![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
What if they had been head up at that point?
Then you would have had a better than 80% chance of winning.
Mike:
I haven't read the other posts so hopefully I won't repeat what others have said. But I do think that you are missing something.
The analysis can be divided up into two situations. But first understand that you can virtually never be sure that you are raised by precisely a flush draw. But you can be suspicious that you opponent might be raising on one.
Case I: It is very likely that you have the best hand. This would happen if you flop something like top pair and top kicker. For example, you have AQ and the flop comes queen high and based on the before the flop action you have no reason to believe a big pair is out. Here if you lead and are raised it makes sense to reraise because you are so likely to have the best hand.
Case II: It is questionable that you have the best hand. The same flop as before but now you hold a hand like Q9. When raised, there are too many hands that could beat you. A better queen would be one, and a flush draw that gets there would be another. Here the raise has turned your hand into just a calling hand and if the flush card does get there, there is little chance that your hand will be any good. But if the flush card does not come, the probability that you have the best hand has gone way up so you can frequently bet again.
Do you see the difference?
Mason,
Even in the case where you hold Q9 there are many more ways someone can Axs for a flush draw than a better Q, so why not raise since you are the favorite?
Oops, posted too fast again. He probably would have raised with A(Q-A) so there are 10 ways he could hold A(2-J) for a flush draw. He would have raised with Q(Q-A) so there are 8 ways he could hold Q(10-J). Since it's about even that he has a better hand, the added probability of being outdrawn makes raising the wrong play, as you said.
Charlie,
Preflop against a large field I want the button or “virtual button” to call with king small suited since this hand clearly wants to play for one bet. By “virtual button”, I want to see that the button is about to fold before playing. Note that about half my opponents in mid limit have this basic “sloppiness tell” around here.
On the flop I agree that you should check since you have little going for you other than the flush draw. After checking, you have a fine checkraise for value. You now have six opponents and are a 1.86 to 1 dog at that point to hit your flush. This raise makes money in the long run, even though your hand is not made yet. Although the button may reraise, which may force some of the originals callers to fold, it is unlikely so many will fold that your raise will lose all the aforementioned value.
Note that with six callers you have to worry that a flush that pairs the board can easily make somebody a full. But you might find out that you are against a set or two pair (BTW, only a blind or terrible player could have two pair here) on the flop when someone who originally calls makes it three bets.
I do think playing king-small suited can get you in trouble and may be high variance if you misplay it when a king flops and face action. But this isn't the case here.
Rick
K8s is absolute garbage, except for a third of a bet in the SB.
The checkraise is an awful play. Hero shoulda bet out, hoping for button to raise, knocking out K-big, A8, gutshot draws, maybe even a weak T. I play in the loosest, most passive $10-20 & $15-30 games you can imagine, and believe me, Hero wants people out at this point(having put in 4 sb's w/trash).
I don't understand your argument about knocking people out on the flop when you have a draw to the second nut flush. The benefit of additional callers when a flush hits has got to outweigh the benefit of knocking out overcards and then winning if a K comes along.
Also, I think you undervalue K8s in a multiway, unraised pot. Having a hand that can flop the second nut flush or flush draw is not garbage. In fact, I think S&M suggest calling with Q5s on the button in a multiway pot.
What is being addressed is how an unknown player at $15-$30 might play. In general, they don't play, especially if the game is full, in the matter that you describe,
I'm sorry to dissent here, but many online 15/30 players will make this exact play with hand like 53s, 54s, K4o, 33, K-hi, and A-hi. Remember, 88 didn't raise preflop, and was checked to on the flop. A *lot* of players will auto-bet in this position, so it makes checkraising with anything bettter than K-hi correct.
Unlike Izmet, I tend to shrink back into rope a dope mode when hit with unexpected aggression from the sb in this position. I might go for the free card play sometimes too, but giving up the pot now is silly.
Hell, I saw someone 2-bet and then cap a pot heads-up with KQo and a board of JJT with a two flush on the board. They lead through the river and won with a river K.
- Andrew
Just for clarity, I did raise preflop with my 88.
And Izmet, please don't go!
Puggy
This may seem nitpicky, but it's quite a relevant question:
I might go for the free card play sometimes too, but giving up the pot now is silly.
Did you mean free showdown play or free card play? Raising the flop to check the turn is a bad play here, imo. Raising the turn to check the river is, of course, perfectly acceptable.
30-60. All pass to the cut-off, a poor player. He raises. On the button, you re-raise with A-Ts. To your dismany, the big blind, a good and tricky player, calls. Cut-off calls and you take the flop 3-handed. There is $270 in the pot.
Flop is 9-6-5 rainbow with one of your suit. Both opponents check to you and you bet. Both opponents call. $360 in the pot.
Turn is another 5 of the 4th suit. Again both opponents check to you. You also check. (Mistake?)
River is another 6, making board 9-6-5-6-5. Big blind bets, cut-off calls.
Two questions:
1) Was is a mistake to check on the turn? 2) What do you now do on the river?
Results later.
I overcalled on the river and we split the pot 3 ways. BB had A-K, cut-off had A-J. It was a mistake to check the turn for sure. But it does show the value to your play, I think, of making check-raise on the turn a regular part of your game, as it gives your opponents (in this case me) pause.
How many people would have 4 bet it out of the BB in this position? I would do it against all generic opponents. You are almost sure to have the best hand. If he had 4 bet and came out firing he wouldn't have had to split the pot 3 ways.
Pretty tough to 4-bet out of position. However, he knew cut-off is weak, and he knew I knew cut-off is weak; therefore we were both more likely to have less strong hands than in a more "generic" situation.
I think he would have had to fire at least twice to win the pot, whether he 4-bet or not.
It seems more and more players in 20-40 and 30-60 are now limping with a hand that contains a King or Queen in it than previously. Used to be you could picked up unraised pots fairly often from the blind by betting into not too many opponents when an otherwise non-threatening flop contained a King or Queen. Now it seems more and more players are limping with A-Q, K-Q, K-J, Q-J or even A-K.
Anyone else notice this?
I believe most middle limit players view King-Queen as a standard limping hand from any position and King-Jack and Queen-Jack are standard limping hands from middle position and late position after others have limped. Ace-King and Ace-Queen are raising hands in most games. I have not noticed people limping in much with AK or AQ. They seem to raise with them unless there is a lot of limpers.
I rarely play KQ from anywhere but middle to late position. I do not feel this hand can be played profitably in middle limit games from utg or early position. I will play a lot more hands that many would fold from late position because I personally fell position importance cannot be overemphasized.
Just some thoughts...
Michael D. (Soccer/Sucker Mike D)
So do you think the advice that you can get away betting into not too many opponents in an unraised flop when the flop contains an otherwise non-threatening K or Q is wrong? It seems to me that I used to be able to make this play from the blinds more successfully than now.
I believe that in an unraised pot, if you flop a top pair of Queens with a King kicker or a top pair of Kings with a Queen kicker you have an excellent playing hand and will win a lot of money over the course of a year in this situation. You will get payed off all the way to the river by hands which also have top pair but with a worse kicker. If someone had a better kicker they would have probably raised pre-flop. The reason you get paid off by a hand like King-Jack, King-Ten, or King-Little suited on a King-high flop is because your opponent does not know how big your King is or whether or not you even have a King. Similarily, with a Queen-high flop and a guy has limped in with Queen-Jack, Queen-Ten, Queen-Nine, or Queen-Little suited.
I agree, Jim. But my question was what you think about Mason's suggestion that in an unraised pot, it is unlikely an opponent who limped has a K or a Q, and therefore you can bet into a flop containing K high or Q high as a bluff. It seems I get away with this less and less, not because my opponents are catching on, but because they seem to have a K or Q more often despite having not raised pre-flop.
Andy,
I also find more are limping these days with the hands you describe (at the 20/40, I'm not quite ready for 30/60). However, Mason's play is still useful if the limpers came in from middle to late position. Most KQ type hands are still raising before the flop with these hands in those positions.
Regards,
Rick
I don't agree that in an unraised pot it is unlikely that an opponent has a King or Queen. Typical players will limp with KJ,KT, or any suited King. They will also limp in with QJ,QT,Q9, and many with any suited Queen especially from late position. This is a lot of hands. As an example, I was playing in a $40-$80 game with John Feeney at Oceans 11 and John limped in from the button with Qs5s behind an early limper and myself.
I do agree that a board of Kxx rainbow or Qxx rainbow is a good flop to bluff or semi-bluff against a small number of opponents (3 or less).
Jim,
I am starting to agree with your logic almost 100% here. Essentially, your opponent's mistakes are amplified tremendously in an unraised pot when you hold this hand.
Another advantage of limping with KQ is that if you do get raised behind and a the flop comes king or queen high (with several opponents), a probe bet into the raiser (especially with opponents in between) will often give you a good feel for where you are at. Anyway, in a typical game I have cut down on my raises with KQ before the flop, even in positions I normally like to be aggressive, such as the cutoff against two or three weak limpers. And if I play KQ early (the game has to be soft), I tend to just call.
Also, by not getting pot tied with a pre flop raise, KQ plays in such a straightforward manner that I believe you significantly reduce your swings. So even if we are wrong about the increase in expectation, this might make limping the better play in the typical game.
Regards,
Rick
I don't think that KQ was ever a raising hand in early poistion in most mid limit games. So, I am not sure that things have changed much (as Andy intimates). I have not noticed very many people limping with AK/AQ in early position.
holdemdude,
On RGP there was a post about a year and a half ago, which detailed what the optimal preflop round strategy for a hold'em game where betting was allowed only on the preflop round.
