J9s

[CoranMoran 0]

I'll be honest, you (this time yes, specifically you, Fred) seem very weak tight in your recent LHE posts, and I suspect you are passing up potential +EV situations because you are too tight preflop.

Making posts on here is a good way to discover the imperfections in one's game.I think we found one.This is good.--cm

[fleung22 1]

I lied. One more:This is a quote from you in the T9 off thread.There is a poster, then a raise, and it folds to us in the BB.We're getting 4.5-1 to call here, and you're ok with calling with T9o when we'll be out of position to both players in the hand, but you want to fold J9s when we're going to be at least 4 handed, and will have position on at least 2 of the players?You're being fairly hypocritical.

Zach my friend, let me begin by telling you a little story:A man and his beautiful new wife were riding their horse and carriage home after a glorious day by the water. All of the sudden the horse stalls. The man gets out and walks directly in front of the horse and says "THAT'S ONE!".They get on their merry way and all of the sudden does it again.Once again the man gets out, stares at the horse and says "THAT'S TWO!"After things get back in order they ride along and make it nearly all the way home when the horse stalls once more.This time the man reaches full his shotgun, says "THAT'S THREE!!!" and blows the brains out of the horse.As the man walks towards his wife she has this horrified look and says, "Don't you think that was a bit extreme?"The husband looks at her and replies "THAT'S ONE!"

As a side note, you're saying that if your lead gets raised, you can 3-bet? But in an earlier post you said that you'd lead because you'd never get raised by a worse hand and you can fold. You're not making sense.- Zach

3-bet is on flop, the fold to a raise is a comment I made regarding turn after the 4c falls. Make sense?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------You're talking about two completely different situations. In the BB I already have pot equity since I have to post and so I'm getting a discount on my call. Also, after my call there will be no more action. It is a pure odds situation.Small pairs, connectors, etc. are hands I like when there are lots (5+) players involved and I still want position if possible. By playing in early-middle position you put yourself in danger. Assuming there are still 2 players in before you, would you call to an early raise? Would you cold call a 3-bet? I'll assume you say no (if yes, then scratch the rest of this). Playing so early leaves us vulnerable to heavy action behind us and now we either waste money (with a fold) or we're in a big pot, few players and with a marginal hand.Again, if J9s is a playable hand from 3rd to act after two limpers then what hands are not playable?My response is always based on the info in the OP (assuming I've read it right). There are no reads to this table. If this was a really soft and loose table I would reconsider but hardly an autocall. I think you've got a good mind for the game and encourage you to keep it coming.However, unless you actually catch me saying two different things for EXACTLY the same situations all I gotta say is...THAT'S TWO

[Zach6668 513]

You're NOT closing the action in the T9o hand either. Maybe the poster is going to raise...In this case, we're going to get at least 4 way action. That means, even if the guy on your left raises, you're getting calls from UTG, UTG+1, and sometimes cold calls, sometimes blinds, etc. It doesn't really matter how many bets you actually put in preflop. Paying 1 or 2 bets isn't a big difference, to see a multiway flop with a speculative hand. Even in my scenario, we have position on 2 of the 3 villains, AND great relative position vs the aggressor.I think in the response you just quote from a previous thread, I had misread your post, and I think I alluded to that in that thread, or meant to, anyways, so I really don't know why you brought it up.Obviously the T9o hand and the J9s hand are different, every single hand is, but there are distinct similarities, and calling in one spot, while not calling in the other is strange. I agree with the T9o call, but I think it's a lot less automatic than the J9s call.In this case, we're VERY likely to get a nice multiway pot. Players will see 3 limpers up front and be a lot more likely to want to see a flop with their mediocre hands, and again, if it gets raised behind us, again, it's not a big deal. The only thing it cuts down is our implied odds, but in a 4, 5, 6 way pot, we don't need huge implied odds, and they aren't even cut that much for one more bet.Furthermore, you're saying you want 5+ players to play these hands. That's good, but it's not required. 2 limpers is pretty much enough for this, with the potential for more limpers behind us, AND obviously the BB is coming along if it's not raised, and probably the SB. There's 5 way action right there.I'm basing my analysis on a typical .5/1 FR table, since we have no specific reads, and the fact that this hand was very loose passive. A typical table, in my experiences is semi-loose, semi-passive. Not quite on the scale of a live table, but not quite a 5/10 TAG table. I'd also think it's fair to assume that Actuary is significantly better postflop than 90% (at least) of the players at .5/1.If it goes raise/3-bet/cap behind us, obviously I'm folding, but it's only an SB invested in a chance to see a flop with a great multiway hand. Saying that it gets us in trouble to limp here because we may have to fold later on preflop not a good argument. If it folds to you in MP3 say, you raise KJo, and it gets 3-bet and capped before it gets back to you, by tighter players, it's an easy fold. Should we have not raised in the first place? Of course not.You asked what hands are not playable here, and that's a pretty wide range, so I'll give you my limping range here instead: Two limpers, at a semi-loose, semi-passive table, and I'm MP1:22+, all suited connectors above, and including 67s, maybe even 56s on the softest tables, all one gappers from 79s and up, probably 68s as well, and maybe 57s, two gappers including KTs, Q9s, J8s, probably, although the last two are pretty loose. I may even include JTo, QJo as the offsuit connector range, but I'm a lot less likely to play those as they can get you into more trouble due to being dominated lots. Obviously, I'd keep my standard raising range as well, 99+, AJo+, ATs+, QKs, QKo, and so on.I gotta go, gonna be late for dinner, lol. I think I covered most of it.- Zach

