$50 to $1000 on pstars day 18: 75 hands full of love

[KidKanuck 0]

Table 'Eumaios' Seat #5 is the button Seat 8: thecandle ($11.75 in chips) *** HOLE CARDS *** Dealt to thecandle [4h 4c] The Jezus: folds Salva135: folds chris9327: raises $0.25 to $0.50 LatesJ: folds NumLock: folds crowthorne joins the table at seat #9 Golden_sun: folds Jero: folds thecandle: calls $0.25 Pretty passive table. I plan on betting out on any flop that doesn't have an A or a K. *** FLOP *** [4s Jd Td] thecandle: bets $0.25 chris9327: folds thecandle collected $1.45 from pot thecandle: doesn't show handHey Smash,would you ever consider slowplaying this set to this flop hoping the turn or river brings an Ace or King?

[jayistheman 0]

thats a very dangerous flop to slowplay... any royalty card can murder your hand giving someone a str8 or a FH... and a diamond is no good as well... a pre flop raiser most likely would have called if he had overs or any of these draws. seems to me like the raiser has a pocket pair that missed (77 88 99)... which means any free cards can make him a higher set... which would be hard to read, and put you in bad shape.but smash knows better when it comes to limit hold em... guess u should wait for his answer.

[DiverDown4 0]

would you ever consider slowplaying this set to this flop hoping the turn or river brings an Ace or King?Orignal Raiser could have q-k, a-q, or ak, any of of those hands, plus aa-kk or qq, so that means any A,K,Q or queen would give him trips or a straight or maybe even a higher two pair. Thats probably why you wouldnt slow play it. Also, in low limits, there is USUALLY, no need to slowplay, you usually get a lot of action anyway.

[Absolute 0]

Table 'Tabora' Seat #8 is the button  Seat 3: thecandle ($17.55 in chips)  *** HOLE CARDS ***  Dealt to thecandle [8h 9h]  bigslick_STX: folds  Jero: folds  thecandle: folds  EF

Huh?

[wrto4556 0]

Table 'Tabora' Seat #8 is the button  Seat 3: thecandle ($17.55 in chips)  *** HOLE CARDS ***  Dealt to thecandle [8h 9h]  bigslick_STX: folds  Jero: folds  thecandle: folds  EF

Huh?

98s from EP....I don't get what's so hard.

[Vade 0]

He's in first postion there.

[Awful 0]

He's in first postion there.

Well, no, UTG+2... those guys folding before him. Still too early for 89s unless the table was passive and dumb (which I didn't break down the HH's in reverse order enough to see). Each HH plays out normally, they're just put in the email last hand to 1st hand

[Vade 0]

Haha...oops, yeah early position I meant.

[DiverDown4 0]

Table was too tight

[Awful 0]

Table was too tight

Thanks. Yeah, that makes 89o a good fold. Especially if there was some preflop aggression too.

[Smasharoo 0]

would you ever consider slowplaying this set to this flop hoping the turn or river brings an Ace or King?So the guy playing KT makes the nut straight without having to pay to draw at it? No thanks :)Even check-raising it here's not great. You'd have to check, hope someone bet out so you call, hope a non diamond blank comes on the river and then check again, hope he bets again and THEN raise to protect this hand.OR you could just bet when you have the best hand....

[bigedjr17 0]

would you ever consider slowplaying this set to this flop hoping the turn or river brings an Ace or King?So the guy playing KT makes the nut straight without having to pay to draw at it? No thanks :)Even check-raising it here's not great. You'd have to check, hope someone bet out so you call, hope a non diamond blank comes on the river and then check again, hope he bets again and THEN raise to protect this hand.OR you could just bet when you have the best hand....

98% of the time it's best to lead out with the best hand, you never want to give a potential draw free cards..

[Fluffyfrog 0]

Someone asked me that on the last thread.I guess I will at some point, but be forewarned, low limit NL is exceptionally boring to read the way I play it.It's so easy to beat it's silly.

Then why would anyone want to play limit? I play limit myself, but my friends all play NL and i always get to hear the same story; "play NL, it's where the money is at!" We all play at lower limits, having just started out about 9 months ago.I'm a big fan of your posts, smasharoo. You should publish them in a book when you're finished.

[Smasharoo 0]

Then why would anyone want to play limit?Well, there's probably more money in limit long term. While NL is easy beat, it's not nessecarily easy to beat for more money with the same bankroll if you see what I mean.

[Fluffyfrog 0]

Then why would anyone want to play limit?Well, there's probably more money in limit long term. While NL is easy beat, it's not nessecarily easy to beat for more money with the same bankroll if you see what I mean.

Not quite sure what you mean actually... Are you perhaps talking about general skill increasing much more when moving up tables in NL than in limit? If anything, I like to think that I learn more about the game playing limit than I would have learned by playing NL.