While this isn't exactly the kind game that one plays heads up, it is pretty close to the optimal opening strategy. Basically, they way you play is as such:
When you are opening from the small blind:
*) raise with any two broadway cards.
*) raise with suited cards whose high card is a Ten or greater.
*) raise with all your aces and kings, and your strong queens and strong jacks.
*) raise with all of your pairs.
*) call with most of the rest of your hands which are even remotely of value.
When you are in the big blind, and the small blind has limped, you can pretty much use the raising guidelines above.
When you are in the big blind and defending against a raise:
*) Reraise with all but your worst aces (i.e. A4o, A3o, A2o)
*) Reraise with your strong kings and strong queens.
*) reraise with all pairs 66+.
*) Call with most hands which are reasonable drawing hands (e.g. J8o, 53s, Q4s, 33), or have medium or better kickers (e.g. Q8o, T6o).
After the flop, play pairs aggressivly, and try to showdown most every pair. Play your draws aggressivly. If turn raises scare your opponent, raise often when you turn a draw. Often call with as little as A-hi. Bluff the river regularly when you've played the hand strongly.
Of course, this is a pretty simple guideline. It's probably best to keep it simple since the other thing you'll be doing while you play is adjusting how you play with respect to any leaks you see in your opponents game. Do they fold their big blind sometimes? Raise more. Do they fold the turn often, bluff more. Do they call you down more than they should? Don't bet your mediocre hands like small pairs, and A-hi, but bluff with your worst hands like 8-hi, value bet your medium pairs and better.
Good luck,
- Andrew
Andrew...I assume the same holds true when playing strickly heads-up. I consider my self tight-aggressive in full ring games, however I may be giving up pre-flop on some hands I should be playing...thanks... Would like to hear from some of you experts out there also...thanks
holdemdude,
The above strategy is *strictly* a heads-up strategy.
- Andrew
Anyone ever raised 8 times preflop in one session with AK, and not hit anything???
Three days ago I had AK three times in early position, raised and missed all three times. Net loss on the three hands combined: six small bets. Anymore if I get that hand up front and get callers behind, I glance at the flop and if I don't pair, I'm done. If you try that, you won't even notice how often that hand misses, just like you don't notice how often 6-7 misses.
Tommy
By the same token does ANYONE feel like they get AK as often as they get 72? Seems like 72 comes about 3 or 4 times as often as AK.
I once had AK four times in one ROUND, and didn't stack a chip.
This is a spot where whether you bet or check should be guided by many factors such as:
1. The texture of the flop
2. The position of the aggressive players left on the hand i.e. the farther away from you they are in a clockwise direction, the more likely you should be willing to bet
3. The chances of winning the pot outright or the chances of whittling the opposition down such that you can possibly steal on the turn even if you miss.
4. The size of the pot i.e. I might very well bet a hand like K2 suited in a medium size pot on a benign looking flop in order to make a hand like KJ fold so that I create 2 extra outs for myself.
4. Your current image
etc etc
It is specifically wrong to have a general rule in this situation. You can't always bet and you can't always checkcall and more importantly you shouldn't always do one thing or the other (particularly if you are willing to call 2 bets cold after checking). Let the extraneous factors dictate your course of action. An added benefit here is that you become harder to read because your opponents will have a tough time figuring out the the extraneous factors that have guided your course of action.
I often see a blind check raise a large field with a draw because they think they will win the money more than their fair share. While this play makes sense at first and may help to vary your play I think it is a mistake for two reasons.
Depending on the 'texture' of the flop/the players you are up against/your image, your raise out of the blind may not be respected one bit and you will be 3 bet by the original bettor, making your customers possibly fold on the spot or much more likely to fold on the turn because they have seen a lot of aggression from two players.
Even if you are not 3bet by the orginal bettor you have still put unnecessary pressure on others to leave the hand on the turn. Why not wait until the turn to put you money if you hit and keep your money if you don't? You can hardly expect to be paid as much on the turn if you check raise on the flop. If I am wrong I would appreciate being told so :D. -Ben
The point is that when the flush card comes in on the turn you are not going to get too many callers on the turn even if you had not raised on the flop. Thus, the reason to raise on the flop when everyone will call. It's a raise for value on the come.
But you do have to balance it with the likelihood of the original bettor 3 betting it and shutting out the field.
Is it ever correct to raise pre-flop and then fold when an oppponent re-raises? I've only seen one player do this, and I've seen him do it 3 times, to 3 separate opponents, and all 3 times he was, at the point he folded, heads up. This was in 30-60; at the time he folded there was $200 in the pot. He was in middle position all 3 times, so I don't think he had raised as an out-and-out steal.
It's possible that the preflop raiser had hands like AQ, KQo or KQs, or KJs, which meant that when reraised the reraiser probabaly has AA, KK, QQ, or AKs making him an underdog. THis is the only logic I have for his play.
I've made that play about 100 times, I'd guess, in the last three years. Typically I have something like K-8 or J-10. My reason for folding isn't the cards, it's the momentum shift. I tried to take charge and had that potential ripped away. Okay fine. Surrender.
One time I did it with JJ against one of the Bellagio regulars who was up here for a few weeks. Easy to remember such a drastic play! I was in the cutoff and he reraised from the button. This guy had not played a hand for a LONG time, at least five laps. I was getting ready to quit anyway, so I mucked face up hoping he would show. He did. KK. Yeah, I know, I probably should have looked at the flop to see if a jack came. But I didn't trust myself to fold for one bet on the flop if it came no big cards.
Tommy
Wouldn't the button have done the same thing with T-T?
Maybe in general he would, but at that moment in time I didn't think so. But let's say his range of hands was AA,KK,QQ and 10-10. With 10-10 he's likely to get me to lay down later unless I already decided before the flop to go to the river. I folded so I wouldn't have to make that choice.
Tommy
Usually when I do this, I have a hand like AT or AJ, and the three bettor is in later position or even worse out of the blinds. I would just as soon not get involved at that point.
Andy,
I thought I had an easy laydown late this afternoon. I'm in a relatively un-aggressive game where most of my advantage came on blind steals and out-playing weak opponents in smallish pots.
The three players to my left were all very tight (one was a prop), so I open raised with K9 offsuit in the cutoff. The button three-bet and the tight prop cold called out of the small blind. The big blind tossed and I threw my hand away. However, if I were head up or just against a blind allowing me to act last on all betting rounds, I would probably go with it. With bad position, two opponents are much harder to outplay than one with a hand that is easily dominated.
Regards,
Rick
Yes, your K-9 would seem useless against two opponents such as you describe. Your K-9 here is more in the nature of a steal attempt than the laydowns I've seen this other player make. When I raise from middle or early position, there may be times I don't want to see a re-raise ( maybe most of the time), but there aren't very many times I would lay down to one.
I saw this hand take place in a generally loose-aggresive 20-40 game on-line. Someone limps in, my friend raises with AK, a solid player threebets it, and an erratic player caps it, the limper folds, what do you think my friend should do? My friend decided to fold but I think it is a clear call in that spot, what do you guys think?
Shawn
A solid player who 3 bets will have AA,KK,QQ, or maybe AK suited. Who knows what the capper may have but having to pay another two bets to take a flop against a player marked with a big overpair or another AK is not desirable. I would call but folding may not be far wrong. The key is that you have to be 100% certain that the 3 bettor has AA,KK,QQ, or AK suited to make folding correct.
If you knew that the three bettor would always raise with with QQ as well as AA or KK or AK suited it would be wrong to fold AK getting those pot odds. If an ace came, there would be one combo you would lose to and nine you would beat. If a king came you would be a six to four favorite. Otherwise you fold. You are about a five to one dog to win this pot and future bets should not hurt you on average.
As a pure percentage play, you are a dog to 3 of his 4 possible hands and a tie with the 4th. You simply are NOT the favorite under ANY scenario.
I think this particular situation is borderline but I lean toward folding for two more bets cold when out of position. If I had the button it's an easier call.
I'm going to see a flop sitting in between a capper and 3 bettor. That's horrible. I don't want to be in that position even if I flop a K. There's almost no flop I could get that would make me fall in love. Two aces is about it. Everything else and I'm nervous, cautious, and sandwiched between two aggressive bettors.
I think I can pick better spots than this especially for two bets cold.
natedogg
You shouldn't love AAx flop really. Sure you'll probably win, but how much?
You don't have to be the favorite to make calling correct.
(n/t)
in limit poker, seeing the flop is understandable.
what if it's no-limit and there are a few raises (not all in, but substantial)
No brainer. You absolutely should not call ever. You may consider moving all-in but to do that against a re-raiser and a re-re-raiser you would have to somehow have seen their cards.
To call with AK from out of position with another raiser behind you still to act would be absolute no-limit suicide.
natedogg
When a player posts for a small bet in the cutoff seat, I assume that my preflop strategy should change a little bit. Assuming that I am playing in a pretty loose/aggressive 15-30 game what sort of hands should I now play that I didn't before? Thanks, Ben
By loose-aggressive, I assume you mean that there's a lot of pre-flop raising and flop-betting and raising. If there is, you want to avoid drawing hands and tend to play only premium quality hands. The poster, in effect, raises the ante, which means you loosen up slightly since there's more money to be won. Of course the poster is in better shape than the blinds because of his position, so it's not quite the same as if there were three blinds up front.
In the games I play, the presence of a poster tends to make loose-aggressive games even more aggressive as the players, correctly, think that there is more reward for a successful pre-flop raise (by successful, I mean where both blinds and the poster fold). So this tends to couteract what I said about loosening up some because the pots tends to be raised even more often than normal.
Wildddd 10-20 game
get AKo 2nd after UTG
UTG is one of the rare good player on this table and he raises... i just call
2 other cold call (both weak passive) and the maniac on the BB just call (which means he have unsuited crap. he would have 3 bet with anything near decent.