[fleung22 1]

Fred, wtf are your stats? 12/12/10?

If that's VP/PFR/??? (I'd say PFA but why would you use 10 in the example?)...VP is usually around 20%, PFA is 12...ya got me!

I'll be honest, you (this time yes, specifically you, Fred) seem very weak tight in your recent LHE posts, and I suspect you are passing up potential +EV situations because you are too tight preflop."Tight is right" is wrong. That statement is correct for someone learning LHE, with limited postflop skills and experience. When you get better, and more experienced, you start to play more marginal hands, and push your smaller edges. This is one of those. Since I assume you're conpetent preflop, you should push these edges. Why do you think the top SH LHE players at higher levels have such high VPIPs? It's because they are better than their opponents postflop, and thus, the more hands they play against them, the more opportunity they have to reap the benefits of making fewer postflop mistakes.

Have you been lying to me about everything else?? To be honest you better be a rich mofo, crazy skilz and killing the 20/40 game to back that smack sonny. "weak" insinuates passive play. I may not play a lot of hands but timid I am not.You're a LAG player and that's fine and dandy. But why is it such a sin to be TAG? It paid for my rent on lakeshore condo, car, food, entertainment, and other expenses for 8 months when I was building my company and had savings but no income.""Tight is right" is wrong." is the craziest thing I've ever heard. It's wrong? That's it?! There's room to grow and learn and add more hands to every player's resume. You (yes you) seem to generalize on lots of absolutes. This ABSOLUTELY has to be a situation to call everytime. Hard and fast rules in poker...now THAT'S wrong. This example is NOT a shorthanded (that's what SH means right?)...naturally players have higher VP in a shorthanded game.You wanna debate? I'm all for it...In fact that's what I'm hoping for. I'll find some good nuggets that fit within my game. At my current skill level and game development J9s is not an autocall at a new table when I am MP1 after two callers. Again, anybody who has 100+ J9 hands in database for me to view with positive results PLEASE post.EDIT: btw, since there's lack of emoticons I'm actually enjoying this.

[Moneyball16 0]

If that's VP/PFR/??? (I'd say PFA but why would you use 10 in the example?)...VP is usually around 20%, PFA is 12...ya got me!Have you been lying to me about everything else?? To be honest you better be a rich mofo, crazy skilz and killing the 20/40 game to back that smack sonny. "weak" insinuates passive play. I may not play a lot of hands but timid I am not.You're a LAG player and that's fine and dandy. But why is it such a sin to be TAG? It paid for my rent on lakeshore condo, car, food, entertainment, and other expenses for 8 months when I was building my company and had savings but no income.""Tight is right" is wrong." is the craziest thing I've ever heard. It's wrong? That's it?! There's room to grow and learn and add more hands to every player's resume. You (yes you) seem to generalize on lots of absolutes. This ABSOLUTELY has to be a situation to call everytime. Hard and fast rules in poker...now THAT'S wrong. This example is NOT a shorthanded (that's what SH means right?)...naturally players have higher VP in a shorthanded game.You wanna debate? I'm all for it...In fact that's what I'm hoping for. I'll find some good nuggets that fit within my game. At my current skill level and game development J9s is not an autocall at a new table when I am MP1 after two callers. Again, anybody who has 100+ J9 hands in database for me to view with positive results PLEASE post.EDIT: btw, since there's lack of emoticons I'm actually enjoying this.

