Simple question, but I suspect a lot of people don't really get it...
100-200BB effective stacks. Why raise pre-flop?
What are the merits of the following openers:
2BB
2.5BB
3BB
4BB
Bigger
How do you determine the best opener for a given game?
Printable View
Simple question, but I suspect a lot of people don't really get it...
100-200BB effective stacks. Why raise pre-flop?
What are the merits of the following openers:
2BB
2.5BB
3BB
4BB
Bigger
How do you determine the best opener for a given game?
Just because you have a huge deep stack, doesn't change how I'd raise big hands. The whole point of raising preflop is putting money into the pot while your ahead, so if they don't draw out, then you win. If you don't raise any hands, then your allowing players to limp strong drawing hands into the pot cheap.
If I have 45s, It's a lot easier to know when I'm way ahead or not. I either hit the board hard, or I didn't. With AA KK AK, sometimes it's much more about what your opponent hit. Because if they hit it hard, your probably behind, and if they didn't, then your probably ahead.
It comes down to being able to read where you stand in the hand. Are you the player that can't fold AA? It's these types of players that definately have negative equity in a deep stacked game.
The amount of money going into the pot pre-flop is very small, unless you're comming in for at least 5x.Quote:
Originally Posted by doggz
You open AKo from EP for 3bb. I call with 22, are you happy I paid 3bb? 67s? JTs?Quote:
Originally Posted by doggz
So should we tip our hand with a pretty beefy non-protecting raise so he knows what we have and can tell us when we're beat?Quote:
Originally Posted by doggz
For the sake of argument, if you never raised pre-flop, wouldn't it be more difficult to put you on a hand?Quote:
Originally Posted by doggz
um my raise is 4x BB. What game r we talking about here? PArty 25NL or PArty 600NL?
Both. Why is 4x good for 25NL?Quote:
Originally Posted by Triptanes
What the hell are you blabbing about? There shouldn't be pre flop raises in a deep stacked ring game? That's flat out wrong, but I'm sure you know that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnord
Hmmmmm seems to be the happy medium between rasing too much and rasing to little, for a looser table $1.25.
I raise:AK, AQ (only making 0.8BB/100 after 30k hands ): ), KK, QQ
I asked a really straight-forward question. Sounds like you should be able to nail this one cold.Quote:
Originally Posted by aislephive
I must be missing the joke that is insdie this.Quote:
Originally Posted by aislephive
AJs? KQs? I guess you're in the limp JJ-22 camp then? How does position factor into this? How much trouble do you have winning big pots after limping? I suspect not much in that game...Quote:
Originally Posted by Triptanes
O shit i forgot i raised KQs too. Not AJs.
At the core, preflop raising has simply become a way to get tight players to define their hands on an earlier street and establish an aggressor.
Any value beyond minraise will simply help clear the field and let you take whatever hand you like to the flop. I think many hands run very close in value preflop as you near 200 bb. As for the perfect value to raise, I'm not sure. I really want to think over it but don't have the time between tests. Maybe I'll really get something down tomorrow night.
-'rilla
No prblm winning big pots after limping, no one knows what limping is.
I'm still undecided about limping like 22-55 in EP. Doucy?
Also, I could raise AJs, I dunno y I don't, I'll work on it.
...and build a pot with our best hands (I think this is the most important point.) At the .5/1 level and higher typical players know enough not to stack off with marginal holdings in dry pots.Quote:
Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla
Consider this: Weak/semi-tight/nitty PokerStars 100NL.
3 limpers to you in the CO with 88. Is limping or raising to 3x the better play? Is it close?
I find this result surprising. No way I'm folding 22-55 in a fishy game for less than 5% of the effective stack size.Quote:
Originally Posted by Triptanes
I meant in tougher games sry.
I learned this rationale for raising preflop with good hands, but havent seen it mentioned:
You raise preflop to force crap hands out. If you're holding AKs and you limp in, everyone else will limp, too (with 27o). When the flop comes out 227, you're screwed because you let people with crap cards into the flop.
If you raise your AKs, the guy with 27o will muck preflop and the 227 flop can be considered "mostly harmless".
Now lets say you hit the flop:
You limp AKs and everyone else comes to (27o). You hit the flop hard with a rainbow QJ10. Now you raise and the 27o mucks.
Basically, you aren't going to make any money off of him if you hit, but can lose the hand if he hits. Raising preflop prevents that.
There is something there, but overall your line of thinking is flawed.Quote:
Originally Posted by cryptyk
I would love it for someone UTG to limp 72o then call 3x when I have AKs. However, if he cold calls on the button and knows how to play my cards post-flop I might have a problem...
'rilla's point about defining hands also applies here. Against most players we can rule out a lot of hands when they call our PFR.
