i love controversy (long, but probably worth it)

[akishore 0]

i am finding that i am repeatedly getting into arguments with people about different situations. mostly, it has to do with aggressiveness. sometimes, it has to do with tightness. sometimes, it has to do with reads and confidence.so, i'm going to list some key differences i know i have in my playing style that would be frowned upon by some respected posters here. i warn you, some of this might make you cringe.but, it's honestly been working for me, and i (perhaps stubbornly) stand by my reasoning for doing all of it. although some things are much closer than others (in terms of best play, EV, etc.), others are clear as night and day to me. some things, i won't put up much of a fight for and just shrug and say "i don't mind your reasoning, and your way might very well be the best way," while others, i will continue fighting for.over time, i'm finding that i'm developing my own style of play, my own niche. i know there are some who say that there is only one "correct" style of play for any given set of circumstances (table texture, stakes, etc.), but i'm starting to believe that, just as there is no universally accepted theory of poker (no puns about the book or the fundamental theorem, please) and that a few different theories are accepted (see the chapter on the theories of poker in gary carson's "complete book of hold 'em poker"), it's quite possible that there is more than one correct style of play.finally, i'm not meaning to say that my way is the only right way and that everyone else is wrong. i'm also not saying that i'm going to refuse to change. instead, i simply just disagree with opposing points of view for the moment. it may change. if i'm convinced that i'm not maximizing my profits because of some reason, i'll change my style.so, here they are, one by one. feel free to discuss any of them.aseem

[akishore 0]

1. i don't like getting aggressive with big offsuit hands in loose, multiway pots.i'll always raise AKo and AQo in any position, but i often limp AJo and KQo after a few limpers or when i'm in early/middle position with a loose table to act behind me. i almost never raise ATo and KJo and worse unless i'm specifically going for a blind steal.why? i won't dispute that you probably have an equity edge against the weaker hands your looser opponents are playing. my problem is two-fold; first, the extra "burden" of being the preflop raiser often causes us (or me, at least) to make -EV moves after the flop (explained below), and second, since raising preflop lowers our postflop expectation, i believe that the postflop edge we sacrifice is greater than the the preflop edge we take.when we raise preflop, we make the pot bigger. in a loose game, the pot can often be a good size on the flop (four people in for two bets, for example, and that's assuming the pot isn't five-way or six-way as most of the tables that i seek are). because the pot is bigger, we have to play more aggressively (common sense). often, this includes betting many flops when checked to simply because we want to protect this large pot. in all honesty, i often think betting on those flops is -EV (it's "correct," per se, because the pot is large, but in loose games, missed flops for us often mean we have a negative equity edge that we are pushing by betting). if we don't raise preflop, we can often check. checking is also more correct now because the pot is smaller and we don't need to be as aggressive. the same applies to raising with overcards and a backdoor flush draw, for example, which is often the case when the pot is large and we raised preflop.in essence, what i'm trying to argue is that betting/raising here on a missed flop in a large pot (where we raised preflop) has a lower EV than check/folding on a missed flop in a small pot. i don't know if that makes sense... in other words, we are often forced to be more aggressive than normal when we raise preflop (e.g. continuation bets), and this aggressiveness might be -EV.it is also common knowledge that raising preflop lowers your postflop expectation. with a hand like AKo, i agree that your equity edge preflop is too great to pass up, and the edge you gain by raising preflop into a field of four opponent outweighs the edge you give up postflop. however, i really don't believe this is the case with ATo/KJo, and sometimes with AJo/KQo. in a pot that i know will be multiway, i prefer limping and retaining my postflop edge. where does that edge come from? it comes from opponents going too far with their hands postflop in what is now a small pot instead of a big one (when we flop a good hand), and i think that edge is often bigger than the edge we gain by raising preflop.all in all, this is something i don't make a big case for, but it's definitely a part of my style. top pair with ATo is just messy oftentimes, for example. in general, i really prefer limping with big offsuit hands in a multiway pot in a loose game rather than raising.aseem

[JesseW316 0]

I agree with you, to some extent.You hold A10s on CO/button. Five limpers and a fold in front of you in a game that has had basically everyone staying for the flop. You are saying you would just call in this spot, right? I am just clarifying the situation you were bringing up.