I find it hard to believe that you run at 20/12 and are folding this preflop. Are these stats all fr? From your posts you really come off as a bit of a nitty TAG and I wouldnt consider Zach a LAG either and would consider him to be TAG and to have pretty average stats for most of this forum regulars(again just from his posts).Good to have some discussion in the forums now since its been pretty quiet lately.

[Actuary 3]

ah.... this game is A-D-D-I-C-T-I-V-Ecomments:- yeah, this is call all day for me. - SSHE speaks on the tight is right myth.- this is suited. That is huge in "likely multi-way" potyou'll just have to trust me that I made money on this hand,In fact, if I had my db here, it might show I made money on every hand over the long run that I played voluntarily.I'm also like 20-22% preflop given the slightly tighter tables than beforeAlthough, stealing morepart of playing hands like this successfully is being comfortable with c/c and not taking over the lead each hand.**********fwiw, the bettor had AQ off.strange.

[Moneyball16 0]

fwiw, the bettor had AQ off.strange.

Ive seen people play AQ like this before and am always puzzled by it. Not good enough to raise preflop but fine to bet multiway on all streets postflop unimproved????? lol.

[Zach6668 513]

If that's VP/PFR/??? (I'd say PFA but why would you use 10 in the example?)...VP is usually around 20%, PFA is 12...ya got me!Have you been lying to me about everything else?? To be honest you better be a rich mofo, crazy skilz and killing the 20/40 game to back that smack sonny. "weak" insinuates passive play. I may not play a lot of hands but timid I am not.

10 is AF. I figure if you play super tight preflop, you'd be super aggro postflop, which would be the right thing to do.I didn't mean to insinuate that, as I just said above, I assume you play very TAG, as in tight/nitty preflop (the general sense from your latest series of posts), combined with a very aggro style postflop. There's nothing wrong with that style, as it does work quite well, but it doesn't mean you should be restricted from adding hands that should show a positive return.

You're a LAG player and that's fine and dandy. But why is it such a sin to be TAG? It paid for my rent on lakeshore condo, car, food, entertainment, and other expenses for 8 months when I was building my company and had savings but no income.

I'm anything but LAG. I'm too tight for SH, for one. I haven't played a significant number of hands at FR for a long time, even though I did play one table this morning, while trying to get in some hands at crypto, but definitely not enough to prove that I play lag. Back when I played .5/1 at Party, back when me and Actuary were coming up the ranks, I was semi-loose aggressive/aggressive, but my looseness preflop decreased a bit to where PT auto-rated me as a TAG. I'd be closer to 20/12 right now at FR, I imagine, as well. If you're folding J9s here, you must be opening with the likes when you're in MP3, CO, or Button, right? In order to get up to 20% VPIP, if you're going to be folding hands like this in EMP, you must be adding a wide range in LP, right?

""Tight is right" is wrong." is the craziest thing I've ever heard. It's wrong? That's it?! There's room to grow and learn and add more hands to every player's resume. You (yes you) seem to generalize on lots of absolutes. This ABSOLUTELY has to be a situation to call everytime. Hard and fast rules in poker...now THAT'S wrong.

I never stated a hard and fast rule. I'm merely saying that "Tight is right" is a cliche that was meant for beginners who are learning the finer points of the game, and specifically post flop play. When you only play premium hands, it's hard to lose a ton of money even if you suck postflop, because your edge going into any pot is going to be big enough to make up for your postflop disadvantage, or at least some of it. When you've been playing as long as I'm sure you have, you've developped the skills to play more hands preflop, because you know how to deal with marginal situations postflop. Ideally, if we're trying to maximize our EV, in a vacuum, we should be playing any hand with a positive expectation, even if it's +0.0000000000000000001. Sure, you can get by playing only premium hands, or playing super tight, and still show a profit, perhaps, but giving up those extra hands that should show a profit over time, is like lighting money on fire. The more hands you play with a positive expectation, the more money you will win long term. I know you understand this. And I know you keep asking for stats to prove that it's +EV. The only thing I have at the moment is the word of each of the posters in this thread, all of which have proven to be long terms winners (I think). I've only got 365 hands of FR LHE on this computer, and only 1 occurrence of J9s, which I folded, so obviously my stats are meaningless. When I get a chance, probably tomorrow morning, I'll pull out my old laptop, and see if I can get it running long enough to see if I have a significant sample of FR LHE, and a significant sample of J9s hands in EMP. I doubt I will, but it'll be worth a look, because I did used to play a lot of FR.