I like where you're going here. Let me take a swing from relative noob-land.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnord
The best situation in poker is to have a strong hand when your opponent has a weaker strong hand. In this situation, you will get the most money in the middle than any other situation and your opp will be drawing thin/dead.
In order to get deep stacks into that situation without tipping off the opp that you do have them beat, you need to start the pot early and juice it all the way. Let's say we're dealing 100BB stacks, and anything past a pot-sized pot will scare your opp away (Why not play PL? Meh, just work with me here). So you're going to fire off pot-sized and he's going to call all the way down (yea, retardedly simple - gotta love modeling), effectively tripling the pot at each of 3 streets, so the final pot is <pre-flop-pot>*3^3 = <pre-flop-pot>*27. It's clear that we're aiming at a 200BB pot here, so we'd want the pre-flop pot to be at least 8BB.
Now there's a whole crapton of assumptions and soforth in there, and it's ignoring speculative hands and made draws and such, but I think that's the situation we're gunning for most of the time, and going to the flop with an insufficient pot to get you there is a mistake.
And anyways, you gotta start the reasoning somewhere~
If you get a cold caller for 4x and he's holding 72o, add him to your friends list.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnord
Between position + skill, in an unraked game with deep money I think it's feasible for this call to be +EV for the 72o or at least closer than a lot of you think.Quote:
Originally Posted by cryptyk
The Masked Man says raise...Quote:
Originally Posted by Triptanes
http://tinyurl.com/cyanj
You should open with a minimum of 5xbb in my opinion. That will be your standard raise. No matter what hand you raise with, you should raise that same amount. This will weed out players and disguise the strength of your hand. The point of raising preflop IS to weed out crappy hands like the aforementioned 72o. Sure, you want some dolt playing such a poor starting hand, but you don't want the whole table seeing the flop with random hands that you can't put them on. I think reducing the number of people seeing the flop is another benifit of raising preflop. It's easier to put one or two people on a hand than 6. You onlywant one person to make it to the river with you if at all. If you have more than that you better have the absolute nuts.
Do deep stacks matter in this dicussion? I'm not sure. No matter what, you want establish things preflop rather than "going in blind".
I'm not sure if this thread is rhetorical or what, but I wanted to make those points.
Goddamn it Fnord, your link has made this page unreadable. tinyurl it please.
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrunchyNuts
Thanks for your contribution. It is exactly this kind of thinking which I feel is costing many NLHE money and giving them the wrong perspective in these games.Quote:
Originally Posted by r8ed
Although your point about controling the size of the field does have some merit. Particularly discouraging players with position from comming in behind you.
BTW, what's magic about 5x? Why not 3x, 4x or 6x?
I raise preflop so if I hit whatever im looking for I can play it very fast. If I dont raise preflop with AK and flop comes A72 my betting would be capped by the pot, but if i raise preflop some sucker with aj or at will call and go broke :) With draw hands ( AK, AQ, AJs) I raise to dumb money into the pot so if i hit, the potential for a big pot is there, with AK 4-10xBB, with AJ and AQ i cap it at 6x. (also put 88, 99, TT, jj, qq here)
With my big PP's I raise as much as I think my opponents will call and i hope they make the 2nd best hand (tptk) if not i will try to take it down, i dont want someone drawing cheap.
With these i will raise from 4x to as high as i think i can get away with. (aa, kk)
Using this baby im getting 18bb/100 @ the 100NL 6 max' tables but since i play very fast i lose a ton of big pots A LOT especially to draws, sometimes ( about 30$ of the time) i start out losing 2 buy-ins but my play in general is +EV so i make it back.
1. Isolation.
2. Better position post-flop.
3. Define your opponents starting hand.
4. Put the money in with the best hand.
5. Establish yourself as the agressor.
Obviously not all of these are going to apply on any given hand, but they are some reasons why you raise preflop. Good discussion. /me likes
in deep stacked games, preflop isn't going to mean as much overall - you ever notice that its a lot easier and safer to take down a huge pot after calling a raise than it is being the one raising? i hate having AA with 200bb, raising from the BB and getting calls on the flop, a call on the turn, and then a huge raise on the river after no draws have hit
hold on, i think i look at NL incrorrectly - i see each play as setting yourself up for a chance at doubling up. i don't play at a PT supported site any more so I've gotten away from looking at long-term results of individual hands. if you're asking how much you're going to have to raise AK preflop over the long run to make money in 200bb games ala limit holdem thinking, then i have no idea. It probably depends on how good you are postflop. if you can never fold overpairs, then the preflop raise going to be a much bigger number
my conclusion: it really doesnt matter because postflop is where all the big decisions come in deep games. you can get away with being loose preflop because of implied odds and pot stealing post flop. when deep, its going to be pretty hard to get pocket sevens to fold - sure you can raise 25bbs and take away from their set implied odds, but thats just overkill. i also know that you don't want to get pegged for only raising a few select hands because then you would be easy to avoid- but i guess that wouldnt be the case in a juicy game
Thanks.
