AKs pf, 2nl to a raise/reraise

Villain has been folding since he joined five minutes or so ago. UTG has been at the table a while, he seems solid, haven't seen him open limp.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.02 BB (9 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Hero (Button) ($5.16)
SB ($2.86)
BB ($3.81)
UTG ($2.99)
UTG+1 ($0.92)
MP1 ($1.92)
MP2 ($5.35)
MP3 ($5)
Villain (CO) ($0.97)

Preflop: Hero is Button with K, A
UTG bets $0.08, 4 folds, Villain raises to $0.97 (All-In), Hero ?

This is a situation that's bugging me at this level. Should I fold, call or raise? In a tourney I'm likely to shove, but I don't know what is right here.

First off, UTG's range... I can't be certain, but he seems solid, so I respect his raise from UTG, but I'm happy my hand is better. I got him on AJ+, 77+ perhaps KQs KJs ATs.

Villain, well his range could be a little wider... he came to the table with a dollar and has been folding for five minutes, so this stinks of a pocket pair, but it could be any broadway combo if past experience is anything to go by.

If I didn't have UTG to act after me, this would be an easy call for a dollar, I'm pretty sure I'm ahead of his range with even money.

And one more thing I'd like to consider in this thread... what if it's AKo I'm holding? Does it make a difference?

fck it, re raise all in. After playing these stakes I think you're way ahead of both their range. The thing is UTG doesn't have a huge stack ( i know - its' 150 BB's....ok so that's a poor arguement lol) I just look at it as just over 1/2 a buyin, so ya, i'd just shove on them and most of the time he's gonna fold. pretty bad at this level right, i think the majority of ppl arn't even thinking about position at all so he could be leading out there with alot of crap.
just my 2 cents

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcZp6CHpgr8

Originally Posted by surviva316

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcZp6CHpgr8

Great. Here... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g0sNbHWf9k&feature=fvw

Originally Posted by surviva316

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcZp6CHpgr8

WTF does this have to do with the thread and question?

Besides Wakiki only needs to be experienced once, and should not be relived through youtube.

tugger I am not sure in this spot at 2NL, but @ 10NL I would fold out here in the same spot. reason being the reraise all in is for 50BB and if he holds AA/KK you are dominated and only calling to hit str8 or flush. I know it sucks to fold out a hand like this but if you are playing any kind of volume.....meh......move on to the next hand. There will be better spots.

easy shove at 2nl

I'm new and playing NL2/NL5. Personally I wouldn't shove or call. Thing is most of players at these levels would call you with QQ or even lower pocket pairs. There is no reason to coin flip if you feel you are better player then they are. At least that's my opinion.

There is a chance someone might hold AQ but it's also possible one of them has KK/AA and you're dominated.

My choice fold and wait for better opportunity to outplay them.

Easiest shove ever. UTG folds the majority of the time, but even when he calls we still have plenty of equity vs like JJ+.

The other dude we have dominated or are flipping the vast majority of the time.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 54.830% 48.13% 06.70% 56861793 7919130.00 { AcKc }
Hand 1: 45.170% 38.47% 06.70% 45448923 7919130.00 { 88+, AJs+, AJo+ }



This is a pretty reasonable range for someone at 2NL to shove 50bbs in with I think. We have the best of it plus likely dead money. I don't see why we wouldn't just shove here.

Originally Posted by Ztech

tugger I am not sure in this spot at 2NL, but @ 10NL I would fold out here in the same spot.

Originally Posted by littleogre

easy shove at 2nl

Had sort of the same issue last night and got the two guys coming in with AQ and AJ to my suited AK board came K33K9. So they don't always do it with PP. I see lots of people do it when they finally catch suited Ax because they just want to play a hand.

Originally Posted by XTR1000

Originally Posted by Ztech

tugger I am not sure in this spot at 2NL, but @ 10NL I would fold out here in the same spot.

Originally Posted by littleogre

easy shove at 2nl

please explain why this is anything but a shove. Sure stats would help but against the typical 2nl villains we have a good amount of equity. I would put utg on TT+, AQ+. The dude that shoved is a shorty so i think he is likely shoving something like 88+,AT+, any suited ace.