[akishore 0]

2. i really don't think that most situations in small stakes poker are raise/fold. i think that a very large number of times, calling is actually the best play.the most common example of this is when it folds to you in a middle/late position preflop, and you have a borderline/marginal hand. oftentimes, the correct play here is to raise or fold, since raising gives you a shot at the blinds, gives you more information about the hands behind you and gives you control of the hand, while calling prevents all of this. however, to use this same example, calling is oftentimes the best play when it folds to you in MP3, for example, and you have a hand that is very profitable against weak players that does very well in multiway pots--small pocket pairs and medium/high suited connectors, for example. raising with 33 is silly, but folding it is passing up a very profitable opportunity. limping is totally good in a loose game since you can still expect at least a three-handed pot which will usually be four-handed and sometimes even five-handed.another situation is with a strong hand on the turn where you've had the lead and you suddenly get raised. to go into a raise/fold mode here is also often silly and counterproductive. a common situation where this arises is one where you have an overpair on a semi-ragged board and an average small-stakes player raises you on the turn. often, the pot is too big to fold here (we are often drawing live against two pair, and we are often the best hand against top pair). calling down is clearly the best play in these sitautions.yet another situation is the common way-ahead/way-behind scenarios where we flop a strong hand on a very ragged board against a preflop aggressor. another situation is where we have a strong hand on the river against a passive player who has just woken up; we often lose two bets when when we're behind but gain only one bet when we're ahead if we raise his river bet, for example.finally, cold-calling preflop is a good example of why "raise/fold" just doesn't apply all that much in loose small-stakes games. in middle and high limits (i.e. tight games), if someone raises pre-flop, it's almost always incorrect to cold-call. at these stakes, however, cold-calling is often correct with medium/small pocket pairs, big suited broadway cards and suited connectors (sometimes). to three-bet JTs in MP3 after MP2 raises is just silly, for example, when we can easily expect a multiway pot by cold-calling.all in all, i feel that raw aggression just isn't the best style in loose games where calling increases your expectation. the common "raise/fold" way of thinking just doesn't cut it at these small stakes. while calling is passive and is often frowned upon, it is clearly the best move in multiple situations.aseem

[akishore 0]

I agree with you, to some extent.You hold A10s on CO/button. Five limpers and a fold in front of you in a game that has had basically everyone staying for the flop. You are saying you would just call in this spot, right? I am just clarifying the situation you were bringing up.

if that was a typo and you mean A-10 _offsuit_, then yes. if it's suited, then i'm raising.aseem

[akishore 0]

more to come later, i'm tired right now.aseem

[ddudley 0]

i almost never raise ATo and KJo and worse unless i'm specifically going for a blind steal.

I'm assuming we are talking about 10 handed tables...I'm think I'm gonna have to agree with you on the A-To. I've put a lot of thought into how to play this hand and I've come to the same conclusion. I don't raise with this hand unless I have a good reason to... I'm opening the pot in LP, a complete idiot has limped in front of me and I'd like to try and isolate him, etc. Also, If you have read HEPFAP, I think Sklansky would agree that A-To sucks. He says he put it into group 6 but thought about putting it in group 7 because it's so difficult to play after the flop.The main problem I run into is that when I raise preflop and then flop an Ace, 1 of 2 things happens about 90% of the time. Either, (1) I'm up against A-J, A-Q or A-K and lose a bunch of money or (2) I bet and everyone folds. So, I either lose 4-5 BB or win 2-3 BB. Not a good situation.I find that with just limping, I get a lot of weaker players limping with hands like A-9 to A-2, then losing a lot of money. Also, if someone raises preflop then puts up a fight later I have an easier time letting it go.I'll have to do some more thinking about A-Jo, K-Qo and K-Jo. But, my initial thoughts are A-Jo and K-Qo are group 4 hands and I'll probably keep opening the pot with a raise. K-Jo is a group 5 hand and thus I will normally open for a raise in MP or LP and fold in EP. I may have to study that one a bit more.

[stonecrow 0]

1. i don't like getting aggressive with big offsuit hands in loose, multiway pots.why? i won't dispute that you probably have an equity edge against the weaker hands your looser opponents are playing. my problem is two-fold; first, the extra "burden" of being the preflop raiser often causes us (or me, at least) to make -EV moves after the flop (explained below), and second, since raising preflop lowers our postflop expectation, i believe that the postflop edge we sacrifice is greater than the the preflop edge we take.

amen. my sentiments exactly.

[strategy 4]

Bah. I thought you might have been talking about NL games, in which case I had something to add about #2.You strategy forum people and your obsession with limit hold'em. (although you are one of the few of us who post questions about all types of games)

[akishore 0]

Bah. I thought you might have been talking about NL games, in which case I had something to add about #2.

i'm still interested, go ahead.aseem

[tdmlb24 0]

As I play more and more I am finding out that in the beginning I thought there was just one accepted strategy, tight aggressive. But now I see that they are so many different ways to approach the game and ways to win.