This has me thinking a lot about my play. I've been on the party network playing $25NL against the rocks, and pre-flop raising has become 90% of my strategy since most pots I'm in don't make it past the flop.
Against this type of opponent (tight/passive/weak (~10% VP$IP, <1.0 post-flop agression)), I find that a 4BB PFR ($1) from LP (CO-1 to SB) will drive them out, say, perhaps 80% of the time, gaining you $.35. If called by one (let's say that covers the rest of the 20% probability), after the flop, betting an average of 3/4 pot (random between 1/2 pot and pot ($1-$2)) will win you the pot 75% of the time right there (say, a 9BB pot, $2.25).
Assuming you never ever hit, this move is still +EV (dealing in dollars here 'cause, well, I want to):
The post-flop action isn't very profitable if you never hit, but that's not the reality~Code:Pre flop profit = .35
Post flop profit = .75 * (2.25+1.5) - (1.5 + 1) = 2.8125 - 2.5 = 0.3125
Total EV = <pre flop profit> * .8 + <post flop profit> * .2 = .35 * .8 + .2 * 0.3125 = .28 + 0.0625 = 0.3425
Disclaimer: I know this has very little to do with deep stacked games, was just a related case that has some bearing to the discussion.
Ahhh... yes. Being out of postion with a well-defined hand is a killer. I've come to the conclusion that you're better off just punching it with a protection bet and being happy with the money in the pot unless there is someone you think you can stack off with a pair out of position (particularly in 6-max I think something like JJ/TT plays for stacks often enough (and often enough could be as low as 5-10%).) Then balance this with a bluff raise every now and then against aware but mediocre tight players.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmackinYaUp
I'm not asking that question and "How much do I raise with AK" is missing a lot of variables.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmackinYaUp
We're on the same page here. However, one street flows into the next so saying pre-flop doesn't matter is silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmackinYaUp
5xbb seems to do the job at 25NL full ring. 4 gets too many callers and 6 gets too many folds. It's been the number working for me. Maybe for deeper stacked games, you could bet at 8xbb or higher as long as you keep your bet constant. Since pocket pairs have the odds to call a raise that is 10% of the smallest stack in the hand, you need to raise it up higher.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnord
Not raising reminds me of omaha. Everybody limps in and whoever hits their hand wins. Yipee.
Also, AK was a losing hand for me for a long time. Why? I attribute it to NOT raising preflop - because once I started to raise it 5xbb and continuation bet (full pot) the flop every time I turned that stat around quick. It's a profitable hand for me now. So raising AK/AQ lets you represent AA/KK on the flop as well.
Here's an oversimplified outlook.
You raise pre flop for these reasons:
1) To win the blinds. Absent of blinds you are the sucker if you play any other hand than AA!
2) For value, meaning that you are hoping for worse hands to call your raises.
3) To induce mistakes, such as people avoiding big pots with you because of your aggressive play.
If only a better hand calls your raises, you will have to get lucky or outplay them post flop, raising pre flop helps you outplay them postflop.
All hands are worth the same unless it goes to a showdown, so make sure that your post flop bets and raises are such that worse hands are able to call or such that better hands will fold.
Simple eh?
I'm rather fond of the guys that raise AAxx and take it to the felt for their stack. You can call that raise with any 4 cards heads-up and get the best of it. I'm seeing a lot of similarities here actually. Because skilled Omaha hi play builds pots with good hands, however you end up continuation betting less because you're more likely to get called.Quote:
Originally Posted by r8ed
This size of my raise in relation to the blinds do not change at any level of blinds. The only thing that changes my raising patterns are:
(1) position @ table while considering # of players still in the hand
(2) # of remaining players @ the table
Are you talking about 'playable' hands when you say this or are you closer to the 'any 2 cards' end of the spectrum for equity or implied value purposes?Quote:
Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla
Also, I'm just curious, when talking about deepstacked games, who is deep? Just you or a bunch of people?
I'm not saying that preflop doesn't matter at all, but the deeper the stacks get, the less it matters. Sure, streets flow into one another in the sense that you raise preflop and you bet on the flop. I'm not sure what you mean beyond that, though, but I am genuinely interested to hear more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnord
On the other hand the streets can be totally disjointed at times. You can have aces, raise it preflop, bet it on a safe flop, then a measly looking 5 hits the turn and you suddenly run into a huge raise. That is not a good flow at all.
However, I see what your saying if I think about it like this: if you are playing in a 10 handed game where everyone has a couple hundred bb's behind them, then your preflop will matter more simply because of the number of people and the ability to camp all day. Pocket 2's might have reverse implied odds here.