Thanks for the replies, guys.

It seems to me this situation is one that has to be dealt with at the time. I'm certainly capable of folding AK pre flop, I did it only the other night to an almost similar situation... but the raise and reraise in this instance both came from early position, and neither were short stacks; I couldn't fold my AK fast enough that time, and it turned out I was against JJ and AA. But this is a different situation.

I tend to find when a person sits down with a dollar and folds for five minutes before putting all his money in, it's a gambler. Often I see these kind of people double up with a weakish hand like 66, then tighten up and play properly. They're trying to buy in on the cheap. I've tried it myself, waiting, doubling, then settling, but I found it a waste of time, better to just buy in for $2 and settle down from the off. So I'm like 90% sure he has a pair, the other 10% says he's dominated or I am.

I was pleased with Carroter's post. I had a similar range, I went for 66+, AJo+, AJs+, and estimated I was 55% against this range, so it seems I am capable of assigning ranges and estimating my hand strength in relation accurately enough to make the correct play.

I'm also glad someone pointed out this might be a fold at higher level. If I'm 55% against Villain, it's not going to take much tweaking to make AK a fold. At higher levels, you might say Villain's range is up to TT+, AQs+, AK, to which I imagine I'm losing to.


Anyway, like I say, I don't really know how to play this hand, I assess the situation when it's on me. Sometimes I fold, but not this time.

I reraised to $3, enough to see UTG all in, and he folds.
CO shows 88, and it's a flip. Ace high flop, I take it down.

Is there a logical argument for calling, or is this purely a fold or shove situation?

Originally Posted by littleogre

Originally Posted by XTR1000

Originally Posted by Ztech

tugger I am not sure in this spot at 2NL, but @ 10NL I would fold out here in the same spot.

Originally Posted by littleogre

easy shove at 2nl

please explain why this is anything but a shove. Sure stats would help but against the typical 2nl villains we have a good amount of equity. I would put utg on TT+, AQ+. The dude that shoved is a shorty so i think he is likely shoving something like 88+,AT+, any suited ace.

he's not facepalming your advice to shove, he's facepalming the fact that both of you base this off of the fact that you're at 2nl. this is like the most common question in the world: should we go all in with AK/QQ? the answer does not have very much at all to with the stakes.

here's a better rule of thumb:
-you should ALWAYS call if you can be confident to include AQ in the shover's range (e.g. in this spot).
-you should call if you have any kind of money committed to the pot, and the shover's range is at least 50% sure to include at least QQ+, AK (just fold if it's only KK/AA ldo). an example of this is if you 3b and villain 4b or jams, you'd be amazed how nitty they have to be for a laydown to be correct.

this is a really cool spot to fool around with pokerstove and ev calculations though, so i'd really really suggest doing some of your own homework on figuring out things like if you 3b, and they jam, how deep do you have to be for a fold to be ok if you're certain their range is QQ+, AK? if their range is 50% QQ, 50% AK, all of KK+? if you make a steal attempt of 3bb's and someone overshoves over it from the blinds, how SHORT do they have to be for a call to be correct, if you are certain their range is QQ+, AK and nothing else?

etc. trust me, this stuff is A LOT more helpful than just relying on "how the stakes play" because you're going to run into this spot over and over and over and over and over at every single stake you play. and as regs become more 3b/4b happy, questions and the ranges and such all continue to change, so starting to get a good handle on WHY you're committing your stack when you're behind a lot of the time, as opposed to just being like ZOMG 2NLZ AND I GOT DA NUTZ! SHOVE! will REALLY behoove you.

lord knows i wish i had a better handle of this sorta thing before i started posting fitty cent blinds

Originally Posted by surviva316

Originally Posted by littleogre

Originally Posted by XTR1000

Originally Posted by Ztech

tugger I am not sure in this spot at 2NL, but @ 10NL I would fold out here in the same spot.

