Fnord...

This is directed at you because I've seen you dabbling around the concept in many of your posts.

Now, I know you play stars 100NL. I am currently at party 25NL (which I'm sure is a lot different) but I think both games can be just as donkish.

Anyway, this week I've been raising any pair first in, in any position. At first I was a bit skeptical with this strat but my bb/100 on middle/low pairs has been steadily increasing. I know it's a small sample size, but so far I like the concept. Although the folding equity at 25NL is never large, it's nice to cbet and take down a pot on the flop when people give you credit for an overpair etc. Plus checking behind to catch my set is always fun. Of course I bet out my sets the same way I cbet. And the number one reason I love this idea is: People put you on wider ranges. Raising 4bb UTG with 33 may be -EV by itself, but I'm getting a little more action on my big pairs.

My question to you (and of course to the other great minds here): how effective do you believe this tactic to be? Of course the argument can be made that against a bunch of opponents who never pay attention, it's -EV. I believe it to be +EV in a lot of different situations though. A weird thing is it seems like I'm playing a lot more hands, but my VPIP is still under 20. My total aggr is ridiculous though. During today's session my total aggr was over 10.00 on each of four different tables.

This post is kinda jumbled, but I'm just trying to put my thoughts down. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

6 max NL Stats for March:

Demi, I think hes talking full ring. 6 max is much more aggressive.

Demi: you are way too loose to be really profitable. I would get that vpip under 30%.

Originally Posted by Pingviini

Demi: you are way too loose to be really profitable. I would get that vpip under 30%.

you're joking right?

Originally Posted by Pingviini

Demi: you are way too loose to be really profitable. I would get that vpip under 30%.

I am, at this time, unfortunately forced to disagree with you.

Originally Posted by Pelion

Demi, I think hes talking full ring. 6 max is much more aggressive.

Ultra small sample size, but gives you an idea of my VPIP/PFR stats.

The real question is: is it more profitable to, say, 10 table, giving up much of the value that you gain by playing that range of hands, or to 3-4 table exploiting every table condition?




BTW, my take on it is that it's probably better to play a huge amount of tables for lower limits, as when you get to higher stakes, table selection isn't as good, and the average player will force you to play better poker to keep your edge

Originally Posted by midas06

The real question is: is it more profitable to, say, 10 table, giving up much of the value that you gain by playing that range of hands, or to 3-4 table exploiting every table condition?




BTW, my take on it is that it's probably better to play a huge amount of tables for lower limits, as when you get to higher stakes, table selection isn't as good, and the average player will force you to play better poker to keep your edge

agreed

Too many players arent good enough anymore to run different lines with hands/reads or just play lines against an opp without the goods.
They still want to showdown a good hand.

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

Originally Posted by midas06

The real question is: is it more profitable to, say, 10 table, giving up much of the value that you gain by playing that range of hands, or to 3-4 table exploiting every table condition?




BTW, my take on it is that it's probably better to play a huge amount of tables for lower limits, as when you get to higher stakes, table selection isn't as good, and the average player will force you to play better poker to keep your edge

agreed

Too many players arent good enough anymore to run different lines with hands/reads or just play lines against an opp without the goods.
They still want to showdown a good hand.

Well, I agree with this, in most cases I keep my lines fairly simple, but when I start moving up in stakes, I'm definitely going to have to mix it up, and I think the idea of raising every pair can be a powerful one in the right situations.

Originally Posted by Krieg1984

Anyway, this week I've been raising any pair first in, in any position.

Wow you just blew my mind cuz I've actually started doing this exact thing myself this week over on UB, where the players seem slightly tighter, and I love the results so far. I agree it does feel like you are playing way more hands (although you're not unless you were tossing small pp's before). And it feels great every time you win a pot with a c-bet because normally that's a pot you would have lost if you were just set-hunting. And then there's those times when your c-bet is called and BOOM your set comes on the turn! I feel this has been helping my big hands get some more action and I am harder to read as well. Glad to see that others play this way.

Originally Posted by martindcx1e

Originally Posted by Krieg1984

Anyway, this week I've been raising any pair first in, in any position.

Wow you just blew my mind cuz I've actually started doing this exact thing myself this week over on UB, where the players seem slightly tighter, and I love the results so far. I agree it does feel like you are playing way more hands (although you're not unless you were tossing small pp's before). And it feels great every time you win a pot with a c-bet because normally that's a pot you would have lost if you were just set-hunting. And then there's those times when your c-bet is called and BOOM your set comes on the turn! I feel this has been helping my big hands get some more action and I am harder to read as well. Glad to see that others play this way.

I think the strategy is definitely better suited to tight and/or passive tables.

I rarely slowplay anything below a boat, so even if I lose a bet here and there with my caught cbets with low pairs, my big hands are getting more action.

Funny how Fnord replies to like every thread except the one titled, "Fnord."

Originally Posted by martindcx1e

Funny how Fnord replies to like every thread except the one titled, "Fnord."

lol I was noticing the same thing.

So what happens if you dont hit your set on the turn? Do you cbet again?

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

So what happens if you dont hit your set on the turn? Do you cbet again?

That's way too general of a question. It depends.

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

So what happens if you dont hit your set on the turn? Do you cbet again?

Treat your mid-low PP that had c-bets called just as your would treat a missed AK.

The 'depends' comes from the player you're playing against. And stack sizes, and position, and table image, and pot size, and # of players still in, etc.

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

So what happens if you dont hit your set on the turn? Do you cbet again?

Treat your mid-low PP that had c-bets called just as your would treat a missed AK.

The 'depends' comes from the player you're playing against. And stack sizes, and position, and table image, and pot size, and # of players still in, etc.

Yeah what he said.

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

So what happens if you dont hit your set on the turn? Do you cbet again?

Treat your mid-low PP that had c-bets called just as your would treat a missed AK.

The 'depends' comes from the player you're playing against. And stack sizes, and position, and table image, and pot size, and # of players still in, etc.

Fold???

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

So what happens if you dont hit your set on the turn? Do you cbet again?

Treat your mid-low PP that had c-bets called just as your would treat a missed AK.

The 'depends' comes from the player you're playing against. And stack sizes, and position, and table image, and pot size, and # of players still in, etc.

Fold???

If you seek definative answers to the play of most hands for stakes where you can make a good side income, then seriously consider Limit Hold'em instead of NLHE.

Originally Posted by Fnord

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

Originally Posted by Rabid Dog

So what happens if you dont hit your set on the turn? Do you cbet again?

Treat your mid-low PP that had c-bets called just as your would treat a missed AK.

The 'depends' comes from the player you're playing against. And stack sizes, and position, and table image, and pot size, and # of players still in, etc.

Fold???

If you seek definative answers to the play of most hands for stakes where you can make a good side income, then seriously consider Limit Hold'em instead of NLHE.

Fold is how I treat a missed AK. Well I guess it would actually depend on the flop as to how I treat it really. But on a missed flop if I c-bet it and I miss on the turn, then usually I raise again in late position or if someone raises in front of me I will fold it. But if no one raises in front of me and I raise then I get reraised then I fold. I do also check the turn if Im one of the first to act. And then fold to a raise here (might be showing weakness, doing this though).