If you're playing in a 3 handed deep stacked game, though, preflop doesn't mean much of shit besides establishing an initial aggressor. You can (and in my opinion should) raise with shit like 75s because preflop doesnt mean anything in this case and the blinds are coming around every 45 seconds.
look at how the dominant 10-20 NL players play on stars. Do you think they raise 4xBB with 9To because it's a good hand? They know they have 2 ways to win the hand even against AA. Bluffing or catching a big flop.
In deep stack games, cards become less important, while bluffs and position increase in value tremendously.
Don't believe me? min raise someones flop bet then bet the pot on the turn sometime, you'll be surprised what happens.
Agreed, whoever takes a lead in the pot usually ends up taking it down shorthanded.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmontis
Bump, because this seems like an important question that hasn't received enough attention.
Where's Rondavu? I thought he might give an insightful answer.
Ok I dont know if this is what you are getting at Fnord but this is how I see it:
Assume 100BB stacks.
In loose games where you often get 2-5 callers preflop and continuation bets on the flop tend to be unsuccessful pots tend to build themselves rather quickly. I tend to raise 3xBB preflop here with all my hands. If i get 3 callers preflop the pot is already ~12BBs and a pot sized bet on the flop will often get 1 or 2 callers. 1 caller and the pot is about is 36BBs on the turn, 2 callers and the pot is 48BBs. (If you raised 5xBB preflop the pot would be 45BBs - 60BBs which is too big for my liking) Against loose players I prefer having a lot of money behind for the turn and the river because this is where they make their most costly mistakes. With a 36BBs-48BBs pot on the turn and still 85BBs in my stack its not that hard to win big pots without having to overbet if they want to see a showdown and you haven't invested too much to get to the turn with only one or two players. If I raise more preflop the pot tends to grow too quickly (because of the number of players calling preflop+flop) leaving me with less money behind for the turn and river.
In tighter games where you only get 1-2 callers preflop a raise of 4xBB-5xBB is better because its much harder to build a pot. If you get 2 preflop callers and one caller on the flop the pot will be:
~45BBs if you raised 5xBB preflop
~36BBs if you raised 4xBB preflop
~27BBs if you raised 3xBB preflop
With a 27BBs pot and only one opponent it gets difficult to win big pots without overbetting, but with a 45BBs pot on the turn its not that hard.
In loose games you can make a lot of money on the turn and river whereas in tighter games few pots tend to go further than the flop and with less opponents (and when they do you want to be able to stack someone without having to overbet). Therefore you want more money behind in looser games and more money in preflop in tighter games.
Ok i read about half of the posts and now ill have my shot
The assumption we have all made is that we use the preflop raise to get opps out of the hand. Therefore we also assume that we are protecting our unmade but potentailly winning cards against more speculative cards or cards that may hit but not be the best hand. Also we are making people pay when we have top cards to try and beat us or gain a draw that may also do the same.
But is this true?
Our thinking behind each hand is to make the most money possible when we have the best hand (this is not necessarily by betting the most but betting the highest amount of money our opp is prepared to call at each street) therefore is our preflop raise not of a similar nature?
are we trying to raise an amount that people will call to see a flop with whatever holdings they have. I would say we are.
therefore how do we define the scope of our preflop raise?
therefore we WANT to give pps the chance to flop a set, we want to give suited connectors the chance to flop a draw etc but when we hit we wnat to close the oppertunity so fast they have to make the fold. Therefore my raise would eb weighted on what i think opps will call with certain hands when they have a deeper stack. Arguably there may, and fnord may show, to be math behind this question. I would argue against this as if my stack is twice as deep and therefore i raise twice as much or something equally stupid imo an 8bb raise is still an 8bb raise.
But to counter this arguement if the stacks are deep many people may decide that despite having odds for their draw it is worth calling anyway because the hit to their stack is smaller as a whole percentage. I think im right in suggesting pro players like deep stacks and smaller blinds as it allows for space to 'play poker' (see for example the world heads up tournament)
so my thinking is this
if you can outplay opps post flop id make the pots small and win more of them. this takes away the temptation for the opp to make dumb plays with crap draws or rubish cards because there is nothing to win, the pot is small.
in contrast if im having diffculty or i repsect other opps play then i raise bigger to make pots worth entering with suited connectors etc so that opps will hold in the pot if they catch something becuase ive built up a nice pot.
well that was long winded and not all of it made sense, im sure ill edit this but those are some of my thoughts between lectures.
A lot of this is already said but as Bob Hoskins said... its good to talk.
The thing that confuses me slightly about this thread is the implicit assertion that having "deep stacks" automatically affects the value of your pre-flop raises.
Why would that be the case? Do you think that when players get to 100xBB and above that they are more likely to ignore your raises and play anyway, because it represents less of their stack?
I appreciate that in a deep stack NL game you stand to lose more in every hand.
One of your first comments was that
Small compared to your stack, but surely it's the blinds which determine the speed of play, not everyone's stack size.Quote:
The amount of money going into the pot pre-flop is very small, unless you're comming in for at least 5x.