Originally Posted by littleogre

easy shove at 2nl

:facepalm:

please explain why this is anything but a shove. Sure stats would help but against the typical 2nl villains we have a good amount of equity. I would put utg on TT+, AQ+. The dude that shoved is a shorty so i think he is likely shoving something like 88+,AT+, any suited ace.

he's not facepalming your advice to shove, he's facepalming the fact that both of you base this off of the fact that you're at 2nl. this is like the most common question in the world: should we go all in with AK/QQ? the answer does not have very much at all to with the stakes.

here's a better rule of thumb:
-you should ALWAYS call if you can be confident to include AQ in the shover's range (e.g. in this spot).
-you should call if you have any kind of money committed to the pot, and the shover's range is at least 50% sure to include at least QQ+, AK (just fold if it's only KK/AA ldo). an example of this is if you 3b and villain 4b or jams, you'd be amazed how nitty they have to be for a laydown to be correct.

this is a really cool spot to fool around with pokerstove and ev calculations though, so i'd really really suggest doing some of your own homework on figuring out things like if you 3b, and they jam, how deep do you have to be for a fold to be ok if you're certain their range is QQ+, AK? if their range is 50% QQ, 50% AK, all of KK+? if you make a steal attempt of 3bb's and someone overshoves over it from the blinds, how SHORT do they have to be for a call to be correct, if you are certain their range is QQ+, AK and nothing else?

etc. trust me, this stuff is A LOT more helpful than just relying on "how the stakes play" because you're going to run into this spot over and over and over and over and over at every single stake you play. and as regs become more 3b/4b happy, questions and the ranges and such all continue to change, so starting to get a good handle on WHY you're committing your stack when you're behind a lot of the time, as opposed to just being like ZOMG 2NLZ AND I GOT DA NUTZ! SHOVE! will REALLY behoove you.

lord knows i wish i had a better handle of this sorta thing before i started posting fitty cent blinds :roll:

Great post.

You're right, I am going to run into this situation time and again, at every level I play. But the only reason stakes play any part here, for me, is range. At 2nl, an opener from UTG has a wider range than at 10nl, is this safe to assume?

He was facepalming that neither sentecne starts with a capital letter imo.

Stakes do make a difference in my opinion. A lot of 2NL players are very recreational and many of them also do not specialize in cash games. You'll probably find a lot more players at 2NL than enjoy donkaments just as much as cash compared to 10NL and above. That being said, donkament players like to get all-in preflop more often with hands like AQ or AJ because of lack of postflop skills. Not sure if my analysis is correct or way off but just my 2cents.

Originally Posted by littleogre

Originally Posted by XTR1000

Originally Posted by Ztech

tugger I am not sure in this spot at 2NL, but @ 10NL I would fold out here in the same spot.

Originally Posted by littleogre

easy shove at 2nl

please explain why this is anything but a shove. Sure stats would help but against the typical 2nl villains we have a good amount of equity. I would put utg on TT+, AQ+. The dude that shoved is a shorty so i think he is likely shoving something like 88+,AT+, any suited ace.

I am not sure what XTR's post means. does not seem to add anything to the thread.

As I stated I am not sure for 2NL, it is a 50BB shove with a player left to act after you with a 150BB stack. Not the ideal situation to be in preflop without reads, I just stated that I would wait for a better spot. I don't mind flipping with a 20BB stack in this spot but 50BB+, not so much.

Also I have recently read the OP "Folding to 10K", I am having great sucess following this strategy. I just think you may be trying to make a case to push an edge that you may or may not have, IMO wait for a better spot. My 2cents.

Yea I shove this all day.

Ranges and equity people. Seems to be a lot of feeling and intuition going on here.

Originally Posted by tugger

Villain has been folding since he joined five minutes or so ago.

Fwiw I've seen people fold for 15 minutes then turn up with crap like AJo with this kind of line. I think it would be a mistake to give him too tight of a range just because of 5 minutes of tight play.

FFS the more I read this thread the more I want to tear some hair out.


Reads
Ranges
Equity

Stop saying what you would or wouldnt do at different stakes and put some bloody ranges into your replies. Then take it one step further and take 20 secs to plug the range into pokerstove and get your equity v's that range, then you could really go overboard and compare that equity to your pot equity.

Insta shove

surviva is a smart dude.

Facepalm aimed at basing advice on the stakes of a hand, especially when OP has provided us with some reads on the villian. Figure out a range, calculate the ev of your possible actions and maximize. The sooner you realize that there is absolutely zero difference between 2NL and 20kNL, but different ranges for any given path of action, the sooner you will be out of the micros.

