Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

I found the latest Cardplayer interview with Alan Goehring to be really interesting for me, especially his views on his unorthodox style.

This is what he had to say specifically about the subject at hand:


"When I won the WPT championship, I would say that 98 percent of my opening raises were for exactly two times the big blind, and in the recent LAPC I won, I would say that 90 percent of my raises were exactly two times the big blind, with the other 10 percent being, at a maximum, two and a half times the big blind."

"I have never read a poker book that suggests regularly making such a small raise, and in fact some books explicitly state that this is poor play. On occasion, a player who doesn’t know me will advise me to raise more, saying I will not be able to get the blinds to fold with such a modest raise. My response is, well, maybe I don’t want the blinds to fold, because if the blinds fold, I am not going to win much. So, it doesn’t matter what I have or if I am in early or late position, it is going to be two times the big blind. Maybe it works for me because of the range of hands I play or how I play after the flop — but I would say, get used to it, because there is no way I will ever change that part of my game."

This really struck me, because the fundamental question must be asked why do we raise 3xBB with our premium hands? Don't we want action from our best starting cards in order to maximize value? Wouldn't it be great if someone re-raised us with our AA, KK, AK, QQ's when they think we are min raising out of weakness?

Anyways, I'd love to hear what some of you guys think of Alan Goehring's play and whether or not it can translate well to internet play.

As for myself, I'm going to experiment a bit with it today in the 4/180s and see how it goes.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Smaller preflop raises mean that he's often allowing opponents to play correctly (according to the fundamental theory of poker) when they make a marginal preflop call. I don't see how that can be a good thing unless his skill edge is so large and he can read other players so well that it makes up for it.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Hard to say, since he didn't really explain why he does it or thinks it is a good idea.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
As for myself, I'm going to experiment a bit with it today in the 4/180s and see how it goes.

[/ QUOTE ]
I see people experimenting with it online all the time. They're called donks.

I think later in tournaments when the blinds are quite big in relation to the size of the stacks it can be a good play, since even a minraise represents a large portion of, for example, the big blinds stack, he still will often fold even getting the big odds in order to preserve his stack. In big live tourneys though the money is generally pretty deep through most stages of the tournament and is therefore not as advisable in those conditions. Taking small pots preflop (i.e. blinds and antes) should be a high priority for anyone who plays a lot of pots.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Isn't that a good thing, to want your opponents to play 'correctly' and play hands that are dominated by you?

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Where's your advantage? If you're Goehring (and I'm not, you're not, very few people are) you have a tremendous advantage post-flop. You can afford to let people see the flop more cheaply because you can and will outplay them after that. Goehring will get away from hands that most people simply won't. He's also talking about a tournament with much deeper stacks than those we typically play online. This again is clearly advantageous to someone who can outplay post-flop as without deepstacks you just can't get involved with lots of hands with any amount of post-flop aggression.

It's almost like taking an NFL playbook to a Pee Wee Football team. We're talking about two totally different games played by people of completely different calibre.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't that a good thing, to want your opponents to play 'correctly' and play hands that are dominated by you?

[/ QUOTE ]
When i'm only open raising with hands that are sure to dominate i'll let you know.

And playing 'correctly' means understanding they're behind but still getting the correct price to play a pot OOP even if they DO assing you a tight range of opening hands. If you're raising lots of hands, you might be a favorite to win the hand with position against say just the big blind, but probably not a 3.5-1 favorite (the minimum odds he's getting to call, even bigger odds after blinds are introduced).

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

I agree with Lloyd. It makes sense for Alan because he's a post-flop crusher. Where does he win most of his chips? By getting people to play with him post-flop. Heck, pot control is favorable for him because it limits the all-in move post-flop and keeps people playing poker with him.

We are not Alan, and we generally are not playing with deep stacks.

