3/6 limit strategy question

[BetItAll33 0]

I've recently started playing 3/6 limit hold 'em at the local casino. My bankroll isn't sufficient according to the 300 BB rule, but this is the smallest game around, so I'm taking a chance.Like most 3/6 games, I would qualify the local game as very loose/passive. People are liable to show down with any two suited cards and preflop raises generally indicate a tier 1 hand. I have been able to beat the game for about 3 BB/hour just by playing ultra tight/aggressive over a very short run (about 30 hours). Here's the question:Can I safely loosen up my starting hand requirement to include, for instance, suited connectors in late position? Presently, I am playing only premium hands and PP's. (KQo would be about the worst hand I play) Is there any reason to change my strategy? I presume that loosening up will increase my variance, which I obviously cannot afford. Any input is greatly appreciated...thanks.yes, I know this could probably go in the strategy forum.

[jayistheman 0]

you can, but you must know when to cut yor losses and fold. i would recommend reading "small stakes holdem".... it will tell you where your game can stand a little loosening. it also has good explanations of pot odds/equity that are a must for loose/passive games.

[mreevit 0]

I've recently started playing 3/6 limit hold 'em at the local casino. My bankroll isn't sufficient according to the 300 BB rule, but this is the smallest game around, so I'm taking a chance.Like most 3/6 games, I would qualify the local game as very loose/passive. People are liable to show down with any two suited cards and preflop raises generally indicate a tier 1 hand. I have been able to beat the game for about 3 BB/hour just by playing ultra tight/aggressive over a very short run (about 30 hours). Here's the question:Can I safely loosen up my starting hand requirement to include, for instance, suited connectors in late position? Presently, I am playing only premium hands and PP's. (KQo would be about the worst hand I play) Is there any reason to change my strategy? I presume that loosening up will increase my variance, which I obviously cannot afford. Any input is greatly appreciated...thanks.yes, I know this could probably go in the strategy forum.

If the game is loose-passive, drawing hands become very profitable. Each time you play a marginal hand such as 67s or J9s you want to make sure you are playing against many players, and always you would want to be in late position with this hand. So, yeah, I would start playing more loose such as JTs and suited connectors. If you have a problem with variance, what I suggest is you play online where there are a wide variety of limits to play at. Good Luck (although it seems like you don' t need it). :wink:

[swami 0]

In realestate is LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION.....in poker it is PATIENCE, PATIENCE, PATIENCE............sounds like you are loosing yours...g/l...jmho

[BetItAll33 0]

thanks for the input. I've read the recent cardplayer.com articles reviewing the hand examples form SSHE. I haven't read the book, but some of the strategies seem very counter-intuitive. I'm sure that most of them have a solid foundation, but I have trouble raising with no pair, no draw. I just picked up Lee Jones' book, so I'll be reading that one first. I feel like I have a very good understanding of pot odds (CS major, math minor), but again, I don't have the bankroll to withstand the variance.

[BetItAll33 0]

Point taken Swami. I am very satisfied with my results thus far, but I'm still cautious due to the very small sample size. I simply wonder if I can maintain my current win rate (or some reasonable approximation of it) by playing this tight. The voice in my head says "It can't be this easy".

[jayistheman 0]

in all fairness to SSHE... when it says to raise with no pair/ no draw, they are doing it on a basis of fold equity, and it is the mathematically correct play.if one bet into a 6 BB pot will make someone fold 17% of the time, then it is a break even play... it works one in 6 times.this becomes important in larger pots, where you have a strong feeling that you might fold them a percentage of the time..say the pot is 10 BB, or $60.if the "desparation bluff" works one in 10 times, you will break even on the play... if it works more than it is a good percentage bluff.SSHE doesnt often recommend betting with no pair/no draw, however... it is often betting with some sort of out, and it all has mathematical reasoning and pot odds.