5 players
Flop: 7-7-7 (rainbow hehe)
BB bet UTG fold i raise, trying to isolate the maniac with what im quite sure is the best hand. one of the weak passive cold calls 2 (now im 90% he has a pocket pair, hes not tricky to check raise with the nuts and kinda predictable) and bb call
Turn: a low blank
BB check (100% sure now he has nuttin, i check too, button bet, BB fold (wow he fold before the river!!!) I call
River queen
we both check and he shows JJ to take the pot
First question: Did i play this hand good? Second question: If he bet the river, do you call? Like i said, i rarely saw him make any move but it happened. ill prolly would have folded...
Ty for help
Charlie
Be wary when you have more than one opponent left after a set flops. Someone usually already has (at least) a full house.
I am the big blind with 8-10 off suit. There are six players besides myself that call the flop. The flop comes 2 7 9 rainbow. I bet out. The next player to act raises and the entire field calls the raise. I reraise thinking that I am getting 6-1 on my money and I have a 32% chance of winning the pot. Is this a good move? Everyone called...as I knew with certainty they would.
The turn is a Q still rainbow. I bet out...hoping some would fold. EVeryone calls. The river is a 4. I check and no one bets. A pair of 9s wins the pot with several grumbling about the bets I cost them
I dont care if I cost them bets...but did I play the hand correctly? Your thoughts are appreciated.
On the turn betting hoping people will fold is futile. There is no chance that you will be able to bet your way to victory in this pot, with 7 way action for 3 bets on the flop. On the other hand, if you were sure everyone would call, betting is fine because you are still making money if all your outs are good (I leave it to you to know whether it is likely someone has KT).
Why three bet the flop? Calling instead of reraising would allow you to check raise when your do hit your card. Betting the turn or a semi bluff won't work. If they called three bets they're committed to the river. Calling the raise and check raising when your card hits is your best course of action.
I might check call the turn since J is not to the nuts anymore(K-T).If someone raised and some folded it would lower your payoff. Before that the overlay justified your raises.
Betting out on the flop is debatable. Were you happy with the raise behind you? In a reasonable game (perhaps this wasn't), the raise behind you would have limited the field considerably, thus reducing your implied odds should you hit your hand. Of course, if you were should you'd get callers regardless of the raise behind you, betting is not incorrect.
Betting the turn is wrong (IMO) for the same reason. You're not going to win the pot here (and probably wouldn't be able to steal it on the river either), so you're still hoping to hit your straight. Your bet on the turn again risks limiting the field if you're raised, and it seems very likely that there will still be a bet even if you check (so you could get the money in the pot without the risk of a field-limiting raise).
Jason
I'm not quite sure I would want "some to fold" on the turn. You're not going to win this pot by betting everyone out on the turn and river. The queen was as a bad card for you in that you are not longer drawing to the nuts, plus you can no longer make top pair with your T. You've got to make your straight to win the pot (although it's possible a T could win it).
Is poster correct that he has a 32% chance of winning the pot on the flop?
I think the poster has around a 32% chance of making a straight which in all likelyhood will win.
P(open ending straight not getting there)=
39(38)/ 47(46)= 68.5%
I aggree w/the comments of the others as you shouodn't bet the turn, and the flop bet is ill advised if the player behind you will raise and thin the field (however his raise didn't thin the field)...
I knew with certainty in the game a raise would not thin the field. If I had it all to do over, I would have check-raised the turn rather than betting out. I could have trapped for more money in the pot that way.
And to an earlier posters question, yes, I loved the raise on the flop as I watched everyone call. I am getting 6-1 on a 3-1 (approximately) shot to win. Maximizing these sorts of situations...regardless of result...is how one makes money playing poker.
This play is fine -
On the flop, you want as much $ in there as you can get -period.
The tunr is a different story. A T will rarely win for you now. A bluff will never work, and 4 of your outs may be no good. The other problem is that someone may have the same hand as you or some of the cards you need in their hands. This was a problem all along, but it is especially the case now that everyone is playing. Is there a TJ out there? What was the winning hand- a 9J, or a 9T? does someone have an 86?
I think on the turn it is best to slow it down, but it probably doesn't matter much what you do...
Good luck.
Dan Z.
Not much point to this story, but thought some might enjoy it.
15-30. One limper, I raise on the button with A-Ks. Both blinds and limper all call. Flop comes J-8-2 rainbow. Small blind mucks, big blind mucks, limper mucks, all before I act!
How nice! This usually happens only when you flop quads.
I've never seen this happen en masse. I sometimes muck to a preflop raiser when heads up. When I do, it's because I know the player will bet, and I won't call, so why waste everyone's time? Next hand.
Here's a reason. Next time you check (i.e. don't muck) heads up with him, you may be giving away some info that you intend to call/raise.
Yeah everything we do provides info. Good post.
Jimminie, where is this game I want to play!!
Big L.A. poker barn. One blind was a complete novice, simply giving money away. Worst player I've ever seen at that level.
I've seen good players slowplay pre-flop by just calling an early position raise with AA or KK if no one else has entered the pot yet. Under what circumstances do you guys think this is a good play?
This seems like a good play if there are many players yet to act behind you because you could entice them to make a -EV call, whereas they would likely fold for threebets.
Also if someone raises and you are in the SB with AA or KK do you ever just call, trying to make the big blind make the mistake of calling as well (and also for the deceptive value you gain)?
Finally I rarely three-bet pre-flop heads-up from the BB, even with a premium hand because my opponent has position and they virtually always bet the flop if I check which allows me to regain that lost bet by checkraising on the flop. Does this seem correct?
thanks,
Shawn Keller
I feel that limping in with aces or kings in early position is a bad move. The reason for raising is to try and limit the amount of cards you must face. If you don't raise and get eight callers there aren't going to be many cards in the deck that won't hurt you.
As far as three betting with aces or kings in the BB that would depend on the amount of people calling the flop. More than four or five players makes it tough for you when out of position.
Finally, raising from the blind heads up with a big hand would depend on how the other player recieves raises. If he/she is willing to play it out with top pair regaurdless of the raise, basically loose, than extracting more bets early is the way to go. If he folds with any sign of strength then deception is probably the best. Heads up the rules change. You need to play the player as much if not more than your cards.
This play works best when facing a tight raiser with a typical raising range of AA-TT, AK/AQ. The problem with 3-betting is that there are so few hands with which you can justifiably 3-bet, namely AA, KK, QQ and AK, and the latter two are borderline. Cold-caling also forces your opponent to play the aggressor after the flop when you're ahead, which is great.
If the raiser has a wider range of hands you'd probably prefer to isolate him with a wider range of hands, so you'd want to 3-bet with your best hands as well.
Shawn,
I always reraise with KK and AA to give protection to hands like QQ and AKs which I usually three bet. But if you don't three bet hands like QQ and AKs then I like the the smooth call of Aces and Kings about 1/3 of the time for deception purposes.
I do like the slowplay in the BB heads-up. I think this play nets you a greater profit than the extra small bet you gain by three betting.
Jamie
IMHO, good players aren't hoping to entice players behind them to call, because even with Aces or Kings, you want two opponents at the most. I very occasionally make this play when players behind me telegraph folds. That allows me to maximize my hand with good position and deception against the raiser.
Another thing to consider is that AA and KK are the only hands you shouldn't be satisfied winning the blinds with (as pointed out in the "Essay" section). I'm assuming that one or two additional bets would be plenty of profit. Notice that once someone has raised, you are guaranteed at least three extra bets if you reraise and win the pot at some point. With this in mind, I almost always reraise to narrow the field, and try to win several bets from the raiser with these hands.
Greetings,
Here are a few hands where some criticized my play on the turn and the river.
These were all from the same 10/20 game.
1) I raise UTG, a maniac cold calls in late position as does the weak player in the BB.
FLop is A8 2 rainbow. BB check I bet call call .
The turn is an offsuit T.
I bet and get raised (weak player folds) , I reraise and he makes it 4 bets. I just called as a)I have seen this guy smooth call w/A's in situations like this (at least once that evening) b) he knows Im not going to three bet the turn w/o a huge hand, c) I think i was somewhat in shock as I have never been 4 bet on the turn before.
The river was a 2. I check and called.
2) I raise in midposition w/ AQo next player cold calls (a player who has noticed some of steal raises are w/suboptimal standards but didn't seem to notice they were steal raises (A2o, K7o)), and BB calls.
The flop is QQ x w/ two clubs.
Check, I bet call fold.
Turn is another small blank (not a club).
I bet and get raises, I reraise heh just calls.
River is Tc. I check and called.
3) Same player as in hand 2 raises UTG. I have AA in BB. All fold to me. I reraise (maybe this isn't neccesarily automatic, bc this wasn't a steal raise).
flop is 7 5 4 rainbow. I bet he calls.
Turn is another 7. I bet and get raised.
I call.
River is antther 5.
Again I check and called.
I should note I usually don't play this bad (weak), but having not played holdem in a while and get monster hands after monster hands (and showing them down to win), I was expecting when I was gettin this kind of heat I was behind.
Ill post the results later!
All comments appreciated.
One more:
4) I limp early w/ 33. 7 see the flop of
6 4 3 rainbow. I bet next calls next raises next reraises (an aggressive player who plays his draws aggressively), all fold to me I cap, all fold to aggressive player who calls.
Turn is 2 making a two flush. I check and call.
River is a blank not pairing the board. Again I check and call.
All comments appreciated! I post the results soon!
LOL, imo i think you lost all 5 hands.
TT in hand 1 .
