deviant

[Actuary 3]

Random hands generating, not going to pick up the Ax bias of players holdings, for one thing.AQ has far more post flop visibility

[econ_tim 0]

Random hands generating, not going to pick up the Ax bias of players holdings, for one thing.

OK. The KJo was just an example. But suggest a reasonable range and I'll recalculate the figures.From your response, I guess you don't like raising KJo here. You're also saying that something other than equity enters into preflop decisions.

[Actuary 3]

Random hands generating, not going to pick up the Ax bias of players holdings, for one thing.

OK. The KJo was just an example. But suggest a reasonable range and I'll recalculate the figures.From your response, I guess you don't like raising KJo here. You're also saying that something other than equity enters into preflop decisions.

I'm also disputing the equity.OOP, with KJ off I prefer a more manageble pot preflopAnd give less odds.AQ off I think is strong enough to withstand the extra drawing odds you give by raising preflop.just a sense, I don't have lots of data/math to support this

[Guest Anonymous]

I'm also disputing the equity.

I'm pretty sure KJo and other hands you're not raising here have a significant equity edge against any reasonable range of hands for the villains.

OOP, with KJ off I prefer a more manageble pot preflopAnd give less odds.AQ off I think is strong enough to withstand the extra drawing odds you give by raising preflop.just  a sense, I don't have lots of data/math to support this

This is the reason why I made the post in the first place. To get a better understanding of when we want to push an equity edge and increase the size of the pot OOP.

[econ_tim 0]

I'm also disputing the equity.

I'm pretty sure KJo and other hands you're not raising here have a significant equity edge against any reasonable range of hands for the villains.

OOP, with KJ off I prefer a more manageble pot preflopAnd give less odds.AQ off I think is strong enough to withstand the extra drawing odds you give by raising preflop.just  a sense, I don't have lots of data/math to support this

This is the reason why I made the post in the first place. To get a better understanding of when we want to push an equity edge and increase the size of the pot OOP.KDawg, if you see this, could you delete the previous "guest" post? Don't know why the forum is letting me post w/o logging in.

[Actuary 3]

how do we distinguish P.Sotves "equity" from reality.Where not all hands stay till the river,KJ's lack of visibility relative to AQ does not show up in an Equity calculation from P.Stove,.

[econ_tim 0]

how do we distinguish P.Sotves "equity" from reality.Where not all hands stay till the river,KJ's lack of visibility relative to AQ does not show up in an Equity calculation from P.Stove,.

the equity is accurate. but equity isn't everything, unless i'm all-in preflop. since i'm not all-in, there will be subsequent betting rounds, and thus my expectation doesn't equal my equity. this is true for both AQ and KJ. i agree AQ is probably easier to play (largely because KJ will lose to Ax UI a decent amount of the time), but we should still think about more than equity when deciding our preflop play.BTW, i hope i'm not being needlessly argumentative. i just find the math of poker interesting. when i can't play, it's the next best thing. i told you there was a real poker discussion to have.

[econ_tim 0]

here's the link i was talking about earlier.it starts out as one of mason's book reviews, but then someone starts criticizing 2+2 publishing, saying SSHE and HEPFAP are inconsistent.mason attempts to reconcile the books.i think it's a very good discussion.

[screech 0]

Why speak with authority when you are wrong?

Ahahahahahahahah.The situation is no different than when you have 3 loose limpers to you in the BB in a full game.

3 very very loose limpers maybe.But in a full game 3 limpers =3/9 = 33% of the fieldhere= 3/5 =60% of the field- implies worse holdings.For the last time here just raise with AQ if you like money.AJ also.I will accept reservation on A10 o/s, but im still raising a fair % of the time.

No.Loose players hands will not be that different relative to our hand just because a smaller % of players are limping in in a full game.When we raise, we are building a pot OOP relying solely on high card strength. These types of hands don't fare well post flop in large multiway pots. That's what tim was getting at with his question.The reason I like raising AQ here as opposed to AJ is that it is much easier to pair our low card and win with AQ than AJ. In this situation, it is not that much more likely that our opponents don't hold K's/Q's than in full games with 3 loose limpers.

