The Min Raise Craze

[Mercury69 3]

Good dayMaybe this should be in the Strat section,. but I have no idea what kind of traffic is giong on these days...This thread is regarding NL Hold 'Em TourniesI have seen many, many, many players re-raising the min amount at all blind levels, all kinds of different stack sizes (except for 10bb or less) and all medium to micro buy-in's. I understand there may actually be some kind of logic to this. Is anyone interested in elaborating? I have seen people min raise then shove or fold to a 3 bet, min raise then call, etc. There doesn't seem to be any logic or pattern to this action and maybe that is the goal.I suspect this also may be a mechanism to get people kind of tilted because, frankly, I find it pretty irritating, although I generally know what to do one way or another and I have little or no problem going post-flop against min raisers, whether I simply call or reraise.Thoughts?

[dna4ever 2]

stop playing limit ?

[bbgun 0]

stop playing limit ?

http://instantrimshot.com/classic/?sound=rimshot

[Mercury69 3]

stop playing limit ?

One of your best quips, sir. Ever.

[Mr. Sparco 2]

I guess the topic is a bit too general to say much about it without discussing specific hands, so feel free to post some. In general, when there is a trend in poker my feeling is that a small percentage of the people actually thought about it and know what they are doing, and the rest just copy what the cool kids do.Either way, the following is kind of stating the obvious, but I can think of at least three basic reasons to minraise postflop: - You want to get a fold and think just about any amount will achieve that, so you go with the cheapest option. - You want to get paid, but you don't think villain will call very much, so a minbet has the highsest chance (or rather: highest EV) of getting called. - You want to get stacks in by the river, but reasonably sized single bets on three streets will not quite achieve that, so you make a minraise or check-minraise on one of the streets.Then of course, there may be higher level situations where you want your opponent to think you are value-minraising but it is actually a bluff, etc. Or you may do it in situations where you normally wouldn't just to balance your range a bit. Or... well, I guess one could go on like this for a while.

[ajs510 122]

stop playing limit ?

Awesome.

[Mercury69 3]

Thx, SparcoMost of the min raise stuff comes preflop as an opening bet, although I do see min bets into all types of pot sizes.I agree with you about most people not even thinking about why they are min betting. I asked, in chat on 'Stars, about it and, of course, got the usual BS replies, but this one stuck out:"What's wrong with min raising?"So I asked: "What's right with it?"And the reply: "If you have to ask, you'll never understand" or something like that.So, yeah. most people have no clue.

[donk4life 34]

What's right with 3xing?

[kobe2odom8 14]

What's right with 3xing?

I still 4x , really not a big deal.

[Mercury69 3]

What's right with 3xing?

I still 4x , really not a big deal.

As long as it's the min, it's no biggie...

[CobaltBlue 662]

Merc, are you speaking about tournaments or cash?

[mrpaddyx 13]

It makes sense in tournaments when the blinds are very high and its a cost effective way of stealing the blinds. Also if you suspect the villian is on a draw it can be a cheap way of stealing a pot. I'm not a fan of it by any means. In my experience, especially in start to mid point in tournaments it seems to create large family pots that are tricky to win due to the wide range of starting hands.

[Mr. Sparco 2]

I'm in a philosophic mood today (read: bored), so I'll ramble on about the topic a bit more.It's a very interesting question what the best preflop opening size is. Mathematically, it's way too hard a question to calculate an optimal opening size in almost any situation, and I don't think anybody will ever be able to do that or even approximate the answer.In practice, I think there are two important factors determining what a good generic opening size is. The first one is your style of play: it simply has to fit into the rest of your style well. Obviously, if you like to play many small pots and don't mind seeing a multiway flop, you will have a smaller opening size than if you like to play fewer but bigger pots and prefer to go to the flop heads up.The second factor, somewhat surprisingly, is: what everyone else is doing. You simply cannot deviate from that too much. A poker table is like a tiny economic system, and your pricing shouldn't be too much different from what your competition is offering.If everyone minraises and you raise to 4x nobody will give you any action unless they have you crushed. If everyone makes it 4x and you minraise you are losing value on your good postflop hands since you could have played much bigger pots with them.These days, in the $50-$200 tournaments, at the later levels almost everybody raises 2x to 2.5x, so making it 3x or more is most likely a mistake regardless of your playing style. This may not be true for the lower stakes, of course. Within that range, on the other hand, there is room for play, and you have to figure out what is optimal for you. I always used to like to be on the high end of the spectrum - until a few months ago my standard raise was 2.5x. I've lowered that to 2.25x recently, which at first was a disaster, but now that I have managed to adapt the rest of my style to it, I'm very happy with it and wouldn't go back. I don't think that for me, minraising is the most profitable style (yet), but there are definitely players for whom it is.