Originally Posted by XTR1000

surviva is a smart dude.

Originally Posted by bjsaust

Originally Posted by tugger

Villain has been folding since he joined five minutes or so ago.

Fwiw I've seen people fold for 15 minutes then turn up with crap like AJo with this kind of line. I think it would be a mistake to give him too tight of a range just because of 5 minutes of tight play.

I agree. 95% of the time it's 66+ KQ+ KJs+ AJo+ ATs+. Sometimes it takes three hands to get one of these hands, sometimes it takes 15 minutes, but when they get it, it's chips in. I don't assign too tight a range, but usually it's an accurate range. I see this so much even when I'm not in the hand, it's getting more and more automatic assigning ranges and deciding if I'm good. It's becoming like a chess opening. Occasionally they surprise me with something really bad, like 33 or JTs, but it's rare. Of course, sometimes its aces, but not often.

The only thing that made this a tough spot was UTG, but he's holding a fold hand much more often than he's holding a call hand, and even if he calls I might not be in bad shape, and I'm nearly always live.

Originally Posted by XTR1000

surviva is a smart dude.

Facepalm aimed at basing advice on the stakes of a hand, especially when OP has provided us with some reads on the villian. Figure out a range, calculate the ev of your possible actions and maximize. The sooner you realize that there is absolutely zero difference between 2NL and 20kNL, but different ranges for any given path of action, the sooner you will be out of the micros.

So let me get this str8. You are saying that there is no difference in the games from 2NL to 1KNL? I would like for you to elaborate on this statement. I have heard several regs on this very site that have said the exact opposite, and is usually the reason they give to start in the micros and learn to adjust to each level before moving up. Which outside of BR management means that the each of the levels play a bit differently. So which is it?

So based on your statement then, if I am a winning player at 2NL of 3.5BB/100 over a decent sample and I come into some money and poof 10K BR, then I will be just fine jumping up to 200NL and the game will play the same?

Wow you're reasoning here is lol bad, let me formalise your argument so you can see why.

P= Premise C= Conclusion

P1: Surviva said that it was a bad approach to change your decisions in this spot based on what stakes you are playing and not the forming of a range for your opp followed by an EV calculation.

P2: If stakes are ever not an important factor in any one given spot in poker, then all stakes must play the same always in every single way imaginable.

P3: Anyone who thinks all stakes play the same always thinks I can haz same win rate at 2NL as 200NL.

P4: Anyone who thinks I can haz same win rate at 2NL as 200NL is full of shit.

------------------------------------------------------------

C: Surviva is full of shit.


Congrats, your argument is valid! ( the conclusion follows logically from the premises) However, since surviva is clearly not full of shit, we need to find a fault with one of your premises. Now look and see where you've went wrong, ez game.

Originally Posted by Carroters

Wow you're reasoning here is lol bad, let me formalise your argument so you can see why.

P= Premise C= Conclusion

P1: Surviva said that it was a bad approach to change your decisions in this spot based on what stakes you are playing and not the forming of a range for your opp followed by an EV calculation.

P2: If stakes are ever not an important factor in any one given spot in poker, then all stakes must play the same always in every single way imaginable.

P3: Anyone who thinks all stakes play the same always thinks I can haz same win rate at 2NL as 200NL.

P4: Anyone who thinks I can haz same win rate at 2NL as 200NL is full of shit.

------------------------------------------------------------

C: Surviva is full of shit.


Congrats, your argument is valid! ( the conclusion follows logically from the premises) However, since surviva is clearly not full of shit, we need to find a fault with one of your premises. Now look and see where you've went wrong, ez game.

I would prefer if you just came out and said what you are trying to say instead of all of this college level logic chart BS, btw these are only really used in the realm of academia.
Of which you mistate and assume several of your premise statements. I never said you would have the same winrate between levels, I only put the winrate in at 2NL to show the player to be a winnnig player over a decent sample. And you conclusion statement, I never posted anywhere that surviva is full of shit.
It appears you like to exaggerate and put words into peoples mouths, I really don't understand the need for this.
I was questioning XTR's statements, which if interpreted in one way say, assign range - calculate EV and respond accordingly. But could also be interpreted in the way I responded to.