[kouta43 0]

Why speak with authority when you are wrong?

Ahahahahahahahah.The situation is no different than when you have 3 loose limpers to you in the BB in a full game.

3 very very loose limpers maybe.But in a full game 3 limpers =3/9 = 33% of the fieldhere= 3/5 =60% of the field- implies worse holdings.For the last time here just raise with AQ if you like money.AJ also.I will accept reservation on A10 o/s, but im still raising a fair % of the time.

No.Loose players hands will not be that different relative to our hand just because a smaller % of players are limping in in a full game.When we raise, we are building a pot OOP relying solely on high card strength. These types of hands don't fare well post flop in large multiway pots. That's what tim was getting at with his question.The reason I like raising AQ here as opposed to AJ is that it is much easier to pair our low card and win with AQ than AJ. In this situation, it is not that much more likely that our opponents don't hold K's/Q's than in full games with 3 loose limpers.

You are wrong. If you want to win more money raise with AJ here everytime.As for Tim, i raise with KJ also. I also kill 6 handed games.

[PoppinFresh 0]

Kouta, cut the ego stuff out. This is a strat forum, not a dick waving contest forum. If you disagree with someone, back up your position with reasons, don't just say 'you're wrong' and leave it at that.

[kouta43 0]

Kouta, cut the ego stuff out. This is a strat forum, not a dick waving contest forum. If you disagree with someone, back up your position with reasons, don't just say 'you're wrong' and leave it at that.

Im not sure what better way to back something up with results?And how often do you see people limp with worse hands 6 handed than they do full ring ?

[econ_tim 0]

Im not sure what better way to back something up with results?

As a social scientist with an empirical bent, I agree. That said, beating a game over a large period of time doesn't prove that every decision you make is optimal. Only that you make better decisions on average than your opponents.

[Actuary 3]

kout,u are annoying as hell.Screech is a solid/successful palyer, like a lot of us here.There many ways to winyours may be best, may not.I don't recognize you from the strategy section and you post like a Gen Pop duche

[kouta43 0]

kout,u are annoying as hell.Screech is a solid/successful palyer, like a lot of us here.There many ways to winyours may be best, may not.I don't recognize you from the strategy section and you post like a Gen Pop duche

maybe i am, but i am also right. I agree that there are marginal situations to discuss- these are what we call tough decisions.But it is not a tough decision to raise AQ here.In a full ring game do you raise AQ here?

[Actuary 3]

Yes.I don't think AQ is tough hereI think the borderline varies among players.it's not the message, it's the attitude.

[Guest Zach6668]

I raise AQ in every situation, every position.Doesn't mean that there isn't a discussion to be had about it.- Zach.

[kouta43 0]

I am not surprised most posters here are winning players- the general way seems to be tight, and at lower limits this should be enough to win due to your opponents playing rubbish and you capitilising through your superior hand selection.However, i am trying to show how you can win more, and raising with good hands is a must.On a side note, i am not surprised to hear the response that i am basically arrogant. It is my single bigget downfall in poker, the ego, and it is where i have to improve most. I get far to pissed off when shitty players draw out with shitty hands even though i know it has to happen, its just my ego doesnt really like my play losing to retards getting lucky. Yeh. There's where i want to improve.

[screech 0]

Yes, AJ, AT, KJ, and even hands like A9 and KT have an equity edge here pf. the question is, whether or not we want to push that edge pf. If we do, our postflop edge will be minimized, and we will be complementing our opponents natural tendencies.Plus, unlike the flop to turn situaiton, our equity changes drastically from pf to the flop. Pushing small edges pf OOP with no other benefits, is not always the best way to maximize your winnings. IF our opponents are loose, and call too much, then they're mistakes are magnified when we keep the pot small.