This example is NOT a shorthanded (that's what SH means right?)...naturally players have higher VP in a shorthanded game.

No, that's correct, but it's irrelevant. LHE is LHE whether it is shorthanded or full ring. I don't mean the best SH players at the highest limits have VPIPs that would be high for full ring, I mean they have significantly higher VPIPs than most of the players at SH, or for whatever game they are playing, relative to the norm at that level. The best example I can think of is this, and it is a little extreme, but demonstrates my point quite well. There is a certain player on AP, who plays 2/4+, who is an absolute ATM. I'll sit way out of my BR just to get the chance to play with him. I've been known to get into capped pots preflop with as little as T9o just because I know he's that bad postflop, that I can extract the maximum when I have as little as bottom pair. As a matter of fact, he's so bad that I'll even post the BB just to get in the game quicker, and that's at SH where the max you'll wait is 3 hands, lol. My point is that I'll rarely fold hands vs him for 1 bet, and will call a huge range vs him preflop even for 2 bets, because he is so bad postflop. Again, that's an extreme example, but the point is that the more reasonable hands you get to play against terrible postflop players, or even any players whom you are better than postflop, the more money you should win in the long run.

You wanna debate? I'm all for it...In fact that's what I'm hoping for. I'll find some good nuggets that fit within my game. At my current skill level and game development J9s is not an autocall at a new table when I am MP1 after two callers. Again, anybody who has 100+ J9 hands in database for me to view with positive results PLEASE post.EDIT: btw, since there's lack of emoticons I'm actually enjoying this.

I'm always down for a good debate. These forums keep me sharp, and on top of my game, and that's why I come here every day, etc. I love these debates. :DAgain, I'll look for some PT stats for ya. I doubt I'll have them, but I may know people who do.

[fleung22 1]

sweet...I just realized I may be what this forum needed. Zach, I would like to officially apply for the position of serge on the Strat Forum.okay, I stress the no read thing. no read will usually mean new table, lots of new players, or heavy drinking by hero. My preference is to have that "nitty" (since so many people have used this term I'll assume it's not an insult like I usually use it) and tight image. I win through stealing which costs me no rake preflop. Post flop I steal a lot more pots than I probably would if opened up significantly. In fact, if players start to fear the hands I play then I will do a preflop raise every single hand regardless of what I have and force them to play. I'm capable of playing post-flop and in a no rake environment my game does loosen. Crap, my ride's here. Pick this up tomorrow. GL all.I'd love a strat session sometime with y'all.

[Zach6668 513]

lol, I'm going to see "Lucky You", loool, I'll be back tomorrow.

[mrdannyg 274]

I'm starting to think one of you guys are going to come out and scream YOU GOT GOT! YOU GOT GOT!! YOU GOT GOT!!!

i don't get it.my stats for J9s are meaningless, given the variance of a <200 sample size, but in general hands like that are profitable, and i'm by no means an excellent post-flop player.

You're talking about two completely different situations. In the BB I already have pot equity since I have to post and so I'm getting a discount on my call. Also, after my call there will be no more action. It is a pure odds situation.

sorry i didn't read all the rest of the thread, but...there was a lot. this stuck out, so i wanted to stress how meaningless it is. if pot equity refers to how much of the pot you've already contributed, it means nothing. those are 'sunk costs' and have no relevance on future play. none.you are getting a discount on your call, but that also means nothing. what is relevant is the odds you are likely to receive (or are receiving, if closing the action).i think you understand this, since you state its a pure odds situation. however the first two points are contradictory, since they imply how much you've put in the pot determine future actions. of course, they only do so insofar as they change your current odds.like zach said, you're receiving 4.5:1 on T9o out of position, without the lead. with J9s, there are 3 possible scenarios:- everyone else folds, except the blinds, and you're in position, getting 3.5-4:1- other people limp, in which case you're getting better than 4.5:1, with decent position- someone raises behind, everyone else folds except the limpers and maybe bb - you're getting 4:1 acting second last.all these are better than the T9o situation, and your hand is better.sorry, that got too long. i mostly wanted to stress the contradiction in the quote. its always tempting to play 'at a discount,' and i do think calling with T9o there is correct. however don't be fooled by things like pot equity, as they are past and irrelevant decisions.

[fleung22 1]

i don't get it.

sorry, it's an Entourage reference. it's really hard to describe unless you watch the show.

[mrdannyg 274]

sorry, it's an Entourage reference. it's really hard to describe unless you watch the show.

haha alright. i have an irrational hatred for that show anyways.p.s. looks like i'll be in toronto around the 2nd-3rd week of august. hope the TO crew will be getting together for some Exhibition Casino barrages!

