LGB: Raise the right amount

[Supern]

I ask this question with cash games in mind.

In Phil Gordon's excellent Little Green Book he says on page 31 that he raises:
2.5-3xBB in EP
3-3.5x in MP
3.5-4x in LP
3x in SB

He does this because:
* committing fewer chips out of position
* a smaller raise from early pos encourages opponents to play against him when he has a powerhouse
* bigger raises from late position put real pressure on the players behind
* bigger pots in position

What do you have to say about this?
Is this a good strategy?

[deacsoft]

I would think all of the reasons you've mentioned are valid. I think it works for Phil Gordon.

[Supern]

He has nothing to say about if he makes any changes depending on what kind of opponents he's playing against.

If you have AA in EP and you know you have 5 very loose players still to act who will probably call even a 10x raise, why raise only 2.5x?

[Hosayif]

[ QUOTE ]
2.5-3xBB in EP
3-3.5x in MP
3.5-4x in LP
3x in SB

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this raising to 2.5 big blinds or raising 2.5 big blinds more?

[deacsoft]

Obviously, you're adjustment (or one like it) would be correct if that was the situation. Mr. Gordon states many times throughout the book that this is only how he plays and that many other plays maybe/are correct. He's not trying to instruct anyone on how to play. He's providing an inside look at how he plays and his thought processes. Also consider that he plays world class competition. I highly doubt anyone is going to call a 10x the BB raise without A-A, or possibly K-K in the game his writing refers to. Or that he's going to have 5 very loose players at his table. Take the book for exactly what Mr. Gordon says it is and little to nothing more.

[Supern]

If BB=10, he says to open-raise from EP to 25-30.

[ronitonline]

Deacsoft has the right idea,
You would have to adjust how you think is necessary, phil gordon says numerous times that his play isnt necessarily correct play, it is how he plays and how he believes he should play, he doesn't act like he's the best and his strategys are perfect or even the best.

[Supern]

I'm interested to hear about how you guys decide how much to raise.

[smbruin22]

there is definitely a gap out there for no-limit book(s) for not such great opposition (like SSHE but for no-limit).

i get the felling that both harrington and little green think 3 callers are bizarre and also i don't think they realize that some fish will call your 15X pre-flop raise with AA

i have found russell fox book fills in some of the gap, but not the entire gap.

not sure 15-20X pre-flop raise (assuming you will get caller) is good idea except with a very few hands (AA for sure).

interesting topic. i don't think that harrington and/or gordon really live in the same poker world as us. great books though.

can't wait for miller SSHE.

[ECDub]

In AllIN magazine we see where Gordon does indeed apply the methods mentioned in LGB and in this case, it turned out horribly. They covered the best and worst of the Fulltiltpoker.net event in Las Vegas. He was voted as the worst overbet of the event and the worst application of pot odds. He was on the button in both hands and played them poorly. In the first hand, he was playing Clonie Gowen. She checked the flop. She had 88 with a 7 2 6 flop. Gordon makes a huge bluff with AJ and Clonie moves in on him. His big bluff made him pot committed and he had to call.

In the second hand Negreanu raised with 22. Gordon came over the top with a large bet with AQ. Kristy Gazes moves all in from the SB. Negreanu folds, Gordon bet so much on the reraise, he had proper odds to call with the weaker hand and called. Gazes had AK and Gordon was eliminated.

Some of the ways he plays may be questionable and he honestly admits he might not do everything perfect. But for one thing, he definitely plays the same as he wrote in the book for the most part and he has been successful.

One funny thing in the article was that Ted Forrest won several best and worst for the tournament. Best Bluffing persistence, worst cautious check on the river, best bluff read, best risky semi bluff, and worst misread. Sounds like Ted was just screwing around the entire tournament.

The worst cautious check on the river hand was the somewhat famous hand where Forrest had AA and Negreanu had AQ. The board was 4 6 6 (A) (6). He could have probably crippled Negreanu, but he just checked.

[benkahuna]

Overbets that pot commit you put observant players in a position in which they cannot bluff you. You see Gus Hansen do it all the time. Harrington talks about it in his book (vol. 2) when discussing the squeeze play.

You don't always want to put yourself in a position to escape your hand. It's a bit weak tight to always bet or raise in a such a way that you'll have to fold to any raise/reraise. Given the high level of aggression of many of the top players and the known advantage of acting in this manner (gap theory), sometimes you just have to put yourself out there.

There may have been other reasons that Phil made a pot-committing overbet (bad read, not good enough observation of opponents throughout the tournament), but just because a raise pot commits you does not, in itself, imply someone made a bad play.

[SamG]

I think this strategy is better for tournaments than cash games. Chris Ferguson says something very similar in one of his Full Tilt lessons.