[kouta43 0]

Yes, AJ, AT, KJ, and even hands like A9 and KT have an equity edge here pf. the question is, whether or not we want to push that edge pf. If we do, our postflop edge will be minimized, and we will be complementing our opponents natural tendencies.Plus, unlike the flop to turn situaiton, our equity changes drastically from pf to the flop. Pushing small edges pf OOP with no other benefits, is not always the best way to maximize your winnings. IF our opponents are loose, and call too much, then they're mistakes are magnified when we keep the pot small.

I see what you are saying, however:Say we have AJ and we dont raise and the flop comes A 6 2 rainbow. If we bet out we wont get called unless someone else has an ace, and we miss out on really punishing our opponents loose tendencies.Say we have KJ, flop comes J 7 4 rainbow- we will get called down by a 7 and even perhaps a 4 if we raise preflop, for 2 reasons- the pot is large, so our opponents naturally tend to chase more, and they may put us on a hand like Aq or AK and figure their hand is good- this i have seen alot.My general style is just to bash up on my opponents as often as i can when m playing 6 max (which happens to be jsut about all the time).Hands like 5 6 o/s (yes, isee players limp with tis bs on the button all the time) just dont connect with the flop very often, so i want to punish them while i can, that is while they are still in the hand preflop.Screech, i hear what you are saying, and i have no doubt you are a winning player because of it, i just think you could win more by being more aggressive.

[Actuary 3]

Screech,I've been unclear on the concept of giving your opponent a chance to make a bigger mistakes by keeping the pot small.let's assume they go to SD with big pot or little pot when they flop bottom pair. Say we flopped TP and no one improves.Who cares if their odds are better on each street now, we still win a bigger pot.I don't disagree because I'm sure I don't understand something here.I can't apply the theoretical to the bankeretical.

[kouta43 0]

the idea is your opponent is going to draw regardless of the pot size, so if the pot is large he is getting the correct odds to draw, whereis if we keep the pot small he is not getting sufficient odds to try and draw out.

[Actuary 3]

the idea is your opponent is going to draw regardless of the pot size, so if the pot is large he is getting the correct odds to draw, whereis if we keep the pot small he is not getting sufficient odds to try and draw out.

that part I understand.if he's going to sd either way, we just make more when the pot is big, right?

[MrNiceGuy 0]

the idea is your opponent is going to draw regardless of the pot size, so if the pot is large he is getting the correct odds to draw, whereis if we keep the pot small he is not getting sufficient odds to try and draw out.

that part I understand.if he's going to sd either way, we just make more when the pot is big, right?

Yes.I believe that the "getting you opponents to make mistakes postflop by keeping the the pot small preflop" idea is overused.For example, say a loose player limps in with 76s, a couple others limp, and you don't raise with AQo. Then, you've maginfied his postflop mistakes when he decides to chase a hand when he only has a few outs. But, you've also failed to make his preflop limp a big mistake (limping with 76s in a 4-way unraised pot will rarely be a huge mistake - whether it is a mistake, and how big that mistake is, depends on your opponents skills and your own postflop skills). On the other hand, playing 76s in a 4-way pot is clearly -EV when the pot is going to be raised.For me, in the BB in the OP's situation, I consider AJo/ATo/KQo to be the borderline cases, and whether I decide to raise with them depends on what I think of my opponents. But when I check them, rather than raise, it's because I think it's a better approach to the hand primarily because of my poor position (as well as for deception). On the button, if I decide to play these hands behind several limpers, I almost always come in with a raise.

[econ_tim 0]

On the button, if I decide to play these hands behind several limpers, I almost always come in with a raise.

I agree. I would much rather push an equity edge preflop from the button.Another aspect of raising good hands from the BB after several limpers (this thread isn't really about AQ) is that you practically commit yourself to putting in another SB after the flop, when your equity will change. Sure, you will have a postflop equity edge on average, but you will get less callers when you flop good and get raised when your opponents flop good.