[Frez 0]

ah.... this game is A-D-D-I-C-T-I-V-Ecomments:- yeah, this is call all day for me. - SSHE speaks on the tight is right myth.- this is suited. That is huge in "likely multi-way" pot

Question: In my short time here I've noticed guys threat SSHE like the Bible. Yes it does say to loosen up some in a very loose game, but it defines a loose game as 6-8 players seeing the flop. Semi loose as 4-6 (I may be a touch off on those since I'm at work and don't have the book handy). When we're playing at tables where the VP$IP in 20%, we're only expecting 2 players, plus 1 or 2 blinds in the pot. I'm not sure 3.5 players per flop counts as loose enough to apply SSHE in every situation. Is that the typical approach here?

In fact, if I had my db here, it might show I made money on every hand over the long run that I played voluntarily.

One would hope, since that's the idea when you enter a hand voluntarily. Well done.

[Zach6668 513]

Question: In my short time here I've noticed guys threat SSHE like the Bible. Yes it does say to loosen up some in a very loose game, but it defines a loose game as 6-8 players seeing the flop. Semi loose as 4-6 (I may be a touch off on those since I'm at work and don't have the book handy). When we're playing at tables where the VP$IP in 20%, we're only expecting 2 players, plus 1 or 2 blinds in the pot. I'm not sure 3.5 players per flop counts as loose enough to apply SSHE in every situation. Is that the typical approach here?

SSHE is a great book for beginners, IMO.As I've stated in this thread, it talks about "tight is right", and while it is perfect for people who have a lack of postflop experience and skill, it's restricting the people who still follow it after they've gained the necessary skill/experience to add a few hands here and there, J9s in a limped pot, for example. It's a great book, and a great basis, but it's definitely something that a good player will have to expand upon to become great.Of course, SSHE was writting mostly with loose-passive tables in mind (read: live games), so naturally, it doesn't exactly translate to our tighter online games. Again, it's something that is great as a basis, but has to be expanded upon. The key to any poker book is not to follow it word for word, using it is a guide (ie hard charts, etc), it is to understand WHY a book recommends a certain play. WHY a book stats to fold J9o utg, etc. The key is to learn what makes a certain play profitable, so you can expand on that yourself. SSHE is a great beginners guide to this type of thinking as well, but it's not exactly the be-all and end-all of poker books. As you become a better player, you definitely need to deviate from the exact teachings, and modify it.

[RISEorFall 0]

Question: In my short time here I've noticed guys threat SSHE like the Bible. Yes it does say to loosen up some in a very loose game, but it defines a loose game as 6-8 players seeing the flop. Semi loose as 4-6 (I may be a touch off on those since I'm at work and don't have the book handy). When we're playing at tables where the VP$IP in 20%, we're only expecting 2 players, plus 1 or 2 blinds in the pot. I'm not sure 3.5 players per flop counts as loose enough to apply SSHE in every situation. Is that the typical approach here?

This is really hand by hand analysis of how loose the table is, though. In general, if the table only has 3-4 players to a flop, you should not be as willing to play some speculative hands up front. If, however, you're in a later position and all of a sudden there's 4 or 5 limps to you, the table has become loose, even if only for this one hand. If you're on a loose table and in later position and everyone folds to you, well, all of a sudden the table has become tight, even if only for this one hand.In this hand, there are already 2 limpers plus the blinds. Which means usually we will have 4-5 players to this flop. As a general rule, I will play most speculative hands if there's been 2 limpers to me. I'll play them from an EP or earlier MP positions if there's one limper and my second limp will often encourage more to limp behind me.

[fleung22 1]

haha alright. i have an irrational hatred for that show anyways.p.s. looks like i'll be in toronto around the 2nd-3rd week of august. hope the TO crew will be getting together for some Exhibition Casino barrages!

HATRED?!?! I didn't even know men like you existed!I'm kind've the Toronto organizer for events on FCPers and another poker tour so check with me near that time. That's actually around the time me and serge may be organizing a little get together with Daniel and the crew. Gambling, of course, will commence.

[Zach6668 513]

HATRED?!?! I didn't even know men like you existed!I'm kind've the Toronto organizer for events on FCPers and another poker tour so check with me near that time. That's actually around the time me and serge may be organizing a little get together with Daniel and the crew. Gambling, of course, will commence.

I'll be in Toronto from June 8th to the 12th, if anything is going on.