This might well be my fundamental lack of understanding of the situation but in my eyes if i am holding 8 3 off and someone raises to 5xBB i am folding whether i have 10BB or 1000BB.
As long as the raises are proportional and relevant to
i) the blinds and
ii) the texture of the table
then I would think that the point of raising is the same as ever:
- to assert some measure of confidence (false or not) that you could win the hand
- to force other players to respond to that assertion and therefore in some way begin to define their own holdings
- to isolate the players who feel they have hands that can compete with yours
- to build the pot, increasing the value of the win
I personally think that preflop, building the pot is (while obviously important) the least of the three aims. Unless you hold AA, the first thing you always want to know is if anyone has a hand that is stronger than yours.
Barring complete "playing the players" bluffs... the worst case scenario for any hand which you think is strong is to have too many players see a flop. We all know - any two cards can - and frequently do - win***. It's up to you to raise preflop to prevent this.
*** Is this is the part where my 8 3 off scenario with a massive stack starts to look more playable (?)
It would be interesting to see you (Fnord) begin to hint at what you were getting at with this thread.
In no limit, the larger the stacks ---> the smaller the impact of a pre flop raise. Implied odds increase as stack size increases. If you had a 500 BB stack, and are holding 72o, and a 5x BB raise comes infront of you, it is safe to call and hope to either A) Flop a very unlikely and very lucky and well disguised monster, or B) Outplay your opponent post flop because you are the better player. If you are holding only 10x BB, you are putting half your stack at risk with a hand that is likely to be a huge underdog and definitely at least a slight one, with little to no opportunity to outplay your opponent post flop. Theoretically, in the limit (in the calculus sense, not the poker sense) as stack size increases to infinity, the relevence of the pre flop raise size goes to zero.Quote:
Why would that be the case? Do you think that when players get to 100xBB and above that they are more likely to ignore your raises and play anyway, because it represents less of their stack?
This is supporting evidence to Fnord's point (i think, not to put words in his mouth) though it was intended to dispute it. Think about this: If they offered a SnG where you start with a million chips, and the blinds started at 1/2 chips, and someone raises infront of you to 20 chips (10x BB) and you look down at 83o on the button, why n ot call? 20 chips represents 1/500,000th of your stack. If the flop is 888, 883, 338, or 333 etc, 1/90,000 of the time you stand to gain a ton of chips and you are only risking .0002% of your stack. This is an extreme example, but it gets to the point of how stack size correlates to pre flop raise relevence.Quote:
This might well be my fundamental lack of understanding of the situation but in my eyes if i am holding 8 3 off and someone raises to 5xBB i am folding whether i have 10BB or 1000BB.
All that being said, i don't agree that pre flop raises don't have value in deep stack games simply because not all players think this way. The fact is that the vast majority of players WILL respect a 4x pre flop raise even if everyone at the table has 100+ BB, and therefore you gain information from raising pre flop that you would not have by limping. If some pro were to put out a book citing the merits of never raising pre flop in deep stack ring games, and people began to believe it and more and more players stopped raising pre flop, the value of raising pre flop would decrease because you would not benefit from the information you gain when your opponent calls your raise.
In general yes, but against good players you don't have the implied odds as they won't pay you off when you hit. Calling 10% of your stack with a low pp against a good player and folding if you don't hit your set will lose you money because you won't get paid off everytime you hit.Quote:
In no limit, the larger the stacks ---> the smaller the impact of a pre flop raise. Implied odds increase as stack size increases. If you had a 500 BB stack, and are holding 72o, and a 5x BB raise comes infront of you, it is safe to call and hope to either A) Flop a very unlikely and very lucky and well disguised monster, or B) Outplay your opponent post flop because you are the better player. If you are holding only 10x BB, you are putting half your stack at risk with a hand that is likely to be a huge underdog and definitely at least a slight one, with little to no opportunity to outplay your opponent post flop. Theoretically, in the limit (in the calculus sense, not the poker sense) as stack size increases to infinity, the relevence of the pre flop raise size goes to zero.
A 5BB raise out of a 500BB stack is only 1% of your stack. And im' not advocating a call here at all, i'm just saying its a much much better call with real deep stacks then it is with real shallow ones. Though both would be a -EV call against compotent opponents, it is less -EV if your stack is deeper because you have the chance to get paid off if you hit or outplay your opponent if you both miss.
I know, I was just pointing out an exception not faulting anything you said.Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerPatNEU
I may be way off base here, but I can see using a pf raise to disguise my hand. Assuming that you have been seen limping a lot of suited connectors and the like, I would suspect that if you were to raise with them on some occasions, you would be more likely to have your hand paid off when it hits, as noone would expect you to have those cards. Other than as some sort of deception, a pf raise doesnt seem to be a good idea in a deep stack game. It might get more into the pot for your premium hands, but then you have defined your holdings, and will not get paid if everyone has a good idea of what you have. It would seem that the real money would be going into the pot post flop.