Here's some interesting thoughts from Howard Lederer about Alan:

Lederer on Goehring

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Sure, you would like a reraise preflop when you're holding AA. You however don't want 4 callers because you miniraised and everybody is getting a cheap shot to see a flop with 78s. I will usually call a miniraise on the big blind with any 2. Sometimes you might get a reraise, but a lot of times you will get many callers which you don't want. It's pretty hard to fold AA on a 782 flop, and with 5 people in the pot the chances of someone having a better hand is obviously a lot bigger.

And NO, it's not a good thing to allow your opponents to play 'correctly'. Let's say you probably have the better hand and preflop you have a bigger chance of winning the hand. Now it's not a bad thing if villain throws in more chips true. This is not a reason however, to offer him a +ev play by giving him great odds.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
A little while later Peter Costa opened in first position for 600 and everyone folded to Alan in the big blind and he called. The flop came 4h Jc Jh. They both checked. The turn was (4h Jc Jh) 9s. Alan bet 800, about half the pot and Peter called. The river was (4h Jc Jh 9s) 4c. Alan again bet about half the pot, 1500. Peter thought about it for a while and then he folded the AA face up! Alan then turned over KK!!!! Wow, wow. How did he do that? He didn't double Peter up before the flop, and then he managed to beat the AA without improving or risking a lot of chips.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow. File this under Peter Costa's misplayed hands file, not the Alan goehring's a genius file.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't that a good thing, to want your opponents to play 'correctly' and play hands that are dominated by you?

[/ QUOTE ]
The blinds are 50/100 and with AA you raise to 200. It's folded to the big blind who calls with 65s. He's getting 3.5 to 1 odds to call. Was his call correct?

Well, it depends on how well you play and how deep the stacks are. He's actually about a 3.5 to 1 dog IF he sees all 5 cards. That won't happen unless he hits the flop hard. If I remember correctly, with suited connectors I figure I need at least 20 to 1 implied odds against an overpair. So if I can win another 2,000 in chips then it makes sence for me to call. If instead you bet 300, and I had to call 200 more. Than I'd need to win another 4,000 in chips to make the call correct.

You can easily see how deep the stacks are, and how much you'll let me win if I do hit the flop, directly impacts whether or not calling is correct. But just by betting 3 BBs instead of 2 BBs pre-flop you have made it much more expensive for me to get paid off correctly and placed a larger emphasis on stack sizes than how well you play post-flop.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

nobody wants to play with allen post flop. The 2bb raise is just a pot sweetener for him really, bc he wants to get the game to all five streets.

Furthermore, he knows people are uncomfortable playing post flop with him, so why send a man to do a boys job (bet size, im talking about). Finally, the reraise he will have to call with a 2bb raise is smaller than that which would be a 3bb. basically, dont do this unless you are awesome.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't that a good thing, to want your opponents to play 'correctly' and play hands that are dominated by you?

[/ QUOTE ]
The blinds are 50/100 and with AA you raise to 200. It's folded to the big blind who calls with 65s. He's getting 3.5 to 1 odds to call. Was his call correct?

Well, it depends on how well you play and how deep the stacks are. He's actually about a 3.5 to 1 dog IF he sees all 5 cards. That won't happen unless he hits the flop hard. If I remember correctly, with suited connectors I figure I need at least 20 to 1 implied odds against an overpair. So if I can win another 2,000 in chips then it makes since for me to call. If instead you bet 300, and I had to call 200 more. Than I'd need to win another 4,000 in chips to make the call correct.

You can easily see how deep the stacks are, and how much you'll let me win if I do hit the flop, directly impacts whether or not calling is correct. But just by betting 3 BBs instead of 2 BBs pre-flop you have made it much more expensive for me to get paid off correctly and placed a larger emphasis on stack sizes than how well you play post-flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

great post.

this is this one in the anthology thread, too that is pretty good:

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/show...rt=all&vc=1

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
nobody wants to play with allen post flop. The 2bb raise is just a pot sweetener for him really, bc he wants to get the game to all five streets.