Hand #3 - When you get raised when the boards pairs the 7's, I think your opponent was just slowplaying his big pair. I'd either re-raise here or check-raise the river.
1) 88 2)Ac2c 3) KK 4) 66.
Seems I need sexier titles to get mroe response but thanks for those who responded.
10-20 Online Holdem.
1) I get dealt KK in the cutoff. Early position raises, all fold to player on my right who calls. I reraise to get blinds out, but button calls. Everyone else calls. Flop comes Jc 8c 4h. Checked to me i bet, call, original raiser raises, call, i reraise, fold, ep caps, call, I call.
Turn is a 2s. He bets out, fold, I call. (should i raise here given his aggression on the flop?) this is my main question.
River pairs the 4. He checks I bet, he calls. I take the pot.
My main question is should I have popped him on the turn.
No.
No, since u dont know him...
He might hold AA or JJ or even 88 sometimes and would have played it exactly the same way.
Now, just write in a excel document that "Mr. X" cap the betting on the flop with nothing better than a pair in a shorthanded pot and be ready when youll face a situation like this again against this player!
Charlie
Middle limper, solid player raises from late, and I 3-bet from the sb with Ad,Ac. Both call.
The flop= 8h,4h,3s
I bet, both called.
The turn was a Qc
I bet, middle player called and late player raised. I re-raised, middle player called and late player capped it at 4 bets. I folded.
The river blanked. Check, bet, fold. Late player flashed QQ.
I'm trying not to be results orientated. How was my 3 bet on the turn? How was my fold getting 16 to 1? The fact I even need to ask these questions shows how much I have to learn. I question whether I possess the knowledge/experience to mix read with pot/implied odds when making these decisions. Thanks.
Kevin
I would give the late player some respect, though with that board I can't blame you for reraising. Maybe he had AQ??? But his 4 bet strongly suggests a set to me. Tough to lay down, I dunno if i would in this situation. But i think it would be the best play.
I certainly would have played it that strong....probably couldnt have laid it down either...but that is a hole in my game.
I would have played it the same way, but there is no way I would fold that hand. You are getting 17:1 on the turn, because the middle position player will almost surely call. You are only a 22:1 dog to hit an Ace on the river, and if that happens, you will make a lot of money on the river. That, combined with the chance that the capper has either 2 pair (in which case you have a ton of outs) or a hand like AhQh make this an easy call.
I'm a 22:1 dog getting (I counted 16:1) to hit an ace on the river, but I can't like the Ah. If I snag an As, I thought I could get maybe 2 more bets from QQ (and maybe not even that). I agree he could've had Ah,Qh. But I thought it was likely the first player had a suited Ah, which is why I am posting this hand. Does this mean I can figure I have 2 clean outs, since the Ah is likely in someone's hand? Thanks AFish.
22 TO 1 DOG AT BEST , 16 TO 1 ON YOUR MONEY , SOLID PLAYER RAISED, AS THE SOLID PLAYERS CHIPS HIT THE TABLE THE HAND WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCKED, HE OBVIOUSLY KNOWS WHO YOU ARE AND HOW YOU PLAY, RAISE FROM THE SMALL BLIND, YOUR LUCKY IT WASNT ME , I WOULD HAVE SMOOTH CALLED AND LET YOU DRAW TO YOUR 2 OUTER, BUT AS YOU KNOW THAT IS HOW I PLAY, THAT PLAY YOU MADE AGAINST M THE OTHER DAY WAS BRILLIANT, YOU ARE NOT FAR BEHIND THAT GUY IN WISCONSIN.GL2U MY FRIEND.
Thanks Sean, but I'm not so sure that I didn't make a poor play (only to get lucky), in the hand you are referring to. At the very least it was borderline. : ) See ya soon.
Kevin
Seems like everybody agrees your play on the turn. But not me.
I will call the raise on the turn, then check and call on the river. You already showed your strength. I read your post before, you have tendency to overlay the big pocket pair. Seems you have to make 3 or 4 bets on the flop or turn with big pair. Sometime you have to give some respect to other players.
Just my thought. Like your post
Interesting question. I agree that the Ace of hearts is not an out, as the cold caller must have it or be drawing to hearts. Your fold can't be wrong by much, if at all, but I would've called and check-called on the river, assuming the flush doesn't hit. After all, couldn't the raiser have KK, as well as AhQh? Still, if you know the player's aggressiveness, you may feel that the latter hand is unlikely.
Cero-
Actually, I thought the latter hand was more likely than KK. KK would've been a pretty tough 4 bet.
Thanks for commenting Reader. It probably seems that I tend to overplay big pairs, because that's when they end up here on 2+2 : ). But I don't always play them this strongly. Here, I thought re-raising had a couple of advantages. For one thing, I may still have the best hand. If so, I collect 2 more big bets from the flush draw. I also thought it might be a combination (2-way) re-raise. That is, the solid player might pay off with a worse hand, or he might fold if he held AA (rare, but possible). If he didn't have QQ, he'd have to be concerned about me having it. btw- I did have a great deal of respect for this player which I thought was mutual. That's why I folded for 4 bets.
Kevin,
I don't think I would have reraised the turn. I save that money for a river call and EXPECT to be shown QQ. Why try to drive out the limper(who likely is on a flush draw) when you're probably beat by the raiser? You said the pre-flop raiser was solid AND he has to put you on a big hand to 3 bet from the SB. If you 3 bet from the SB with AK or JJ then that's a different story. Otherwise, I think he has to put you on AA,KK. Knowing that, what would he check raise the turn with that you beat? Most likely nothing, possibly AhQh but I don't think so.
I think that is even more unlikely once he caps it. Therefore, I think you made a tough but correct laydown. If the limper flopped a set, he has played them horribly. It's highely likely he is on a flush draw therefore the Ah is either gone or not an out. The last Ace is probably your only out. 44:1?
I counted 17 BB in the pot, counting the big blind's dead money. I could be wrong. So I agree with your fold. I think it hinges entirely upon your assessment of the solid player.
Which might bring up another question: Would a solid player cap the turn with AhQh?
Nice post Kevin
Jamie
Jamie,
You asked: "Would a solid player cap the turn with AhQh?"
A lot of players described as solid in these threads have more gamble in them than you think. But perhaps there is a method to their madness.
Many “solid” players with AhQh might cap the turn, and in some case so would an AhQx along with a KhKx. The idea from the “solid” players perspective would be why not cap the turn since it will make it very unlikely the river would be bet unless a heart brings the middle player to life, and even then the middle player might check hoping the turn capper will bet the river. Then the solid player who capped the turn checks the river (unless he makes his flush with AhQh). In the end it costs the “solid” player the same, since it can't be that wrong to make the initial raise on the turn with any of the above hands, and a call of the reraise on the turn is mandatory with either AQ and only moderately wrong with the KK (remember, if the solid player has AhQx, he is likely to put the SB on KK rather than AA or QQ, and he has plenty of outs to this hand).
Regards,
Rick
Thanks for commenting Jamie- A couple of replies...
"Why try to drive out the limper(who likely is on a flush draw) when you're probably beat by the raiser?"
I wasn't trying to drive him out, but make him pay more for his draw. I also wasn't sure at this point that I had to be beat by the raiser.
"If you 3 bet from the SB with AK or JJ then that's a different story."
This was also part of my reason to 3-bet the turn. I felt I was slightly less predictable than the solid player. While I should be marked for a big pair from the sb after 3-betting pre-flop, I would still make this play with some other hands just often enough to where it would be a mistake to hold onto this read stubbornly. In other words, it wouldn't be often, but I still could have the hands you stated plus some others. btw- He didn't check/raise the turn, he raised and re-raised.
Thanks again Jamie.
This is a good one to think about away from the table. Suppose that the raiser has either AhQh or QQ, and that the caller is on a flush draw.
I did the following calculations on these assumptions:
Case 1) raiser has AhQh. You have seen 6 cards, and we have assumed what the raisers cards are specifically, and we are assuming that the caller has 2 hearts. This leaves 42 cards unaccounted for. 9 of of them make your hand a loser on the river (7 unaccounted for hearts and 2 queens). Assume that if any of these cards hits, that you will fold on the river.
So your EV for calling in this case is 17*34/42-9/42=13.1 big bets
Case 2) raiser has QQ. Assume if you call the turn, then you will call 1 bet on the river no matter what. I realize that you are smarter than that, but this will be sufficient for now. Also assume that if your hand is good that you will get two big bets on the end. You could quibble over this, but it hardly matters since you only have 1 out.
So your EV for calling in this case is 19*1/42-2*41/42=-1.5 big bets.
There are 3 ways the raiser could have QQ and one way he can have AhQh. and you are getting 13.1 to 1.5. So you should call.
Steve
Steve-
I greatly appreciate you're taking the time to provide me with these calculations. I have saved your response for further study!
Thanks again!
Kevin
He can have AhAs as well...
AhQh, AhAs or QQ.
lars
Kevin,
I'm convinced that if the results were not shown in your lead post and the question was “What do I do after the solid player caps the turn after I reraised?” we would have had many responses indicating that the best thing to do is call him down (unless a heart hits and the other player comes to life).
The assumptions that Steve Fiete makes in the thread are reasonable. I don't have time to check the math but it looks good at a glance. So I would call him down also, but would I have without looking at Steve's analysis :-).
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
I would have like to see the post without results too because that may have influenced my answer even I tried to not let it. I think in practice I would have not laid them down. Oh well, I talk a mean game. :)
Thanks,
Jamie Collins
I think you played it perfectly. Reminds me of a drastic hand the other night where the turn got capped and I was about to make a similar laydown, except on the river, and the pot was monstrously huge. Didn't have to cuz I hit instead!