I agree that raising for deception (in some way increasing your implied odds?) is certainly a move to make in deep stack games.Quote:
Originally Posted by pgil
But to actually be deceptive, you would have to raise both your premium hands and your other hands (suited connectors or whatever). Otherwise, where is the deception?
Personally, by FAR the reason I raise preflop is so that I can win far more on the river.
I like to raise 4BB preflop, and bet the pot on flop/turn/river.
Lets look at pot sizes with a 4BB preflop raise, and just limping.
For this example assume 3 players calling preflop, and one caling you all the way down.
Limped Pot:
PreFlop Pot: 3BB
Flop Pot:9BB
Turn Pot:27BB
River Pot: 81BB
Raised Pot:
PreFlop Pot: 15BB
Flop Pot:45BB
Turn Pot:135BB
River Pot: 405BB
Which pot do you want to win?
I hate playing in a unraised pot...
Which pot makes your decisions easier?Quote:
Originally Posted by Laeelin
If you start with 100xBB and your opponent check-raises all-in on the turn, can you fold for your last 35xBB? If you can't, aren't you essentially giving anyone large implied odds for calling preflop with any pocket pair to hit a set?
FNORD, can you give us a synopsis of what you were getting at with this post. I've read the entire thing and can say that it confused me more than helped me with my ring game strategy.
bumpQuote:
Originally Posted by thirteen
Double bump with a layer of creamy bumpQuote:
Originally Posted by SmackinYaUp
You can't just waltz in, ask a series of mysterious questions and waltz out again!
After much consideration, here is my list of reasons to raise pf with deep stacks. Keep in mind that I haven't been playing ring games for very long.
1. To protect hands that I have trouble letting go. ie AA. I have a hard time folding it, so I dont want to let too many people see a flop.
2. To disguise the strength of your hand. Throwing in a raisew/ 56s from LP every once in a while to fool opponents.
3. Related to above, to allow you to C-Bet more effectively. If you raise pf, you can effectively bet out on any A or K flop, and (at least at the tables I play) people will give you credit for either.
4. At a weak table, to build the pot because a lot of people will call a bet pf that they wont call post flop, and will easily fold once the flop doesnt hit their hand (again, lower stakes w/ bad players).
5. For info. To allow you to better put your opponents on a range of hands by finding out how much they like it pf. Doesnt always work, but can be useful.
As for the amount, I think it varies by table, but once the magic number for my table is found, I tend to raise that amount, plus 1xBB for every limper.
That's about all that I can think of for now, I hope this isnt too far off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent7
:::cough:::cough::: BUMP :::cough:::cough::::
I don’t think that the relevance of a Pre flop raise (PFR) goes to zero if we double the stack size. If there is a purpose for a PFR with 100bb stack, then it still has a purpose with a 200bb stack but you may have to double the PFR to achieve the same purpose.
Defines your hand. (this bet is either a value bet if you have the cards or a bluff / semi bluff if not)
The PFR tells everyone “I have hand that I think will win”. It generally has the effect of allowing your continuation bet to work. The continuation bet says “I still have a hand that will win”. Without a PFR the continuation bet as a bluff has little chance of winning.
To cause the weakest hands to fold
If we were all perfect card readers and could always tell when we were out flopped then we would not need a PFR to limit the types of hands that could out flop us. But us weaker players (me for one) need a PFR to help me read players. If the flop comes 227 I want to be able to confidently plop down a continuation bet with AK. I can’t do that if there were no PFR on the hand.
Still, you WANT weaker hands to call your PFR so it’s size must be chosen such that some weaker hands will fold and some weaker hands will call. This ensures that you can be “reasonably” confident in plopping down a continuation bet with AK on a flop of 227. A properly chosen PFR size allows a value bet while limiting the types of hands (and number of hands) that will out flop you.
How does stack size affect these purposes then? I thought about this a great deal but could not come to any conclusions. Should the PFR be based on the bb or on a % of avg stack size to produce these results? I don’t have an answer.
To provoke discussion of something people take for granted but probably don't really understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by thirteen
There is more material worth a response, but I'll get to that later as there is a simple response to this part.Quote:
Originally Posted by EricE
With less than 20-50ish bb stacks a PFR protects you hand. Increasing your bet size further will just scare away the bad players you want to play post-flop unless they are truely terrible. At the 100+ range we can't protect our hand, hence I think there is sea change that hasn't been discussed on this board.
Ok, Let me see if I've got things straight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnord
So in a deep stack game, we should still raise a pretty standard amount (3,4 or 5xbb) and we should not increase our PFR because of the deeper stacks or we'll only scare away worse players.