[Blink20 0]

there is no universally accepted theory of poker

I have more to say about this too, I agree completely, but off to buy my g/f a laptop and me some more RAM for my computer. Time for a gig of ram :-)

[Suited_Up 2]

I'm with you all the way on both subjects!Although I have been playing a little extra tight lately and have been folding some hands to raises more than I used to. (KJo, QJo, baby pairs depending on the table, and any A10.) (K10 and Q10 I fold most of the time now unless I can try to steal with it.)But I definitely agree with what you're saying. Sounds a bit like my style as well... I see wrto and kdawg make posts talking about raising in certain situations, and if I did some of those on a regular basis, I just can't imagine coming out ahead in the lower games. Maybe 3/6 and 5/10 is a different situation, but not .50/1 and 1/2. Once in awhile I will miss a bet or two, but plenty of times I am behind to some illogical 2 pair or crazy straight and I save a few bets. It seems to even out.I just rambled a bit, but hopefully I wasn't too off base.

[popeye18 0]

calling is oftentimes the best play when it folds to you in MP3,

I think this might be one place where i disagree with you. I just cant see me calling with anything if its folded to me in mp3. For your example i dont think your passing up much by folding 33 in a loose game and raising is probably right if its tight. Im curious as to what you do with other hands in this situation- 10Js, A8o, K10o.

[econ_tim 0]

I think AJo and KQo have too much equity not to raise preflop. You rightly state that raising preflop trades off a possible postflop value for a likely preflop value. You also say you want people to go farther with their bad hands, so you don't raise preflop. But won't this same people go too far with their hands if you do raise preflop. I guess the question to answer is what preflop action will cause your opponents to make the most costly mistakes. It could be the case that raising preflop gets them to make one costly mistake (cold calling with a bad hand) but then makes the pot so big that being a calling station is almost correct play. I think even in big pots, your opponents will call with draws they aren't getting odds for.You also talk about how creating a big pot affect your postflop play. This is an issue I have wondered about but haven't fully worked out. I think correct poker strategy is forward looking and time consistent. But sometimes people seem to be raising or calling preflop for one reason and then playing postflop in a way that clashes with this reasoning. For instance, people call with a medium pair preflop hoping to hit a set. Then for some reason they be when they miss. Another example that is not as clear is people say you should raise with some hands to "give yourself odds to draw." I don't think this can be right. You are wondering if raising preflop has bad consequences later on, and I think this is the correct way to evaluate the play, but I'm not sure what the answer is.

[akishore 0]

calling is oftentimes the best play when it folds to you in MP3,

I think this might be one place where i disagree with you. I just cant see me calling with anything if its folded to me in mp3. For your example i dont think your passing up much by folding 33 in a loose game and raising is probably right if its tight. Im curious as to what you do with other hands in this situation- 10Js, A8o, K10o.

in a tougher game, you should probably fold 33 from MP3 if it's folded to you, since you can't expect multiway action and you're concerned about being isolated out of position with a hand that has no visibility postflop (since you clearly won't have the implied odds to play it for set value).open-raising 33 from MP3 in a tight game isn't right, unless you're specifically open-raising from MP3 with any two cards to steal the blinds. any hand that gives you action is either way ahead or has much better visibility and playability postflop. you also have four hands to act behind you, any of which could be way stronger than 33. imagine getting three-bet out of position, that would suck.while this is a raise/fold situation in tougher games with most hands, 33 is a clear fold. while you can raise 33 to steal the blinds, i'd rather raise A2o to steal the blinds than 33. if you're always raising here with any two cards to steal the blinds, like i said, your hand doesn't matter, but if your hand matters, 33 is a fold and not a raise.however, in a loose game, you really don't have to worry about isolation, and you really _can_ expect multiway action if you just limp. trying to steal the blinds is also pretty silly in a loose game. most importantly, though, pocket pairs are golden in small stakes games because you have great implied odds in a multiway pot to hit a set and drag a good amount of money.i think folding here is passing up on too profitable an opportunity. since raising isn't right, limping in is pretty good.this is actually a direct example from ed miller's "microlimit collection" from 2+2. you should check it out if you haven't already. note that play at small stakes, like this example, often runs opposite and counter to play at higher stakes like HPFAP recommends. this is just one example of adjustments you have to make as you go from higher stakes to smaller ones.let me know if you still disagree.aseem

[TheIceman05 0]

in essence, what i'm trying to argue is that betting/raising here on a missed flop in a large pot (where we raised preflop) has a lower EV than check/folding on a missed flop in a small pot. i don't know if that makes sense... in other words, we are often forced to be more aggressive than normal when we raise preflop (e.g. continuation bets), and this aggressiveness might be -EV.aseem

This is basically the thesis of point number 1, no? And it's entirely incomplete. If you made this argument in front of a judge, he'd send you in front of the bar and you wouldn't be practicing law in MA anytime soon.I'll give you a chance to revise this argument before any serious lambasting occurs. I appreciate what you're doing, but I WILL play forum sheriff on some of these. And this is one I'm going to get nasty about. So fix this, or admit that you don't see the problem, then I'll respond (in 9 hours, probably)Ice

[akishore 0]

great post, tim, as usual.