My belief is that the levels do play differently, if they did not then any player that was able to assign ranges calculate EV and equity should be able to win at any level. Which we know is not necessarily the case, there are different reasons/causes for this. Sometimes it is variance, or we change our play, or the players we are playing have adjusted and are exploiting our play. The latter statement is the one that I think makes the levels play differently.

If XTR is advocating to play strictly a EV/mathmatical game then I would agree with his statement. But I don't think he is advocating this, which is why I asked him to elaborate on his statement.

Originally Posted by Ztech

Originally Posted by XTR1000

surviva is a smart dude.

Facepalm aimed at basing advice on the stakes of a hand, especially when OP has provided us with some reads on the villian. Figure out a range, calculate the ev of your possible actions and maximize. The sooner you realize that there is absolutely zero difference between 2NL and 20kNL, but different ranges for any given path of action, the sooner you will be out of the micros.

So let me get this str8. You are saying that there is no difference in the games from 2NL to 1KNL? I would like for you to elaborate on this statement. I have heard several regs on this very site that have said the exact opposite, and is usually the reason they give to start in the micros and learn to adjust to each level before moving up. Which outside of BR management means that the each of the levels play a bit differently. So which is it?

So based on your statement then, if I am a winning player at 2NL of 3.5BB/100 over a decent sample and I come into some money and poof 10K BR, then I will be just fine jumping up to 200NL and the game will play the same?

I don't think that's exactly what he is saying. He is saying that we should worry more about villains ranges then stakes. I can' disagree but at 2nl we can make a few assumptions. We can assume that the utg will call our shove with almost all of his utg raising range. Most 2nl folks hate to bet/fold. They actually think you are stupid if you do so. Can't count how many times i've bet folded the turn and had some 2nl pro chime in with wtf what kinda idiot bet folds.

The levels do play differently, but not because of the stakes but because of the players. There is a reason why a a$200NL player can win at $2NL but the opposite is untrue. Just because the game is the exact same, it doesn't mean a micro player can beat midstakes because of the skill of the opponents. Everything you are trying to learn in poker is a skill set in and of itself. Just because you don't have any reason to learn about 2 barrel bluffs and outleveling your opponent, you still need to play the call stations the exact same at all stakes. Make a hand and get paid.

Ztech, you need to chill the hell out and not be so argumentative. Nobody is learning shit with the way everyone is going about things lately. So many hostile people around here and that is my fucking job so everybody get your own thing.

I am going to talk to BJ and stacks, we may need to make some changes around here in the form of strikes with a couple people if this keeps up.

I meant to say XTR, not surviva.

Z-tech - it is merely a joke at the way you've jumped to the conclusion that he was saying the stakes play exactly the same way. Of course he doesn't think you'll have the same win rate at 200NL and I'm not trying to put words in your mouth or twist anything. It's pretty difficult to twist things on the internet since everything is written down for everyone to see in it's original form (unless you edit obv)

I mean of course there are huge differences between 2NL and 200NL. The point is in each case any decision still comes down to your opponents range and working out EV vs that range. People are just telling you that doing this is more important than using general vague reasons like "It's 2NL." to form your decision.

And yeah chill out this is the internet ffs who actually gives a shit what some random guy says that may or may not make you mad. Focus on the poker content since that's what we're all here for. Nothing I say is meant to be generally offensive on this forum, ever. I'm usually just over dramatic in the efforts I go to to stress points.

Jyms is right, poker comes first. A bunch of fish arguing over some bullshit irrelevant crap is not what this forum needs so I aploogise if my post was a catalyst for yet more of this.

I still think it does matter what the stakes are, especially when we are talking about 2NL.

At the risk of getting flamed, I'm going to use play money as an example. Almost nobody at the play money tables cares about their stack, and as a result you will a LOT of horrible play.

At 1KNL, most people care about their stacks. Even the rich fish probably play that level so that the money actually means something to them.