I had QQ in the blind. UTG raised and six players called and I just called.
Flop: A-Q-x, two of a suit. (<-- We need a word that means that!)
Capped, five-way.
Turn: J
I bet, one fold and two call. The button raised. I three bet. One caller and the button capped it. No question, he had the straight. You'll have to trust me that this was certain, not just because I knew the player, but because, like you, I got four-bet on the turn. That's a pretty sure sign that improvement is needed. I was going to fold on the river if I didn't fill up.
River: I didn't fill up. I hit quads!
I bet, got called, and the button folded his straight while exposing it just a touch. No matter what had come on the river, one of us was going to make a good laydown. That's often how it is with capped turns.
Tommy
.
10-20 HE I've been getting crap the whole night and get dealt JJ in middle position. All fold to me i raise.
Next player calls, rest fold to poster who calls, rest fold.
Flop is 6 9 10. 2 hearts. I bet it out, get raised and reraised. Back to me i figure im up against a set or at least two pair so i fold. Turn Jh. River K. Winenr takes it down with two pair KTo. Reraiser had Jd8d. hmmm. i just sat down here, so should i have called 2 bets cold with jacks on the flop?
I would with an overpair since there are so many drawing hands out there when the flop contains both a two flush and a Ten-Nine. However, folding may not be far wrong since the Jack of Hearts may not be an out and any Jack puts three cards in a straight zone (J-T-9). There will be a significant percentage of the time when you are beat and the rest of the time when you are ahead you can be easily overtaken. In this specific example, any Queen or Seven beats you with two cards to come. If the winner had a single Heart, than at the river any Heart beats you that does not pair the board.
I am not sure I would beat myself up too much on this one.
I am having an extremely tough time with a 10-20 hand that I played recently. A good friend of mine thinks my play was crazy, so any comments would be appreciated.
We are seven-handed, and I am in the BB with AhJd. My read on several of the players is fairly strong and accurate. Middle position player open-raises. He is a loose raiser who will raise with many hands to open (as little as JT or any 2 suited), but will play quite straightforwardly after the flop. The button, another loose caller/bettor, calls the raise, as do I. Would *anyone* fold here?
Flop comes down Qh 4h Jd, giving me middle pair with an overcard kicker and backdoor flush possibility. I check. Preflop raiser now checks. This check is almost *definitely* not a slowplay, and I take it as an announcement that his hand has missed completely (although he may have a small pocket pair and decide to check-call). The button bets. In this spot, the button will bet any two cards, although I give him some sort of pair or draw since he did cold call the raise preflop. I consider check-raising, but rather decide to call, as I believe the preflop raiser's hand is basically hopeless or drawing quite thin (as he usually is). I call.
Turn: Qh 4h Jd 10c
I pick up a gutshot, with middle pair and an overcard kicker. I check, knowing for sure the turn will be bet by the button. Preflop raiser checks, button bets as predicted, I call, preflop raiser mucks. Would *anyone* have folded here?
River card is an ugly 9h. I check, and the button bets. I call, as he is quite capable of bluffing in this spot, especially being the aggressor. He shows KcJc and takes the pot. Would anyone have folded the river against this loose bettor?
Finally, in discussing the hand with my friend, I pointed out that my hand was in fact good on the flop and turn, making my calls appear correct. He argues that if I felt my hand was good, I should have put in a bet/raise somewhere along the line. My feeling was that since the button would bet many pairs/draws/A-high in this situation, the check-call seemed correct. If my hand was good I gain by letting the button bet it for me, and if I'm beat I avoid losing the maximum. I felt folding would have been extremely weak, except *maybe* on the river, but even then probably still.
Comments are *greatly* appreciated.
Thank you.
You played this hand like I would have liked you to play it if I was the button. You put no pressure back on the button to give him the opportunity to fold. Then he makes his straight on the end probably thinking he had the best hand all the way when you didnt play back on him. Playing the hand in the first place was ok against these type of players (an easy muck against a solid MP raise) only if your read on these 2 players were as you say. However you must also rememeber that you are out of position every round. I would have definitely popped him on the flop with 2nd high pair and best kicker with also the backdoor nut flush/straight draw. If he plays back at you then you can easily release your hand (although it is the best one) and your loss is only 4 small bets. If I have an accurate read on someone like you say you had, I believe a check raise on the flop was mandatory.
I would have played it aobut the way you did. You took essentially a bad beat. They happen. I might have bet out on the flop except the preflop raiser. I disagree with the other poster and I would not have check raised. The main reason is the fact that MP raiser MAY have QQ and slow playing it. You may in fact get three bet after your raise. What would you do then?
Just my thoughts. I dont think you misplayed the hand.
Yes, Matt, I see your point. MP pre flop raiser could have QQ. However, there are numerous hands a player of this caliber could check raise with that are far less than premium (QJ, KQ, etc...) Remember this is a seven handed game and MP has been observed to bring it in with a raise with any suited cards, then play fairly straight forward after the flop. Like I said before, if DD is 3-bet after his check raise on the flop, by either MP or the button, the hand can be easily released and his investment is only 4 small bets. I still think if he believes he has an acurate read on a player(s), the correct play in this situation would be to check raise the flop.
Where I play, when you turn over your jack of diamonds and there's another jack of diamonds on the board, everybody gets his money back. ;)
I would have checkraised the flop, since MP missed and the button would bet a lot of hands worse than yours. Assuming MP folded and the button called, I would have led on the turn and check called the river. Note that I don't see the button laying down the hand, so you were destined to lose money.
10-20, several loose players.
Two players (including the button) limp. I am in the SB with Qd9d, and I call half a bet. BB checks. Flop is Ah6dQh. I check, checked around to button who bets. I raise, all fold, button calls.
Turn card is the As. I bet, button calls.
River card is the 8d. I check, button bets, I call.
He shows Ad8c and takes the pot.
Comments?
He played awfully timidly. I would have had to raise at least on the river. What did he think you had?
Also, I dont like the check raise on the flop. The value of your hand is hitting your off card...the 9, going runner runner diamonds or tripping up. YOu want extra players in the field when you hit one of them. Unless you really were confident that the Q with a 9 kicker was the best hand, the raise is unadvised in my opinion.
Both of your messages today have mentioned very loose play. Don't think that because you catch a piece of the flop that you will always have the best of it with loose players. What could he have been calling you with? Most likely a weak ace (as he was). And even if it was a Q, you're most likely to be dominated with your 9 kicker. He may have not check raised you on the turn thinking you would fold but would bet out on the river and get you for a raise then. I agree with Matt on this one.
I would have just check-folded on the flop. The second best play would be to bet out. Check-raising is a mistake, because there is not enough of a chance that you will win the pot with that move.
The two suited board makes it more likely that the bettor will have a flush draw. This plus the chance that you are against and A is too much to go after this small pot with a check-raise.
Steve
In loose games, many people play any Ace. Accordingly, I would assume that I am behind on the flop. When I'm behind and have no chance of driving out everyone, I just check call. That is what I would have done here. There are enough potential outs (hitting 2 pair, trips, or a runner runner flush) to make it correct to take another card. I would have folded on the turn.
i would of just folded after the flop you were dominated the whole time. your raise just killed your pot odds that you needed to be in the hand to begin with
i was wondering what what hand you would call out of the the small blind.
1. small suited connectors
2. medium suited connectors
3. Face card and a medium card unsuited
4. Face card and a medium card suited for 3and4 how high of a face card do you call with
5. face and a small card
i thank you all for your answears in advance
I'm no expert, but I'm sure the answer depends on the the number of players already in the pot to make it worthwhile to call in the SB. Of course, I'm assuming that there has been no raising. If we assume that there have already been 5 or 6 limpers and that the BB doesn't raise much, then I'd probably call with (2) medium suited connectors and (4) at least a Qxs. The only other cards from your list that I'd consider calling with are (1) small suited connectors if there are more than 6 limpers. These are mainly drawing hands that can potentially hit the nuts and are most profitable when there are a lot of players. Of course, these drawing hands can also become expensive.
P.S. I probably wouldn't call with A-rag offsuit. You didn't put this in your list. Are you assuming that A-rag offsuit is an automatic call here?
no i don't play it
With 3+ limpers and a passive BB:
I would play any two suited, 54+, 75+, T7+, Ax, K8+, Q9+, and any pair.
With 2 limpers and a passive BB:
I would limit it to 54s+, 75s+, T7s+, Axs, Kxs, Qxs, 54, 97, J8, Ax, K8+, Q9+, and any pair.
With only 1 limper and a passive BB:
I would limit it to 54s+, 75s+, Axs, K8s+, Q9s+, 76+, T8+, A9+, KT+, and any pair.
If the BB is aggressive, I would tighten up considerably.
when do you play Ax suited,
I usually play it in middle late position in an unraised pot. The reason i ask is because it has not been a very profitable play for me. Actually i have not hit a flush with one in over 30 hours. I think that i have hit one or two flushes in that time but thats besides the point.
It depends on the game you play in. If you play in a loose passive game you can play A-xs from any position. As the game gets tighter/more aggressive it's best to play it from later positions.
If playing it early you must play well post flop. Be prepared to dump it if you flop top pair and meet resistance.
In a passive game i will play A4s or A5s up front, but if there is much raising i want 4 or 5 callers in first before i call.
I play 3-6, 6-12, and 9-18 about two times a week at Lucky Chances in Colma. I've been doing fairly well as of late, usually taking home at least a rack in the 3-6 and 6-12 games after one to three hours of play. My profitability at 9-18 has not been as good (about half a rack in the same time frame). Playing my tight/aggressive "A" game has really built up my confidence level and I feel that I'm ready to take a shot at the next level.