You also say you want people to go farther with their bad hands, so you don't raise preflop. But won't this same people go too far with their hands if you do raise preflop.

the pot will be smaller _postflop_ when we don't raise preflop, so i believe that this mistake will be costlier for our opponents when they go too far with their bad hands in a smaller pot.

You also talk about how creating a big pot affect your postflop play. This is an issue I have wondered about but haven't fully worked out. I think correct poker strategy is forward looking and time consistent.

exactly!i've been thinking about this for a long time, too. i think it's actually most applicable in no limit games, but still very applicable in limit games.this is the reason why i think poker is very much like chess. you have to constantly be thinking about future betting. this is also the reason why poker is such an insanely complex and intricate science.

You are wondering if raising preflop [with certain hands] has bad consequences later on, and I think this is the correct way to evaluate the play, but I'm not sure what the answer is.

that's part of what i'm arguing.i'm not sure if i'm correct either, but i do agree that it is the correct way to think about it.aseem

[akishore 0]

in essence, what i'm trying to argue is that betting/raising here on a missed flop in a large pot (where we raised preflop) has a lower EV than check/folding on a missed flop in a small pot. i don't know if that makes sense... in other words, we are often forced to be more aggressive than normal when we raise preflop (e.g. continuation bets), and this aggressiveness might be -EV.aseem

This is basically the thesis of point number 1, no? And it's entirely incomplete. If you made this argument in front of a judge, he'd send you in front of the bar and you wouldn't be practicing law in MA anytime soon.I'll give you a chance to revise this argument before any serious lambasting occurs. I appreciate what you're doing, but I WILL play forum sheriff on some of these. And this is one I'm going to get nasty about. So fix this, or admit that you don't see the problem, then I'll respond (in 9 hours, probably)Ice

thanks, buddy. :-) this is the main section i was very hazy about. i didn't know exactly what i was trying to say and how to say it.i think my mistake has something to do with the concepts of EV versus expectation. check/folding always has 0 EV, and betting on a missed flop in a large pot can't really be -EV if it is the "correct" play oftentimes.maybe i meant that playing your hand regularly on missed flops after not raising preflop (and having a smaller pot consequently) has higher expectation than playing it overaggressively after raising preflop (and having a bigger pot consequently).so i guess that i admit that i don't entirely see the problem.go ahead, help me out.aseem

[MrNiceGuy 0]

while this is a raise/fold situation in tougher games with most hands, 33 is a clear fold. while you can raise 33 to steal the blinds, i'd rather raise A2o to steal the blinds than 33.

I disagree - I'd prefer 33 to A2. Either way, your primary goal with the raise is to steal the blinds. But of course you select which hands to steal with based on how they'll do if the steal fails. A2 has somewhat better "flopability"; it will flop top pair or better around 18% of the time (and a pair of deuces another 9.7%) while 33 will flop a set only 8.8% of the time. But when you flop an A, you're only going to get action if you're beat, whereas if you flop a 3, and the other guy catches anything, you'll probably end up dragging a good-sized pot. Plus, when nobody catches, if he has an A, obviously I'd rather have 33 than A2.

[akishore 0]

I disagree - I'd prefer 33 to A2. Either way, your primary goal with the raise is to steal the blinds. But of course you select which hands to steal with based on how they'll do if the steal fails.

exactly.33 has no visibility postflop (you're missing your set the vast majority of times), which makes it very difficult to play when your steal fails.more importantly, any two overcards is close to an even 50/50 against you pot-equity-wise. since you will be forced to play your 33 even when you don't hit a set, the reverse implied odds are actually bigger here than (IMHO) they are with an ace.why?because if both you and your opponent are going to showdown, he'll often have your 33 beat. further, since he can bet or check/raise when he hits and call or check/fold when he doesn't, you lose money the times he hits and probably make less the times he doesn't. since he is an even 50/50 to beat your hand by showdown, these are reverse implied odds.