A lot of the plays you see at 2NL are absolutely horrible, but please do not assume its necessarily because the players are all that bad at poker. Much of the time the fish are aware that they are playing badly but they can't be bothered to put forth the effort to improve their understanding of the game for whatever reason. They're generally just there for the gamble and thrill anyway.

If you had a 2NL player and a 1kNL player with identical stats reads over a 200 hand sample, the 2NL player is almost always going to be stacking off lighter than the 1kNL player. 2NL nit regs get stacked by sets and two pair all the time with TPTK but 100NL regs not so much.

This relates directly to the hand in this thread because as a default, we have to widen all villains' continance ranges which gives AK more equity.

I agree that the correct thought process should be assign a range, and go from there, but the fact that stack off ranges are so much wider at 2NL, especially preflop that you have to take this into account when assigning ranges to villains, which is why it should be correct to say things like 'shove, its 2nl', but perhaps it would be better to say 'shove because we're ahead of his range, but we assume this because he is a typical 2nl villain'.

I think its important for people to be able to make these distinctions between stakes because what works at one level may not work at all at another.

You guys arent getting it. The stakes dont determine the right way to play, the players ranges determine it. You can (often correctly) say that the ranges change according to the stakes, but its important to recognise that you're making your play based on a range, not on the stakes.

So yes, theres no difference between stakes in HOW you make your decisions. Work out a range, work out your equity, work out your price, make the most +EV play.

You're playing 2NL because that's as good as you are right now. What jyms and bjsaust are saying, I think, is that you're here to learn the skills to improve beyond that level.

This is a scenario you are going to run into at any level. Where you need to calculate your equity vs. a perceived range and then work out if it's a profitable push or not.

Regardless of the stakes you're playing, that's clearly something you should learn and will have to learn to be successful as you progress. So why not start thinking in that frame right now.

It's still all VERY foreign to me and my math skills are borderline retarded, but I'm working on it. I appreciate what's being put out here. I often find myself thinking within the confines of my shitty 2NL level when I SHOULD be thinking about poker, the game, as a whole. Not the microcosm of 2NL.

Wow - this really isn't that hard to grasp guys.

Lets take the very same hand at $50nl

An UTG who I have covered but who is 1/2 buyin up raises, all fold round to shorty in CO who hasn't played much in last 5mins and shoves his $24 in.

I have A-Ks on BB.

I don't think "This is $50nl so what should I do"

I look at their ranges, look at my equity, and decide what to do.

DUC???

Originally Posted by Ztech

Originally Posted by XTR1000

surviva is a smart dude.

Facepalm aimed at basing advice on the stakes of a hand, especially when OP has provided us with some reads on the villian. Figure out a range, calculate the ev of your possible actions and maximize. The sooner you realize that there is absolutely zero difference between 2NL and 20kNL, but different ranges for any given path of action, the sooner you will be out of the micros.

So let me get this str8. You are saying that there is no difference in the games from 2NL to 1KNL? I would like for you to elaborate on this statement. I have heard several regs on this very site that have said the exact opposite, and is usually the reason they give to start in the micros and learn to adjust to each level before moving up. Which outside of BR management means that the each of the levels play a bit differently. So which is it?

So based on your statement then, if I am a winning player at 2NL of 3.5BB/100 over a decent sample and I come into some money and poof 10K BR, then I will be just fine jumping up to 200NL and the game will play the same?

Ztech,
I am hungover and just erased a long post. Feel free to hit me up on aim or msn and I will gladly elaborate what I was trying to say. I would kindly ask you tho, to re-read my statement and tell where exactly I was saying that the stakes were the same, that there would be a general winning strategy or that particularly you could play 200NL.

Put it this way, learning by rote is a shit way to learn poker. Learn to think poker and then win. Saying stuff like 'at 2nl push at 10nl fold' is just teaching rote.

Originally Posted by bjsaust

You guys arent getting it. The stakes dont determine the right way to play, the players ranges determine it.

Aren't you all just saying the same thing?

This statement above is fair enough.

But it's important to remember that the ranges we assign are determined by the stakes. So stake plays a part in determining the correct play.