A PFR is then serving mostly to establish us as the aggressor and our postflop play becomes much more important. It also seems that it becomes increasingly important for us to make bigger lay-downs, knowing that our AQ may not be good on an Q87 board against an aggressive bet in front of us, because someone may have called our small (when compared with stack size) PFR with a JT.
It makes sense. The people I see sitting at my tables playing successful NL ring seem to be raising the least amount of hands preflop but outplaying everyone post flop.
Now, my question is, are we giving more information away by PFRing than we're getting, especially when it doesnt stand to protect a hand and reduce the number of people seeing the flop?
Yes, this is a great thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnord
Reminds me of another great thread which basically says "okay, you raise for information. Why? Are you sure you need information?" etc.
Are you sure you want to "build the pot" or "weed people out"? I'm not saying you don't. You might. But don't let catchphrases substitute for thinking. I look forward to reading more ...[/url]
ok, here's my take on it, and i'm a little bit confused by the attention given to this thread as well but maybe i'm missing something.
I raise preflop for a couple reasons. First, because it weeds people out. The benefit of weeding people out is that the hand of my callers is much more predictable, allowing me to make easier and more accurate post-flop decisions. A side effect of this is that it allows me to get more money into the pot when i have good hands, without tipping my hand. Without a raise preflop, I have to be much much more aggressive post flop, and as we all know aggression scares opponents away and that's the opposite of what I want when I have a good hand. There is a balance between tipping your hand preflop and tipping it even worse post-flop. Even in deep cash games, the average joe doesn't adapt and won't call with many more hands, if any more, than he would if stacks were shorter. I am not technically getting the same protection as I would if stacks were shorter, but i am effectively getting it because it is still reasonable to assume that my opponent will fold junk, and probably maintain a standard of suited connectors or better, which are a threat even when stacks are 100BB or a little less. I also believe that just because someone might have 200BB at a table, doesn't mean they're going to give it up as easily as 100BB. people are generally playing at the limit they're at because they don't want to risk playing for more. So, even if stacks are 400BB and you call a 15BB raise with 72 vs AA, its unlikely you're going to get the 250BB+ you need to make this pay off. the chances of destacking someone with 100BB >>>>> than the chances of destacking someone with 200BB+. i have a feeling what i've written so far is really disorganized, i'll edit it when i have time later.
One thought that occurred to me is that raising makes it more costly to bluff, which might be a deterrent for many players. The truly aggressive players will still bluff, but the ones that would take a stab at a smallish type pot with a 1/2 pot bet or so will be less likely to do it when that bluff costs a large portion of their stack.
If this theory holds water, raising would make it easier to get away from a hand that was strong preflop when you are bet into or raised by a weakish player.
Just a thought. I don't play much NL except tourneys.
You don't know what you are missing!Quote:
Originally Posted by koolmoe
Are your opponents aware enough to even care? A lot of the multi-tablers on this board play it tight and don't use HUDs nor collect stats. I suspect that this is why camping is so successful. A trivial investment in tools makes it easy to not give them action when they enter a pot outside of the blinds or (limp)/call off 5% or less of the effective stacks, then go nuts post-flop.Quote:
Originally Posted by thirteen
Given the infomation leakage, value of being the aggressor against weak opposition and the lower value of pre-flop strength with deep money you should raise a wider range. Yet, under 5% PFRs seem to be the norm.
Consider that the fewer players who see the flop, the less likely we are going to need to showdown a winning hand. Also consider that the non-idiots I'm running into when in these games are VERY careful about not going broke or even gambling it up in an unraised pot. The 88 pre-flop question I raised is a VERY important one.
Typing this at work, so just ignore any mistakes in my post.
Looking at this issue from the opposite perspective.
Positives to limping with monsters in deep stack games:
1- nobody believes you have top set
2- you win more from Top Pair when you have an overpair
3-you get away losing less when you are behind
4- don't lose money on continuation bluffs
5- limp reraises
Negatives:
1- Worse preflop hands outdraw you
2- Don't win as much with monsters (cancels out Positives 1 and 2)
Limping in deep stack can be better for Shania than Raising.
How so? With more money behind, stuff like Top Pair (particularly out of position against unknown opponents) becomes more difficult to play IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclastic
If the right players are in the pot, I like to spash around a bit in unraised pots because they're not willing to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclastic
How is this superior to bet/re-raise when we're raising a wide enough range?Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclastic
You read me wrong. You just proved my point. You have the overpair, the opponent has the Top Pair.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fnord
Yea, but I'm addressing more the players who feel obligated to make a continuation bet because they read it somewhere and no one told them about the opposite line. Obviously if you are flexible and experienced you shouldn't make mistakes like mistimed bluffs.
Do you ever fold QQ in deep stack? I do. A reraise on your limp reraise from an unknown player will make me fold. A reraise on your bet-reraise will also make me fold. But I'll lose far fewer chips in the first scenario.