But when you flop an A, you're only going to get action if you're beat,

while this sounds nice theoretically, it's just not true.a lot of defenders are inherently stubborn and will often give you action when an ace flops because they will either be trying to represent it themselves or they won't believe you and will call you down.

whereas if you flop a 3, and the other guy catches anything, you'll probably end up dragging a good-sized pot.

the pot won't be big enough to justify playing it for set value since you put in two SB's pre-flop heads-up.

Plus, when nobody catches, if he has an A, obviously I'd rather have 33 than A2.

well, a pair is better than ace-high, but both hands are about the same when it comes to "if nobody catches".what matters more, though, is that when you're ahead pre-flop, you're significantly more ahead with A2 than you are with 33. further, when your opponent hits on the flop, you're way behind with 33 but not always way behind with A2 (especially if you hit a pair of dueces on the flop and are behind to a higher pair).as a parallel, compare it to this situation: which do you prefer on a flop of K72... 88 or A7? they're about the same showdown-wise (as are 33 and A2), but A7 has more ways of improving when it's behind. similarly, A2 has more ways of improving, generally, when it's behind, than 33 does.aseemedit: anyway, that's not the point of this thread. we'll save this discussion for another thread at another time. 8)

[popeye18 0]

this is actually a direct example from ed miller's "microlimit collection" from 2+2.

Do you have a link to this. I couldnt find it in a search at 2+2.

[akishore 0]

this is actually a direct example from ed miller's "microlimit collection" from 2+2.

Do you have a link to this. I couldnt find it in a search at 2+2.

go to the microlimit forum, and it's a sticky.i also uploaded it to my web space if that's easier:http://web.mit.edu/akishore/Public/Microli...tCollection.docaseem

[econ_tim 0]

I was reading through the archive, and found something from Smash on this topic. This is just an excerpt, but you can read the whole thread here:Smash 3:16

I think you're a little confused, frankly. If you raise premium hands and 6 people call you're going to win just as many times as if you limp and 6 people limp. You will, however, WIN MORE MONEY when you raise. The only way you loose money by raising PF with premium starting hands is if you'd loose limping with them. If you're playing in a game where people will cold call PF raises with hands worse than yours it's pretty much statistically impossible for it to be correct not to raise.  

[TheIceman05 0]

Okay, there were a few problems I saw with your logic, but this was the one that REALLY stuck in my craw: "in essence, what i'm trying to argue is that betting/raising here on a missed flop in a large pot (where we raised preflop) has a lower EV than check/folding on a missed flop in a small pot."Yes. Betting when you won't win the pot often enough to justify it is generally worse than checking in that same situation... but this in and of itself MEANS NOTHING AS IT RELATES TO YOUR ARGUMENT, because you ignore the extra money we win by raising preflop when we're ahead postflop.It's that simple, and you ignore it in your thesis paragraph, which confuses me. The argument you make has no real logical structure because of this.1) I believe you're assuming you "waste" more bets by auto-betting when you miss the flop after raising preflop in late position than the bets you pick up by raising before the flop. You should spell this out a little more carefully.2) Slow down when you miss the flop in position. If you have AJ and the flop is 2 9 T or Q 73 or K 9 2.... just check behind when it's checked to you in a 5 way pot. I rarely bet in these situations in loose games because someone's going to look you up, and you are just wasting bets on your 6 outer. Even if I'm pretty sure I'm ahead with a good Ace-high, I have no problem checking behind and betting/raising the turn if I spike one of my "outs."I think I realize what you're trying to say. By raising preflop we create a situation where we "have" (or "it's correct") to fire at the flop, even when we whiff. But this just isn't true. If the pot is limped all the way to you on the button, you raise, everybody calls, and the flop is T83, we're not ahead very often. In fact, it's VERY likely that somebody flopped top pair or a strong draw. Betting here is almost always WRONG! Calling/Peeling is right when we have reason to believe we've got 6 clean outs, but that's differentSo maybe- just maybe- you shouldn't be betting so many flops when you miss? "maybe i meant that playing your hand regularly on missed flops after not raising preflop (and having a smaller pot consequently) has higher expectation than playing it overaggressively after raising preflop (and having a bigger pot consequently)."Don't play overaggressively. And you're not asking the right question. "Do I lose more by firing at big pots than I do by not raising preflop?" The answer, if you're playing correctly, is almost always no.IcePS- Sorry Aseem, I really wanted to give you a good answer on this, but I'm pretty hammered at the moment. I'll come back tomorrow and engage you intelligently and soberly in a strong poker-discussion. I have intense feelings about this. Cheers