[Smasharoo 0]

Not quite sure what you mean actually... Are you perhaps talking about general skill increasing much more when moving up tables in NL than in limit? If anything, I like to think that I learn more about the game playing limit than I would have learned by playing NL.What I mean is that low limit NL played maringally better than average against bad opponents is about as profitable as low limit NL played expertly against bad opponenets. In limit an above average player will do ok, a better player will do better, and an expert should crush the game long term.So NL is much easier to beat, but the upside to playing better is fairly small. Limit is harder to beat and even harder to crush, but once you understand how to crush the game you'll make more money at limit and NL will become a trivial boring game unless you're playing against players almost as good as you are at which point it becomes a very intresting, very complex game where you make less than you do in limit :)I find NL terribly boring. I could 30 table $100 buy in NL all day long, the decisions are so clear cut and odds driven 99% of the time. In fact, I'm amazed no one's had a sucessfull NL bot yet, it'd be so much easier than a limit one.

[Fluffyfrog 0]

Allright, thanks. Now i understand what you mean! Hopefully, one day i'll understand how to completely crush the lower limits as well!

[JFarrell20 1]

I think limit is more of a science, where as no limit is more artistry. Seems like a bot would be much easier to create for limit than NL. Any two hands can win for an artistic NL player (Gus Hansen). Such is not the case with limit.

[Smasharoo 0]

PS. Smash, why didn't you raise the JT with TPGK?? Too passive, I tell you. limping ATs and calling with TPGK and folding to the turn bet when an ace comes. If you had raised on the flop, you could have had an easier decision on the turn.Too many redraws.I think raising there is too agressive. There is a point where agression becomes chip spewing. This might not be at that point, but it's close. Read SSHE pg. 34-35. I think you may be pushing too much with marginal hands with no added value from draws....

[Awful 0]

JFarrell20: No limit is played FAR more poorly at the micro-levels, though. As smash has said, micro NL can be destroyed by chasing with odds and breaking people with the nuts when you get them. No Limit is a game whose added complexity magnifies mistakes. That makes it tougher at the highest levels, but incredibly simple at its lowest levels; it's all contingent on how many mistakes your opponents make... in limit each one costs a fraction of the bet they put out there, or if they're drawing totall dead, the whole bet. In NL, they don't have that protecting them from handing off their whole stack.

[jeff_536 3]

Smash: To my earlier question.Obviously complete small blind with small pair (22-77) but do I call a bet there?What about in CO or button? call one raise? or let it go?Thanks

[Smasharoo 0]

I think limit is more of a science, where as no limit is more artistry. Seems like a bot would be much easier to create for limit than NL. Any two hands can win for an artistic NL player (Gus Hansen). Such is not the case with limit.I guess that's why the top players play NL cash games.Oh wait...When you understand why nearly all the biggest live games are limit games you'll understand why it takes more skill to play.Pot limit is probably the game requiring the most skill of all as it mixes NL's ability to close out drawing hands with limit's ability to mitigate risk and exposure to short term luck. The ability to massively overbet the pot makes NL the weakest of all three games in terms of pure skill.

[JFarrell20 1]

I'm not denying any of that. What I said was I think it would be easier to make a scientific bot, rather than an artistic bot. You can't program art. You made a comment about being surprised that they hadn't made a NL bot simply because it takes less skill. That is probably true, but has nothing to do with bot-making.

[Smasharoo 0]

What I said was I think it would be easier to make a scientific bot, rather than an artistic bot. You can't program art. You made a comment about being surprised that they hadn't made a NL bot simply because it takes less skill. That is probably true, but has nothing to do with bot-making.No, I said I was surprised they hand't made a NL bot because the decisions are so much more clear cut at low limits and it's much easier to program a bot to push all in with a range of hands than it is to figure out the best way to extract the most money in a multiway pot in limit.Because of the ability to bet a lot in NL, you simplify the game for a bot by making it heads up a large majority of the time thereby allowing the bot to do what bots do well, make game theory appropriate plays against a single opponent.What I said was that it'd be easier to make a bot for NL because it's easier to beat which has everything to do with bot making....Please don't assume I'm saying something I don't specifically post. It just makes you look silly.

[Absolute 0]

98s from EP....I don't get what's so hard.

I still don't agree. 89 suited is always playable if there's no raise pending. The implied odds of this hand is worth and pre-flop limp, regardless of position. If you get in the habit of not playing middle suited connectors, you won't maximize your winnings.8-9 suited is an extremely playable hand, even from early position (and he wasn't UTG)You have to call there. There's too much that can happen with that hand.For instance.....10H Jh KcThe action you get on flops like that (and thats just one of MANY) is worth the price alone. Seriously, play the cards.