when blinds are small in relation to chip stack) to the final stages (when blinds and antes constitute a significant portion of one's stack.)

Interestingly, according to Harrington the lower-mid pocket pairs are playable at both ends of the extremes (when your chip stack is over 20x the starting pot is AND later when your stack drops below 6x the staring pot.) However, when your stack hovers bewteen 10-20x the starting pot, Harrington recommends avoiding playing low-mid pairs and suited connectors.

I am giving a rough paraphrase of Harrington's zone indetifications, Q and M theory'; others could provide a more articulate explanation...but the concept, as you have alluded to, is truly intriguing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks, and thanks to all for feedback. I haven't got HOHE2 yet (asking for it for Christmas--hard not to buy it for myself). It sounds like I need it, though. I consistently make it to the final 6 of a 20-25 person tournament, but lately, when I get there, my chip stacks are anemic and it's all I can do to finish in the money (i.e., I'm not winning it).

However stupid this may sound, I'm not smart enough to implement Skalansky's gambling theory, so I'm using Harrington's suggestion about randomizing play as my way of implementing Skalansky, lol.

This week I'm going to open with 67s or 78s and see how that works. It's only $10! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img])
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-09-2005, 07:55 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Something that\'s worked for me

[ QUOTE ]
This week I'm going to open with 67s or 78s and see how that works. It's only $10! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img])

[/ QUOTE ]

I know the feeling. I generally play very tight but perhaps overly aggressive, especially in early stages of a tourney. Especially in re-buy tourneys, before the rebuy period ends, strong bets (representing strength) of 3-5x bb only seem to scare away passive players. From my experience, 6-10xbb preflop, early in such tourneys, seems to put some pressure on LAGs.

But then I think, "If I can't beat 'em..." and I start loosening up, limping at the button with 98 os, calling an early raise with AJ os, calling a large raise with Ax suited.

Lately, I must confess, I have been on a prolonged tilt, which results in my ultimate contrarian plan. Dig this madness: since I assume most tournament players (live casino multi-tables with buy-ins from $100-$500) operate with the same strategic information (skalansky, harrignton, brunson, carom et. al.) , a true contrarian play is do the opposite, right?

So when I am on the button holding 7-2 os and there are five limpers b4 me, I conclude that the hand ranges of my opponents' collectively will inlcude (at least 2 aces, 1-2 kings, and at least 1 (j,q, or 10). Because I should be folding, I instead raise...pot size raise. Any callers I put on real strength and look to the flop to see if the trash laden deck brings me the trash I seek. If it hits I look like a madman, if it misses people credit me for making a good laydown.

This is the kind of tilt I am experiencing [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-17-2005, 01:51 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Something that\'s worked for me

hey, do you figure i'll hit trips when i'm called like that? this could be big. i mean, really, really big.

tlt
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.