For those of you who play at the 20-40 level at LC, could please give me some pointers. For example, are the players a lot tougher than at the 9-18 level? Are they tighter and more aggressive? I notice that some of the players there are guys that I've played with before in the lower limit games. Any need to make big ajustments in my strategy?
Also, how much should I buy-in for and how much money should I bring altogether? I was thinking for a $500 buy-in with maybe an extra couple hundred in my pocket. Does this sound reasonable?
Your comments are much appreciated.
I always buy in for a min. of 25 BB regardless of the game. In a 20/40 game that's $1000. The surest chip burner is having too few chips and always being on the verge of going all in.
The game is typically much looser and more aggressive than 9-18. You will get bluffed often, anyone coming in first near the button will raise, etc.
The variance increase can be stunning, more than just the multiple of dollars. Even our resident pros take many $1K plus hits over short periods. So how much you buy in depends very much on two factors:
1. How much you have in your bankroll 2. How hard is it going to be emotionally / tilt wise for you to take three consecutive losses of x dollars.
Having done it 6 weeks ago with $1,000 buy-ins, I recommend $600 and going home when you're down to $120 or less. This is roughly buying in for a rack at 6-12, an amount of chips you know how to manage. Also, I'd wait til you're running well one night at 6-12 or 9-18 so you're only out $200-300 if you go broke. Hold off on swinging for the fences until you've built your confidence, medium limit game, and bankroll.
And lastly, read HEPFAP again. It was written for that limit (albeit a somewhat tighter game) and will remind you to delete several loose game adjustments that you've had to make to be successful at those crazy 6-12 games and to make some changes in your play of medium pairs, AJ, etc.
Good luck!
$700 is less than 20 BB. I think this is very short, even for "taking a shot." My SD is 12 BB/hr, which means I can only count on being in the game for about 2 hours.
My advice is to stick with the 9-18 until you:
1) have demonstrated a 1+ BB/hr rate over at least 200 hours.
2) have a BR of over 10k.
But if you do take a shot, knock 'em dead! :-)
Zooey
Jace,
Please do come up and say hi!
The biggest thing you have going against you, which happens to be the biggest thing I have going for me, is game selection. It takes time to get to know the players.
I like Matt's idea of hopping in the 20-40 after you already won a rack at the smaller games. Yeah, it shouldn't matter, but it does, having a recent cushion.
Your toughest opponent will not be the other players, it will be yourself. Moving up is scary. I know that from dropping down and back up about a hundred times. lol
Many of the players see many flops but do not underestimate their trickiness or hand-reading ability. You will be sizing up dozens of players over a short time frame. They only have to focus on one, you. Again, an inherent hurdle.
General advice: Play the tightest game you've ever played until you get to know the players. Buy-in for two racks, don't grimace when you take a bad beat, be strong and look strong.
Tommy
Tommy,
We've actually seen each other before, but have never really spoken to each other. I'll be sure to introduce myself the next time I see you.
In fact, we were on the same table in one of LC's weekly no limit tourneys a while back. I remember the floorman saying that you wrote an article in one of the recent poker magazines. You were really friendly at the table and I made some light-humored remark about your large chip stack (especially pointing out the many $5 chips that you had). Believe it or not, I remember the one hand that you and I were in heads-up. I raised about 2x the BB with pocket 10s and you made it about 5x the BB to go. I pondered for a moment and called. The flop came JQx and I checked. You pushed all-in and I folded, putting you on AQ or better. I sure as hell hope that you weren't bluffing...LOL! The only hand I could have beat was AK and I wanted no part of that hand anymore. I wonder what would have happened if I pushed all-in first!
I went to your Web site and I think your articles are hilarious. Keep up the great work! For those of you who haven't been there, the URL is:
http://hometown.aol.com/tomium/
Thanks Jace.
Sorry I don't remember the hand from the tourny, but it smells like a bluff from here.
See you soon,
Tommy
You have to have at least a thousand dollars with you to play 20-40, if you ask me. If you can't afford to lose 1000 dollars then DON'T play 20-40. 20-40 is a big step up from 9-18.
Have you tried 10-20 or 15-30?
I won't play in a game unless I have at least 25BB with me and I usually buy in for that amount. I prefer to have 50BB on hand.
If you play with scared money or short money you will lose it.
-SmoothB-
To all you guys that responded,
Thanks for the quick responses. In regards to bankroll, losing a couple grand will not put me in a bad financial situation. (Of course, I don't like the prospects of losing something like three to four grand in the next couple of days.) I wouldn't say that the buy-in issue is a big deal for me, but it does make me think. I wouldn't be playing with scared money, but I do have to reconsider how much money to bring. I really like the strategy of starting out at 6-12 or 9-18 and if I do well, take those stacks to the bigger game. If my schedule permits, I think I'll drop by tomorrow and give it a shot. Wish me luck and I hope to see of you guys there! Just don't pick on the newbie too much...lol!
Im in the early middle position with AKd
utg raises(fairly tight solid player, straight forward player)
I reraise, everyone folds flop is Qc 9c 3s
utg checks I bet he calls At this point i figure him for the same hand as I have but at least one clover.
the turn is a kc he bets out i call ( this confirms my suspicion and i call.
River is a 6c
he bets out What do you do now?
Mathematically, he has the Ac 1/3 of the time, assuming he started with AK. Pokerwise, he has the Ac 95% of the time. He can see those four clubs too and is probably playing you for AQ.
Hey the pot is pretty small so go with your read and fold.
Regards.
Here's a hand from a discussion group that is creating a lot of heat. How would you play it?
Your seated on the button in a fairly tight 15/30 game. The table is relatively fish-free; everyone is at least a decent player. There are 2 callers to you and you raise with AA. Both blinds and limpers call. Pot is $150.
Flop K-Q-J with 2 hearts (your aces are black)
SB (a tight unimaginative player) leads out. BB calls, 1st limper raises, 2nd limper cold calls. $240 in pot and $30 to you. What's your action? The 1st limper is fairly aggressive and would have open raised with AK, KQ or anything that makes a set.
Well it's very likely one or both of my remaining aces are in other players hands, and very unlikely a raise on my part will chase anyone from the pot. I think I'm already beat and if not, certainly a dog to the field, so I fold up shop here.
Winger,
Here is my very brief take. It is almost certain you are beat now and your outs might be at best for half the pot when a ten falls or make you expensive second best when an ace falls (giving a ten a straight). If the board pairs on the turn you might beat two pair but you could also get beat by trips or a full. You are facing heat and will probably continue to do so throughout the hand. You also do not have a backdoor heart draw and a heart could make one of four opponents a flush.
I think it is an easy fold and wonder what the debate is about.
Regards,
Rick
easy fold i think
You're likely (very) to be beat. Not many outs. Figure at least 1 player is on a str8 draw and another Ace out there.
Maybe playing for 1/2 or 1/3 if you get lucky and hit a T.
Fold
Too many bad things can happen on the turn and river and not enough good ones. If a heart or any card 9 or higher comes, your aces don't look too good. And it;s likely at least one of your aces is not available, and if one comes on the turn, you're likely still in 2nd place.
I can't think of a reason to play.
I don't see a debate here either. The flop is limpers' paradise. The original bettor is still to act so even the two bets cold to you is an uncertain price. Get on with it. Next hand.
Regards.
You simply fold. To many ways to get beat.
I think the pot is big enough to take a card off even given all of the negative factors (yes I know I'm calling a raise cold on the flop).
A clear fold is not that easy. Let's analyze this hand a bit. You really only have three clear outs (assuming that 10h will lose to a flush) to win or split the pot. With 47 unseen cards, you have 3:44 odds of making your hand (approx 1:15. The blinds will more than likely call because it will only be $15 more to see the turn card. The pot then becomes $270. If you call, you will be getting 1:9 odds. But wait, how do you know that your overpair is currently not the best hand? If you have some knowledge about the players in the pot (in this case you do from what Winger has already mentioned), 1st limper may have top pair with a straight draw (making you the favorite). 2nd limper who cold call two bets knowing that the raiser (you) has yet to act is more concerning. He could have a flush draw, a pair and an openended straight draw, a set (he would likely to have raised coming in--QQ or JJ--or reraise with KK's), a flush and a straight draw, two pairs. Any made straight in this spot would likely to reraise to protect against a flush draw unless the holding is the dreaded Ah10h. Clearly a "clear" fold is not so easy. A cold call in this spot is still subjected to more raises unless I am fairly confident that the blinds would only call. A reraise would likely eliminate the blinds thus narrowing the pot down to three, possibly give you more information on your opponents' hands, and put pressure on drawing hands. Note: I would not make this play if I did not have position. To summarize, I would fold 80%, reraise 10%, and call 10%. This changes with the type of players that I am involved with and my read on them. Sorry for the long rumination :) Quan
One thing is that if the small blind hit it again and the action was really fast on the flop you always have the option of folding when it gets back to you.
Fold it. Your only out is a ten.
Thanks to all the respondents. I too agree that it was a clear fold. The fact that you must be beat and the betting is not nearly done makes this obvious. Your responses won me lunch.
I was in the BB with 9-10. The button was a good but overly aggressive player. He decided to raise in an attempt to get a free card on the turn. I 4 bet when the SB called. Turn blanked. I bet out and got called by all. River brought a 10 and the button chopped it with the ace high flush draw.
After playing (almost) exclusively 20-40 and 40-80 for years, I've been playing some 15-30 at AJ's lately.
I called one chip from the SB with some hands I'd muck in a flash from the SB at 20-40. I think the one-chip-SB-call serves as an equalizer between various levels of play since it causes the snug player to make the same choice as the lose player more often. This is precisely why I rarely play 3-and-6 chip games, because of this and other ramifications of the blinds.