Originally Posted by tugger

But it's important to remember that the ranges we assign are determined by the stakes. So stake plays a part in determining the correct play.

the ranges we apply are determined by the characteristics of the players we apply them to, not by the stakes these players are at. I apply different ranges to a 70-4 fish at 100nl than to a 15-13 TAG at the same stakes. However, the ranges i apply to the 70-4 fish at 100nl will match those for the 70-4 fish at 2nl. etc.

Where your comment has some validity is when we know nothing about these players so must treat them as absolute unknowns, and may therefore choose to use default ranges that experience has taught us to expect - and these may vary by stakes i guess.

Originally Posted by tugger

Originally Posted by bjsaust

You guys arent getting it. The stakes dont determine the right way to play, the players ranges determine it.

Aren't you all just saying the same thing?

This statement above is fair enough.

But it's important to remember that the ranges we assign are determined by the stakes. So stake plays a part in determining the correct play.

Did you read any of the responses by some of the regulars here?

you can lead a horse to water, but you cant make him drink.

Originally Posted by jyms

Did you read any of the responses by some of the regulars here?

Yes, I think I get it. When I am faced with a decision, I will assign a range, and determine my play based on the range I have assigned, my hand strength in comparison to his range, and pot odds if I'm behind his range. The range I assign is based on [edit: other than the obvious betting action before me]
a) stats if I have a decent sample of hands,
b) notes
c) any read based on how he's playing this session,
and if this sheds no light on the matter,
d) average player strength based on limit

I appreciate that you shouldn't make a decision simply because of the limit, for example, it's bad to say that we push with AK here but not at 50nl, and that's how we play AK. But it's not bad to say we are more likely to push with AK at 2nl than 50nl because we're generally assigning a wider range at 2nl, so AK is ahead more often at 2nl.

I'm not reading what people say and thinking "Right, 2nl, AK, it's been raised, so it's a push!"

I'm thinking "Right, 2nl, UTG has a wider range than at 50nl, and so does our shover. Is my AK good against their range?".

Originally Posted by tugger

Originally Posted by jyms

Did you read any of the responses by some of the regulars here?

Yes, I think I get it. When I am faced with a decision, I will assign a range, and determine my play based on the range I have assigned, my hand strength in comparison to his range, and pot odds if I'm behind his range. The range I assign is based on
a) stats if I have a decent sample of hands,
b) notes
c) any read based on how he's playing this session,
and if this sheds no light on the matter,
d) average player strength based on limit

I appreciate that you shouldn't make a decision simply because of the limit, for example, it's bad to say that we push with AK here but not at 50nl, and that's how we play AK. But it's not bad to say we are more likely to push with AK at 2nl than 50nl because we're generally assigning a wider range at 2nl, so AK is ahead more often at 2nl.

I'm not reading what people say and thinking "Right, 2nl, AK, it's been raised, so it's a push!"

I'm thinking "Right, 2nl, UTG has a wider range than at 50nl, and so does our shover. Is my AK good against their range?".

this post should be framed. Nice work. This thread could become recommended reading, the whole way through, for new players here. Call it evolution

Originally Posted by daven

this post should be framed. Nice work. This thread could become recommended reading, the whole way through, for new players here. Call it evolution

Evolution. Nice! Funny thing is, my game is evolving daily. Fuck knows why it took me so long, but I got PokerTracker running now. I have no idea how I've coped without it. Since I multitable, I don't really notice exactly how many hands someone is playing.

Right now I'm building up my database to get a decent sample of hands, currently I have around 4000, which is not enough to analyse my game properly. 67s is my most profitable hand, both in terms of overall profit, and profit per pot, but of course that's because I've hit big with it more than once in this sample of hands, and folded it for cheap. And I'm unbeaten in 4 hands with AJs. Yes, I've had AJs just 4 times in 4000 hands. As soon as I got, say, 20,000 hands, I intend to start posting some of my stats, see what you guys think of my game, where my strengths are, where my weaknesses are, what areas I should be looking at more, etc. Currently I'm running at 23/11, which seems a little less loose than I thought I was playing, but I have tightened up a lot in early position. I've won $30 over this sample, at a rate of nearly 19bb profit per 100. But, like I say, I don't feel like the database has anywhere near enough hands to get a true picture. Is 20,000 enough, or do I need more?