[BetItAll33 0]

would any of you care to comment on some specific examples? (call, fold, raise?) I'm curious as to the 'popular' play for these hands preflop:Q10s from CO, 3 limpersA10 offsuit 1st positionK10 offsuit on the button, 3 limpers67s button, 2 limpers

[FromTheRail 0]

If you can truely describe the 3/6 game at your local casino as loose/passive, then you should definately throw in more hands when you have position on your opponents. However, this does not mean calling three raises on the button with j-10s. I mean see as many cheap (unopened/unraised) flops as possible with suited connectors or small pair. Remember to have enough pot equity to make this play worth while, your going to want at least four people along for the flop. If you worry about variance, I would suggest that you play only suited connectors and play the higher connectors so that flopping top pair or two pair actually means you have a hand you can be in there playing aggressively. Also, remember, when playing top pair in a loose/passive low-limit game your really going to have to be able to evaluate the strength of your kicker. You don't want to constantly keep getting out kicked and having to show down the second best hand.

[BetItAll33 0]

FromtheRail - I would definitely characterize the game as loose passive. I live in small town South Dakota and the game sometimes consists of myself and 9 senior citizens; very Christian betting as I like to say. People will raise with the nuts on the river, and that's about it. To me, that's passive. Friday nights are a little more aggressive with a younger crowd and more alcohol involved.

[FromTheRail 0]

Ok, well that answers that question! You can definately start to add more hands. What you are describing is a game of straight forward A-B-C poker players. Sounds like you have a good read on things, so you should be fine as long as you don't get carried away with the notion of adding more hands. I would also suggest the possibility of introducing more hands slowly so you can begin to get a feel for how these hands play later on in the hand (turn and 5th street). Introducing these hands is the next logical step in the learning curve and will reap rewards when you decide its time to move up in limit.

[allinbluff35 0]

I live in small town South DakotaOh the humanity, I grew up in the piss poor state just north of you and when I went home for christmas all of my friends went to the casino and I snuck in(I am 20) so I went to check out the poker room and the bastards didn't even have one. So just be glad you have a place to play where you live and keep the streak going.

[DeNuts1 0]

Sounds like you should definetly start playing some more hands. If the betting is really like you say I would start mixing in a few (very few)bluff raises if people tend to fold when faced with agressive play. The suited connectors in late pos. can be very popular in a game like that. Rail is correct on adding more hands slowly you don't want to get carried away before you really learn how to play these hands on the later streets.

[einbert 0]

Hey, I am a small stakes player too. I worked my BR up from $300 at .5/1 to about $2000, and I'm currently playing at the 2/4 level. I play basically according to SSHE strategy, and I have to say it has really been working well for me so far. I also understand the reasoning behind the plays I make, and I think this is very important. I would also STRONGLY reccommend that you do go by the 300 BB rule. I think that by playing on a short bankroll, not only do you increase your chance of going broke, but if you are having weekly swings of up to a third of your bankroll (very very possible even with a 200 or 300 BB BR), that could really shake your confidence. I would highly reccomend taking the BR you have and depositing it into an online poker site so you can play with a 300 BB BR. No matter how good your play is, loose-passive limit games are naturally very very high variance ordeals. You could play near-perfect poker and easily drop 50 BB in several hours of play. If that is a quarter of your bankroll, isn't that going to shake your confidence? Anyway, these are just my suggestions. As far as the PF plays....

Q10s from CO, 3 limpers

This is at the very least a call, you're giving up a lot of value if you fold this here. Honestly raising isn't that bad either, especially if the blinds are loose. I call about 80% of the time, raise the other 20%.

A10 offsuit 1st position

I fold this. It's just not that strong a hand, especially if the table is full of coldcallers (probably is given your description). You'll often be coldcalled by a dominated hand out of position with this hand, and it's just not worth playing. If it were suited I would limp, but offsuit I think this is a definite fold.

K10 offsuit on the button, 3 limpers

I fold this, but calling isn't that bad either. Your hand is possibly dominated and you don't have straight of flush potential which is very important in a multiway pot.

67s button, 2 limpers

This is a little tougher than the QTs, but for me it is a call. You have a hand with a lot of potential in a multiway pot, and you know these loose passives will pay you off bigtime whenever you make your hand (straight, flush, trips, or two pair). Also consider playing more PP in early position and Axs and even Kxs on the button with several limpers. These are all profitable hands--even if they do add a little bit of variance to your game they will dramatically increase your longterm winrate.