Three times the BB raised and I folded my SB all three times. Calling in the SB and folding to a BB raise is a reasonable play at 20-40. I'd think it should be FAR more common at 15-30. Is this right?
Any other specific differences (leaving actual cards out of it) that I should consider at 15-30 resulting from the blinds?
Tommy
2/3 chip games have a fundamentally different dynamic. As Sklansky eloquently stated in TOP, "All of poker begins as a struggle for the blinds" (or something like that). Specifically, since the amount of blind $ is greater in 2/3 chip games, there is greater incentive for aggression. this means you should lower your standards for steal raises, you should more frequently 3-bet a late position raiser b/c he has likely loosened his raising standards, etc. (It going without saying that you defend from the blinds more, much more from the SB and marginally more from the BB).
Anon,
I believe your post is correct in theory and is probably true in practice in cardrooms that spread one of these structures (but not the other); however, I believe there is an interesting phenomenon here in Los Angeles that runs contrary to your theory.
Years ago (around 1990) the 10/20 was popular along with the 15/30. The next jump was usually to 30/60. 20/40 was usually spread only when bigger tournaments (attracting the Las Vegas players) were in town. At that time the 15/30 played much bigger than the 10/20 and the 20/40 played only a little bigger than the 15/30 when it was spread. This would make sense in theory.
However, in casinos such as Hollywood Park, the typical 15/30 usually plays much less aggressive and somewhat tighter than the adjoining 20/40 games. I think the reason is the next jump up is to 40/80 so the mid limit yellow ($5) chip games max out at 20/40 so the players itching to gamble (but find 40/80 to big) gravitate towards the 20/40.
Regards,
Rick
PS Hollywood Park does have the only 10/20 game in town, but it is populated by a small and loyal player base and is located outside the rail of “top section”. That game is moderately tight (but not tough) by Los Angeles standards.
Rick,
Since you have moved the conversation from the theoretical to the practical, I will throw in another irrational consideration....
I have noticed that the 20/40 games played with primarily red ($5) chips tend to be better games than 20/40 games with primarily green ($25) chips. The reason for this is that pots with 5X as many chips in them look larger and thus encourage some people to chase when they shouldn't (I think that chasing when you shouldn't is a more common mistake for players in general than folding when you should chase). Since 2/3 chip games tend to involve a larger number of chips than 1/2 chip games in general, I think that, other things being equal, this makes 2/3 chip games better.
Regards,
Anon
Anon
Where do they play 20/40 with $25 chips? I've seen them on the table in Las Vegas but most players seem to use the $5 chips for bets.
Your comments concerning pots that have lots of chips in them loosening up the game are right on. In my experience most 5/10 games played with $5 chips play smaller than a 4/8 game played with $1 chips. Here in Los Angeles the 6/12 holdem games replaced the 5/10 holdem about six or seven years ago. The game is played with green $2 chips and has lots of action. The Normandie Club used to use $5 and $1 chips and their 6/12 game didn't do well until they finally broke down and bought $2 chips.
Regards,
Rick
And do you think I can convince the local cardrooms managers of that, Rick? I have literally begged them to at least put up a 6-12 list, and if patrons see that the game is at least being offered, they might get some players gravitating to the room because there might be a chance that a game a little bigger than 3-6, but smaller than 15-30 might get spread.
So what do they do? They put up a 5-10 list. They actually got a game going one day last week, and it was like watching paint dry. Only a few chips in the game, and very little action. And it's not the players. This is the same crowd that has no problem jamminh up the 4-8 O/8 game and 3-6 when they play.
Put lots of chips in the pots, and it's like moths to the light.
Dunc,
They are probably too cheap to buy the $2 chips :-).
Regards,
Rick
Rick's right: there's no question that, in L.A., the 15/30 is a much less aggressive game than the 20/40. I agree that it has nothing to do with the blind structure, but is rather a function of the level of sophistication of the players who play in the game: there are many players who have moved up from the next largest game (9-18).
As further evidence of this, I offer the fact that 30-60 is a much more aggressive game than 20-40. Most of the players who play 30-60 also play 40-80 (and higher) and thus tend to be more aggressive. Many of the players who play 20-40 will play no higher.
So a 2/3 ante game (15-30) is much less aggressive than a 1/2 ante game (20-40), yet at an overlapping level, a 1/2 ante game (20-40) is much less aggressive than a 2/3 ante game.
I think this counteracts the mathematics involved. In 15-30, you're simply going to have a lot more opportunities to play for 1/3 of a bet more than you are going to have opportunities to play for 1/2 bet more in 20-40 because the pots are raised less often. But in 30-60 you're going to have a lot less opportunities to play for 1/3 of a bet more than you are going to have opportunities to play for 1/2 bet more in 20-40.
I don't know about AJ's, but I also think that the largest game in the house can sometimes have a lot more looser, poor players in it than the 2nd largest. I haven't played in No. Calif much ( I assume AJs is Artichoke Joes), but I remember that at the Oaks the largest game on the 3 occasions I played there (I believe it was 15-30) was filled with much weaker players than the 2nd largest game. This was a much big ger factor in deciding how many hands to play from the small blind than the mathematics involved.
Andy,
From your posts I gather you play a lot at the Commerce. Although it is about the closest to me, I avoid it as the tables are too close together. I hope this changes when and if they complete their expansion, but I have my doubts.
I think the Commerce 30/60 does siphon off some of the more aggressive 20/40 players. At Hollywood Park (which does not spread 30/60), my comments are probably more applicable.
Regards,
Rick
PS Do you think the Commerce is kept so cold in order to keep people who stay up for three days at a time awake?
I understand that 9-18 and higher will be in the new section, so you may be right that the tables will still be close together.
We always joke that you can be blindfolded, driven to a card club, be plopped down in a seat, have the blindfold taken off, and tell where you are, when you're at Commerce, because 90% of the players are wearing jackets. The top section is beyond cold, it's frigid. I like seats 1 & 9, but there are some tables at which you cannot sit in those seats unless you want frostbite.
Good point Andy, about the games getting more aggressive up the ladder. And you're right about AJ's. It's extra lose because it's the biggest game.
Tommy
Tommy,
For the most part I split my time between 20/40 and 15/30 here in Los Angeles. Here are some brief thoughts about small blind play with garbage to mediocre hands in the 15/30 in situations where you are NOT facing a probable steal raise.
In an unraised pot with about three to six opponents, it may be correct to call with anything as some advocate but I find I fold offsuit hands as good as Q5, J6, T5, 94, 83, and 72. However, I will call with the slightly stronger 84 and 73 since they can flop a straight. If I'm wrong, I'm only a little wrong, OTOH, the situation comes up quite often so I would appreciate comment.
In an unraised pot with two or three opponents (e.g., there are one or two limpers and an un-aggressive blind), I call with anything. Now many of my wins will come when opponents flop or turn nothing so there are many opportunities for pure bluffs.
In an unraised pot with six or more opponents, it is probably correct to call with anything. Your good to very good flops with something like 72 offsuit include two pair, trips and fulls; however, they are either vulnerable or don't get much action so even here they may be worth a fold. In any event, this situation is so uncommon (even here in Los Angeles) that it probably isn't worth discussing.
In a raised pot with several opponents I think many players bleed away money by calling with FAR too many hands, including many they wouldn't think of calling in 20/40. So in this sense the weaker player makes huge mistakes in the small blind at this structure. I believe this mistake more than makes up for their somewhat automatic “correct” play of calling one chip in an unraised pot.
You wrote: ” Calling in the SB and folding to a BB raise is a reasonable play at 20-40. I'd think it should be FAR more common at 15-30. Is this right?”
I'm assuming you mean calling and then tossing after several limpers are in. In this case, of course this is right. But if you have a big blind that often raises then you have an aggressive player on your left. I would take a seat change ;-). Head up play and defense against steal raises are another matter that I'll leave to others.
Anyway, good post and I hope you get some more comments.
Regards,
Rick
While I agree you would call with more hands for one chip in 15-30 vs two chips in 20-40, I wouldn't take it this far. With 6 or more callers, calling with anything (like 72) is really asking for trouble. When people are playing that loose, you are likely to run into a larger two pair, three of a kind with a better kicker, and lots of straights and flushes.
I would be more inclined to call with hands like T9, 97, 87, etc. The three-gappers can also mean big trouble as when you make a straight, it is very easy for someone to have a bigger straight. I might be a little looser with suited cards, but if there are lots of callers, you still stand a chance of losing to a larger flush.
In short, play looser from the SB, but don't overdo it. Remember, you still have the worst position, and you want a good hand to ovecome that disadvantage. When it comes to calling raises, you need a REALLY good hand, so in general, don't call raises. And to answer Tommy's question, don't be afraid to throw it away if you called one chip, and then are faced with calling more when the BB raises.
One more thing: While some of these loose calls might be correct in a LA 15-30, most of them would be wrong in a LV 30-60 where the players are much tougher and will make you pay more for draws when you flop them. Play tighter against better players.
For the record, I think my one-chip-calling standards will remain a touch higher than Rick suggested. It's the thoughts behind the decision I needed to hear about, and did.
I'm not convinced (as Rick said) that players call the SB to a raise at 15/30 with the same hands they would fold to a raise at 20/40. But that might be a function of the local players, not a difference between 15/30 and 20/40 in general.
Tommy
3-Bet Brett,
You wrote: ”While I agree you would call with more hands for one chip in 15-30 vs two chips in 20-40, I wouldn't take it this far. With 6 or more callers, calling with anything (like 72) is really asking for trouble. When people are playing that loose, you are likely to run into a larger two pair, three of a kind with a better kicker, and lots of straights and flushes.”
