playing with regulars...make em say what?

[chloee]

Do you guys think there is any long term +EV in throwing in especially maniacal and memorable plays against people you play regularly since they will always know that you may just be spewing? My opinion of it is that there is some, but I'm not sure if its really worth the investment.

[A_C_Slater]

No, because you will have to do them with too much frequency to make sure it stays in their memories. Most regulars don't know what ABC poker is anyway, much less how to defeat it. But if you're playng at a table with good players that are regulars then you may want to occasionly raise things like 98s,76s,33, UTG with hopes of gettting it to showdown.

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
occasionly raise things like 98s,76s,33, UTG

[/ QUOTE ]

The book, Middle Limit Holdem, has some good ideas about deception. It explains specifically why what you stated is not a good idea.

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
occasionly raise things like 98s,76s,33, UTG

[/ QUOTE ]

The book, Middle Limit Holdem, has some good ideas about deception. It explains specifically why what you stated is not a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]


These specific hands are easy to play postflop if you miss and easy to play when you hit. I've read Ciaffone's book. There is even a part in HPFAP about these things. Or is it Mason's Poker essays? Anyway to be clear, I was making reference to a limit game.

[A_C_Slater]

I've found it, HPFAP pg.233

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
These specific hands are easy to play postflop if you miss and easy to play when you hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. Unfortunately, most of the time they miss and you won't see a showdown. You will not see a showdown every time you hit. Even when you do it, these hands are hard to play OOP. You would be better off raising marginal hands in LP or from the BB for the purposes of deception. The value of deception isn't very high, so you should only be willing to give up a small amount of EV to get it.

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
These specific hands are easy to play postflop if you miss and easy to play when you hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. Unfortunately, most of the time they miss and you won't see a showdown. You will not see a showdown every time you hit. Even when you do it, these hands are hard to play OOP. You would be better off raising marginal hands in LP or from the BB for the purposes of deception. The value of deception isn't very high, so you should only be willing to give up a small amount of EV to get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you. But what if for some hypothetical reason you're playing in a game with solid regulars who play 40 plus hours a week with you and who know that your UTG raise means AA-TT, AK-AJ, KQ, only?


Also, I found a good discussion of this in Poker Essays Volume 3 by Malmuth, pg. 125.

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
But what if for some hypothetical reason you're playing in a game with solid regulars who play 40 plus hours a week with you and who know that your UTG raise means AA-TT, AK-AJ, KQ, only?


[/ QUOTE ]

It means you can throw in hands like 99-77 if there's a decent chance for you to pick up the blinds. UTG isn't a great spot for deception because of the reasons stated above. In the conditions you stated, deception from UTG is even less favourable because you will see a showdown only rarely: you will either pick up the pot or have to fold when you're played back at because of your opponents' range against the range they think you have (unless you hold a monster and your opponent has a good made hand).

[A_C_Slater]

"It means you can throw in hands like 99-77 if there's a decent chance for you to pick up the blinds"

Exactly. So why not do it with a hand like 87s that is even easier to play if you miss? I would much rather have 87s on a 45K 4flush flop than 77-99 with one or two solid players in behind you and maybe one in front.

[_TKO_]

[ QUOTE ]
So why not do it with a hand like 87s that is even easier to play if you miss?

[/ QUOTE ]

You will miss much more often with this hand.

The 99-77 wasn't really for deception, it was more for value. Depends on the character of the game too of course. I assumed a tough game. If this is your typical small stakes game but there's a couple good regulars there, I'm still not deviating much from my normal game.

[bernie]

Depends on the action you're already getting on hands. If you're getting plenty of action, why change anything?

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
These specific hands are easy to play postflop if you miss and easy to play when you hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. Unfortunately, most of the time they miss and you won't see a showdown. You will not see a showdown every time you hit. Even when you do it, these hands are hard to play OOP. You would be better off raising marginal hands in LP or from the BB for the purposes of deception. The value of deception isn't very high, so you should only be willing to give up a small amount of EV to get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you. But what if for some hypothetical reason you're playing in a game with solid regulars who play 40 plus hours a week with you and who know that your UTG raise means AA-TT, AK-AJ, KQ, only?


Also, I found a good discussion of this in Poker Essays Volume 3 by Malmuth, pg. 125.


[/ QUOTE ]

Be more inclined to use Mid and late position for loose raises. Besides, who cares if they know your range for UTG? Actually, with that range, or if you just add 88 and 99, it should be enough to get callers. You just have to be just beyond their raising hands to make them wonder and call.

But jumping to hands like 78s? Too drastic, imo. (though it can be fun:D)How about going for high suited connectors before resorting to that low a hand? Makes more sense and at least gives you more of a chance with callers or 3 bettors behind you.

b