[MrConceit 0]

thanks for the input. I've read the recent cardplayer.com articles reviewing the hand examples form SSHE. I haven't read the book, but some of the strategies seem very counter-intuitive. I'm sure that most of them have a solid foundation, but I have trouble raising with no pair, no draw. I just picked up Lee Jones' book, so I'll be reading that one first. I feel like I have a very good understanding of pot odds (CS major, math minor), but again, I don't have the bankroll to withstand the variance.

Ugh. I love SSHE overall, and I feel the series of articles in CardPlayer (by Jim Brief) are so ANTI-SSHE that it's a bit much. It's totally fine to disagree with things in the book (or the book as a whole), but he's been doing the hand samples from the book for 5-6 straight weeks now and basically implies or out and out says they're wrong and giving bad advice.Now again, it's fine for him to say this as a whole, but why not give it as an aside or even dedicate one single article to this. Say he feels the book is advising you to be too aggressive, or implying your draws are stronger than they are, or any number of things. Why dedicate what is amounting to 2 straight months of pick pick pick at the book.It just doesn't seem right to me.Does anyone else feel this way? Or am I way off base here?

[MrConceit 0]

would any of you care to comment on some specific examples? (call, fold, raise?) I'm curious as to the 'popular' play for these hands preflop:Q10s from CO, 3 limpersA10 offsuit 1st positionK10 offsuit on the button, 3 limpers67s button, 2 limpers

First off I basically agree with what einbert said, both about bankroll and about the hands, but I'll put in my .02 briefly also on the hands.The QTs I feel just call, but raising is alright here too (if it was QJs or KQs I'd be more likely to raise of course).ATo I feel is somewhat close between limping and folding, but folding is probably best. In a tighter more skilled table it's a definite fold.KTo in that position I'd say call. But you have to be careful because of kicker. A straight draw vs your 3-5 opponents might be nicer than a K pair.67s with 2 limpers on button... Call, but you'd tend to want 3 limpers, but on the table you describe I'm assuming both blinds will be playing, and the table as a whole probably calls too far. Folding this is ok here. You aren't giving up a ton folding with only 2 limpers.

[jayistheman 0]

i agree. he tends to give the players in these loose/passive games too much credit. he is also overanalyzing an already overanalyzed situation. it makes for some ambiguous thoughts on the subject for the reader.... if i didnt have my own opinion on the content in SSHE, i would definately be biased by the cardplayer articles.

[BetItAll33 0]

Even having not read SSHE, these cardplayer columns read like a critical review, not just a discussion. I wouldn't immediately discount anything written by Sklansky and Malmuth, so I guess I'll have to pick up a copy and form my own opinion. As for Jim Brier, I agree with SOME of the logic in his running series of columns.As for the bankroll, I'm basically playing with 100BB. I know it's risky, and that's pretty much the origin of this post. If I play air tight, can 100 BB be enough? Can I afford to loosen up at all? With a bankroll this limited, does it matter at all, or am I just doomed? You've all been quite helpful.

[deviper 0]

I've recently started playing 3/6 limit hold 'em at the local casino. My bankroll isn't sufficient according to the 300 BB rule, but this is the smallest game around, so I'm taking a chance.Like most 3/6 games, I would qualify the local game as very loose/passive. People are liable to show down with any two suited cards and preflop raises generally indicate a tier 1 hand. I have been able to beat the game for about 3 BB/hour just by playing ultra tight/aggressive over a very short run (about 30 hours). Here's the question:Can I safely loosen up my starting hand requirement to include, for instance, suited connectors in late position? Presently, I am playing only premium hands and PP's. (KQo would be about the worst hand I play) Is there any reason to change my strategy? I presume that loosening up will increase my variance, which I obviously cannot afford. Any input is greatly appreciated...thanks.yes, I know this could probably go in the strategy forum.

its very important to not ack like a maniac at you table but you have to remember be aggressive. aggresiveness is the best way to go, waiting for premium hands is not goin to work. i think the best thing to use at ur table is the check raise if everyone there is loose and aggressive but remember to play aggresive! best of luck to you!