You make good points here. But if you do call there is no doubt you need to play well post flop. Not calling can't hurt your expectation much, and certainly should hold down your swings.
”I would be more inclined to call with hands like T9, 97, 87, etc.”
Gee 3-Bet, these are obvious calls for one chip! What would you consider the borderline calls against two to five limpers?
”The three-gappers can also mean big trouble as when you make a straight, it is very easy for someone to have a bigger straight. I might be a little looser with suited cards, but if there are lots of callers, you still stand a chance of losing to a larger flush.”
You might be right about three-gappers, but I think calling one chip with any two suited is automatic.
”When it comes to calling raises, you need a REALLY good hand, so in general, don't call raises.”
This is great advice, “in general” ;-).
”One more thing: While some of these loose calls might be correct in a LA 15-30, most of them would be wrong in a LV 30-60 where the players are much tougher and will make you pay more for draws when you flop them. Play tighter against better players.”
This is also great advice and applies in reverse. Play looser against bad players. For example, Q9 offsuit on the button MAY be an OK call if you have an opponent on your right who limped and practically plays his hand face up ;-).
Regards,
Rick
Borderline hands would be 97, 96, 86, 85,... down to 54. When I wrote that, I thought 97 and 87 were marginal, and I still wouldn't play them most of the time. I still wouldn't call with most of these hands, and I wouldn't call with any two suited cards either. I would be more likely to call with K2o than 72s (or 82s). But I probably wouldn't call with that either. I prefer to have a good hand before getting involved, especially in early position.
You often use the expression, "it can't be that wrong." With only 52 cards in the deck, not many decisions are "that wrong." But they're wrong enough to make a difference in the long run. If you really feel the need to limp in with trash from the SB in 15-30, stick to 20-40 where you'll be forced to play better.
I would much rather limp in with 52s for one more chip than K2o. For one chip, 52s can flop a heck of a draw. Where as K2o is more than likely dominated.
Now K2o vs 72s is marginal. I would probably rather have 72s, and I would drop unless I flopped a flush draw, two pair or trips.
The reason why I would play any 2 suited for 1/3 of a bet is that the flush draw alone is worth a 1/3 of a bet.
If there are 3 callers, then your getting 13-1 odds on your 1/3 of a bet. Your going to flop 2 pair, trips, or a flush draw around 15% of the time, or 7-1. This is a huge overlay.
Good post! I like all your ideas, especially the one about how low to place the bar when calling one chip. The difference between 8-3 and 8-4 is noted and appreciated.
Tommy
First I am sorry I know this is not exactly right place to post my question. I am just wondering how much average pro poker players make in a year--like people who play 20-40..accasional tonarment ect. Is there many people who makes more than 100,000? Just curious, because to me it seems like if they do not make at least 50,000 a year it is just not worth it since it is alot of stress and hours. You can make more in regular job if you work that much and with your brain. Just my thought. My apology again for this dumb post.. but I am really curious...
In my book POKER ESSAYS there are estimates as to what you can make in the different games.
Since you say average, my guess is that the average $20-$40 pro makes about $20 per hour. The best players, and there are only a handful of these can do a little better than $40 per hour. (Note: Many of these best players are now playing higher.)
Mason,
Would this average pro be better off in 15-30 or 10-20, or would he make even less than 1 bb/hr in those games?
Would this average pro be better off working as the manager of a mcdonalds or kinkos?
fess up mason, how much do you make per hour playing the 30-60 at bellagio?
I would say he makes close to $50/hr. Maybe $55. I was told this by somebody that plays with Mason quite often, and that was his guess as to what Mason pulls out of the 30/60 game.
wanta be a pro card player: have a rich wife...want to be a top pro: have a rich wife who works....gl
Well, all I know is that its really hard to make 50 bucks an hour playing Hold'em for a living, but its damn easy to make 50 bucks an hour writing software. And both are about equally as fun. So, guess which one I do as a hobby and guess which one I do as a profession?
Plus, that 50 bucks an hour playing hold'em comes with no benefits, no 401k, no stock options, no bonuses, and the paycheck comes every two weeks like clockwork. Also, I dont have to maintain a 50k bankroll. I can put that money in the stock market and get my 12% a year on it on top of the 50 bucks an hour.
Although some Hold'em players do get a better deal on taxes, but that is another subject!
I doubt if most people would agree that writing software is as much fun as playing poker. I'd put the ratio at 4-1. If I was making $50/hour playing poker, I'd need $200/hour for writing software to make me indifferent.
I wish I was getting 12%/year in the market. In fact, I wish I was only losing 12%/year :)
Actually, I like writing software more than playing poker. But since I do it 50 hours a week at work, it can sometimes get old.
Good subject. Here is my spin as someone who writes software for ALOT more than $50/hr:
The actual writing part may have been as much fun as poker at one time, but there is other stuff that goes into it that makes it less fun. After many years it becomes routine, and a change of pace is needed. You also have to contend with people who may not be as talented as you. You also don't have complete freedom of time.
You can argue that poker will become old too, but I think that it actually gets better with time as you advance in level and learn to play different games and against different opponents. In a sense, poker is all the time what software is at its best - a pure problem which must be thought through and solved.
No, poker probably won't allow you to save effectively for retirement, but you are already retired if you are doing what you want. Even a job as good as mine won't allow you to become independently wealthy very quickly, and it takes many years before you can retire, maybe after you are too old to completely enjoy the freedom. Poker can provide the freedom of time to pursue other things such as writing the software I want to write rather than what others dictate, thus making poker my job and software my hobby. Then maybe I can sell that software for a whole lot more than I even make now. Maybe I can even go IPO and make millions.
I'm not trying to convince anyone to play poker rather than pursue a software career. That would be completely irresponsible. Engineering and software have been very very good to me, and for someone starting out with the talent and aptitude for it I can think of no better career in this era. I'm just giving you my unique perspective at the moment.
Let's just say that I've been running good lately.
We would all like to know, but don't expect an answer to be in detail. What I would also like to know is why Mason has never progressed to the higher limits. I don't bring this up to be rude or mean, I would really like to know why he doesn't play higher like David does. Is it because he hasn't been able to build his bankroll enough to play higher, or because he doesn't do well against better opponents, or ? I don't know the answer, but I've always been curious.
In the early 1980s I did play higher, and was successful. But somehow I got into the publishing business, and my role has been different from David. What that meant was that I spent much more time and effort writing and producing the books, and I could not concentrate full time on my poker game. This is finally beginning to change and I am playing more this year than the past couple, and I may begin to play higher sometime in the future.
By the way, and I want to be very clear on this, if I did not win in the poker games, there would have been no Two Plus Two Publishing LLC.
3 Bet Brett, my national standards $30-$60 is a big game. You can win or lose two or three thousand dollars in a single 6-8 hour session quite easily. I have seen some of the regulars lose almost $5000 in a single session.
At the Bellagio, the next higher game above $30-$60 is $80-$160. This is a monster game. You can lose 10-15 grand in a single playing session.
My point is that there are many excellent players like Roy Cooke who are comfortable at $30-$60 and do not need the stress associated with playing in a game like $80-$160. Running bad in a game this big over an extended period of time would cost tens of thousands of dollars and be very difficult to get back by stepping down to a lower limit.
As an aside, about a year ago I asked one of the Bellagio floormen why they did away with $60-$120 and replaced it with $80-$160. He did not know exactly but he suspected that one of the reasons was to make the jump from $30-$60 to the high limit area so large that players like Roy Cooke, Mason Malmuth, and others would not be "working" the higher limit games. However, this was pure speculation on his part.
Jim Brier, I'm glad you let me know how much a person could lose at 30-60. I guess I've just been lucky. Even when I'm running bad, I've never dropped $5000 in that game or 40-80. I've never even lost that much at 80-160, but I don't play that game very much. It's populated by thrill seekers like John F.
My point is that you don't need to educate me. I know the risks involved. But since Sklansky plays 80-160 and 200-400, I wondered why MM plays 20-40 and 30-60. Cooke avoids risk, and he has admitted that he doesn't have the heart for the game that he did when was younger. I think he would have a hard time beating the 80 game at Bellagio.
Your floorman (Paul?) is wrong. Players like Cooke and Malmuth are a threat, but Sklansy and Martin are not? Try again. Especially at Bellagio, the best players play in the higher limit games. The 60-120 was spread when B first opened, and was replaced by 100-200 just because the players wanted to play higher. I think they went down to 80-160 to entice more players to play, and because there is usually more action at that limit due to the number of chips in play. Also, I'm sure that several players went broke playing 1-2. 60-120 is still spread when the WSOP is going on.
My reason for bringing this up is to examine why excellent playersplay at mid rather than high limits. Is it because the higher limits are too tough, or because they don't have the necessary bankroll, or they realize that poker is very risky and they don't want to put that much money on the line? I think the last reason is the real reason. Poker is gambling, and even if you are an excellent player, there is no gaurantee that you will win.
I think the reason why players don't regularly move from 30/60 to 80/160, like they do from 15/30 to 30/60 is exactly why Jim posted. It's all about bankroll protection.
- Andrew
Due to the blind structure there is not much difference between the size of a $60-$120 game versus an $80-$160 game. The blinds are a total of $100 versus a total of $120.
I'll make you a deal. :-) I won't impose my priorities on you if you'll return the courtesy.
I've made 95% of my income for ten years from playing poker. Am I rich? No. Will I ever be? No. Have I felt and acted and travelled and lived like a retired person for a decade, 30 years ahead of the usual schedule? Yes. And it ain't so bad.
As to stress, that's a funtion of the person, not the activity. I can't imagine anything