Also, while I have not found more ways how limp-reraising is Superior to bet-reraise, I also haven't found any ways how it's Inferior. So being able to take a Flop with the Positives mentioned in my first post in this thread while not losing EV preflop makes it a good choice.
I don't see how he proved your point. Playing top pair or an overpair (especially less than AA) is much more difficult with deep stacks than with shallow stacks. Overpairs should certainly not be a through ticket for all your money with a deep stack that they might be for short stacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclastic
FYPQuote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclastic
Crystal clear guys?
One thing that I haven't seen mentioned in this thread so far is how the pre-flop betting round is used to jockey for position later in the hand. This includes, but isn't limited to isolation plays etc.
As mentioned, playing certain holdings out of position is harder in deep stack games compared to the opposite, so you could conclude that the battle for position, including limiting the field, using the pre-flop betting round, becomes even more important in deeper stacked games. It's really about managing or limiting your downside risks, and improving or enhancing your upside potentials. Fundamentally, good poker is the application of good risk/reward analysis, so given that stack sizes change risk/reward profiles, its not surprising to me that you'll have to tune your strategies to the stack sizes at your table.
Can we all agree that playing a hand like 88 from EP in short stack games is much easier than playing it in deep stack games because of the increased downside risk? Likewise, responding to LP pre-flop aggression from EP, particularly when there are others that will act on their hands before the original LP raiser speaks again, is also more difficult in deeper stack games. That's why, I would argue, that in Fnord's 88 example, you should be more inclined to be raising your 88 from the CO against 3 limpers in a deeper stack game compared to game with shorter stacks. If a short stack comes over the top of your pre-flop raise all-in, you can call, but if a deep stack does the same, you risk losing your whole stack, thus making that call much harder to make. You effectively need a higher confidence level that you are making a good call because of the increased downside risk to your stack.
I think you see this stack size/pre-flop battle for position phenomenon in pro poker tourneys all the time. Often a largish stack will choose to not tangle with another large stack unless they have way the best of it and will pass on small edges to avoid the larger relative risk to their stack.This is particularly true when they are out of position relative to those other large stacks. Why? That's a good question. I know its partially because quite often in hold-em, where most hands are (read: should be) 2 or 3 way, no one hits the flop, so position becomes an extremely important tactical advantage.
the bigger the stacks, the more position matters.
and for the ppl saying that ur raises should stay the same relative to the blinds, no matter how deep the stacks are. Thats just wrong. If I got a 20 bb stack and someone raises 5 bb preflop im not gonna call with 67s. Or pocket deuces for that matter.
But if we got 10.000 BB stacks, and someone raises 5bb outta pos im DEFINATELY gonna play 22, and I sure am gonna play 67s too. So stack matters.
Actually, the more I think about it, if we say we got 1000bb stacks, I think I would call with just about any hand as long as I had position.
With such a huge stack all that matters is positing.
and maybe even reraises with low pockets/suitet cons preflop, as long as I had pos in a BIGstack game.
I think *calling* with a suited connector sucks, for what it's worth.... ...unless you're floating a post-flop tight player with a wide opening standard.
ok so i'm only 2 weeks behind this discussion, but it comes down to Implied odds. The larger the stack, the larger the implied odds to draw out from behind. Raising preflop reduces implied odds. If I raised 20xbb preflop with AA, then hands like pocket pairs and suited connectors are risking a lot of chips to catch up. If I limp in for 1bb then they are only risking 1/200th to possibly win 200bb.
Also, playing in a 200bb game you aren't going all in as much as you would in a shorter stacked game. I'm looking to pick up 10-20bb pots over and over with no contest moreso then I'm looking to win 400bb pots that I'm only a 60 to 70% favorite in. If you are simply limping into the pot you aren't picking up nearly as much on flops that you miss. Continuation bets reduce in value, and that favors worse players also.
In reality, there are many reasons to raise with the best hand, and together they add up to a very big reason; because you want to win.
no one has anything to say on my post? :(
I am the thread killer
1) to increase your mathematical expectation(get more money in with the best of it)
2) to affect pot odds (minimize implied odds for speculative hands)
3) to win the blinds
4) to take control of the hand (force your opponent to catch a flop/ get a cheap turn card)
5) for deception (give misleading information about the strength of your hand/ the range of hands you play)
6) to define your hand (to gain information)
7) to drive opponents out (increase your chance of winning)
8) as abluff/ semi bluff
9) because we can
Thanks fnord and all for the provocative discussion.
One reason that I raise pre-flop in any game is to help establish the
texture.
I generally don't junk it up too much, and I like a game where my strong hands hold up. At my limits, they'll get paid often enough when I've isolated.
Regular pre-flop raising exacts a toll on limpers and it makes them think twice about limping into the pot with speculative hands when I have position.