[Balloon guy 158]

If you are an older person I think a 3X raise will be seen as you being old school and not understanding the 'new right way to play'Just as the right thing used to be to steal from the blinds, then from the cut off then CO+1 etc, the small ball style of play is the current thing to do.It was kind of funny when I read a strat discussion from DN talking about how the guy bet such a small amount that he was totally priced in etc. This kind of tells me that you are wrong to bet too low.If a person is getting 8:1 and he is on a oesd, then he will be right to call, and you will be wrong to bet an amount that allows him to make that call.If you don't make it mathematically wrong to call then they are winning long term and you are losing.But I like people making it cheap to see the flop and not define my hand pre-flop. they may think they are using a strategy, but they are really just beating their long game.

[Balloon guy 158]

When the computer agrees with you, it repeats it.

[Mercury69 3]

Merc, are you speaking about tournaments or cash?

Yes, sorry...it's about NL Hold Em tournies

If you are an older person I think a 3X raise will be seen as you being old school and not understanding the 'new right way to play'Just as the right thing used to be to steal from the blinds, then from the cut off then CO+1 etc, the small ball style of play is the current thing to do.It was kind of funny when I read a strat discussion from DN talking about how the guy bet such a small amount that he was totally priced in etc. This kind of tells me that you are wrong to bet too low.If a person is getting 8:1 and he is on a oesd, then he will be right to call, and you will be wrong to bet an amount that allows him to make that call.If you don't make it mathematically wrong to call then they are winning long term and you are losing.But I like people making it cheap to see the flop and not define my hand pre-flop. they may think they are using a strategy, but they are really just beating their long game.

This is something I agree with, which is one of the reasons I am questioning the wisdom of min raising preflop.While I have said I find it irritating, it's also invitational (sometimes in the wrong way) and you can almost always expect a C-bet. this probably makes it harder to get a read on opponent holdings, but the fact you got to see a flop for cheap often makes calling with marginal holdings reasonable and, if you're a solid post-flop player, you can often win a pot with a variety of bluffs or C/R or re-raise.PS: I am an "older" person but I have/am learning to adapt to all playing styles, including Russian and Dutch styles ;-). The Viking Approach seems to have tailed off someThanks for the continuing comments.

[rcgs59 15]

Finally some decent discussion I hope :)Is there such a thing as small ball any more? Daniel some feedback plsAre we seeing new trends?thx Marcel love your thoughts, but it's not just the higher stakes that we are seeing 2-2.5 raises. I see it at the lower levels. In the last 6 months I have also noticed a ton of limping, and when you even raise to 3x or 4x we are see callers calling. Some with no logic behind the calling. The game has change a bit more with what I call donkey calling OOP. I am seeing more Ace Rags, any suited or any connectors being called OOP early game and of course cracking decent hands. Just a thought but this is the 3rd to 4th change I have noticed in the game over the last 6 yrs.

[Fluffdog87 2]

I like to keep the pots small so I have the opportunity to make more decisions later in the hand.

[Mercury69 3]

I like to keep the pots small so I have the opportunity to make more decisions later in the hand.

Rarely has one sentence said so much. Distilling poker wisdom like this (and coming from an established solid, if not excellent, player is like MONEY).

[SpatsJ 0]

I like to keep the pots small so I have the opportunity to make more decisions later in the hand.

Maybe I'm being ignorant here, but aren't you more likely to be drawn out on if the pot stays small, since more people can stay in with marginal hands?

[tbrick412 0]

Maybe I'm being ignorant here, but aren't you more likely to be drawn out on if the pot stays small, since more people can stay in with marginal hands?

Exactly. Don't ever want them staying in with marginal hands.

[looshle 6]

If you are an older person I think a 3X raise will be seen as you being old school and not understanding the 'new right way to play'Just as the right thing used to be to steal from the blinds, then from the cut off then CO+1 etc, the small ball style of play is the current thing to do.It was kind of funny when I read a strat discussion from DN talking about how the guy bet such a small amount that he was totally priced in etc. This kind of tells me that you are wrong to bet too low.If a person is getting 8:1 and he is on a oesd, then he will be right to call, and you will be wrong to bet an amount that allows him to make that call.If you don't make it mathematically wrong to call then they are winning long term and you are losing.But I like people making it cheap to see the flop and not define my hand pre-flop. they may think they are using a strategy, but they are really just beating their long game.

I never see someone betting less than 10% of the pot so that an 8:1 dog is able to profitably call but that's not even the point.When making any type of wager there's a wide variety reasons to pick a certain size. When you make a bet it shouldn't be strictly to make sure flush draws and straight draws are unable to call you profitably. You size your bets to manipulate the pot to where you can get x amount of chips in or make sure your river jam is big enough to get a fold. You bet against perceived rangers, not strictly to price out every possible holding. Maybe I'll bet 1/4 the pot with a strong hand to induce a raise so I can 3b and pick off some bluffs and be able to put my opponent in a 4b or fold spot, or just call of spot assuming my 3B is a jam.The point is, the deeper the stacks is, the more room you have to get your opponent to do what you want. Tournament poker is extremely player dependent and actions are not based on maximizing your equity vs a couple specific hands but to maximize our equity vs your opponents perceived range of hands combined with how you expect him to react to your bets.