Furthermore, he knows people are uncomfortable playing post flop with him, so why send a man to do a boys job (bet size, im talking about). Finally, the reraise he will have to call with a 2bb raise is smaller than that which would be a 3bb. basically, dont do this unless you are awesome.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a typical live tournament, there is 3xBB in blinds and antes. Therefore a lot of people raise 5xBB. If you miniraise, the BB is getting 5-1 pot odds. It is going to be very hard for CO and later not to call due to pot odds and/or position.

One of the advantages to this type of raise is no one has any idea whether you have AA or T7s or what. You also have a lot of options if you are reraised.

The book he was refering to was Erick Lingren's "Making the Final Table". Daniel Negreanu also talks about making a lot of small raises. If you are a LAG who is good postflop and way better than most of the table, this approach is effective.

A lot of players on line will make large raises which are pretty certain to be medium strength hands such as 99-JJ or AQ-AK. There are also tight players whose early position raises can be read as high pairs or big aces. The miniraising approach is more deceptive.

I personally almost never miniraise. However, I like to limp or make small raises. I think that gives you more flexibility and deception than larger raises. I like miniraises only when you have a good chance of taking the blinds with them.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

If online tournaments were deeper and slower, and you could be more confident that you could outplay your opponents on every street / you played as LAG as Alan does and played a very wide range of hands and also got more people to make moves at you as a result, you might be able to make these small raises and play like him and have it work.

Online, though, most players are straightforward enough and stacks are shallow enough that most decisions are made early in the hand, preflop or on the flop. Smaller raises aren't as effective for the nature of the game. Perhaps in something like the Stars $109 deepstack Alan's style could be implemented more properly and profitably.

You know, Alan is registered here. I've seen him post a couple times in WPT. I'd be interested in hearing him elaborate on his style, but I almost never see the big pros post strategy so I doubt we will.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]

A lot of players on line will make large raises which are pretty certain to be medium strength hands such as 99-JJ or AQ-AK. There are also tight players whose early position raises can be read as high pairs or big aces. The miniraising approach is more deceptive.


[/ QUOTE ]
No it isn't. if your opening raises are all 3x your opponents have no more or less info than if they're all 2x BB.

And even if you vary it randomly between 2.5-4x they still have no more information (unless you subconsciously do certain sizes with certain types of hands more often). But most good players make approximately the same opening raise regardless of the strength of their cards.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Smaller preflop raises mean that he's often allowing opponents to play correctly (according to the fundamental theory of poker) when they make a marginal preflop call. I don't see how that can be a good thing unless his skill edge is so large and he can read other players so well that it makes up for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, read UCLA's link on his play. Pretty revealing! [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Preflop raising seems to be very inefficient compared to betting on other streets. When antes are not yet involved, a standard 3xbb raise means you are raising 3xbb to win 1.5xbb. How often do you raise double the pot on the flop, turn or river? a min raise makes more sense in this respect. It also controls pot size. If just the bb calls, the pot is 4.5bb as opposed to 6.5bb. When I call a min-raise out of the bb, it is to get in cheap and bust a player with a strong hand. Against a player who may or may not have a good hand, and is a strong enough player not to overplay their hand and go bust, this is not a good play. It just gives Alan or whoever more of a chance to crush you post-flop.

For a player who has mastered post-flop play, this seems like the way to go to me.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

A lot of players on line will make large raises which are pretty certain to be medium strength hands such as 99-JJ or AQ-AK. There are also tight players whose early position raises can be read as high pairs or big aces. The miniraising approach is more deceptive.


[/ QUOTE ]
No it isn't. if your opening raises are all 3x your opponents have no more or less info than if they're all 2x BB.

And even if you vary it randomly between 2.5-4x they still have no more information (unless you subconsciously do certain sizes with certain types of hands more often). But most good players make approximately the same opening raise regardless of the strength of their cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Theoretically, if you always raise 3.5 x BB, you give no more information than if you always raise 2xBB.

However, if you raise 2xBB,you can put in a lot more loose raises. If you raise 3.5xBB, it is a lot harder to make early position raises, so you are more likely to have a big hand when you do. So your early position raises may be read as 99+, AQ+ or whatever.

If you are miniraising, it is a lot easier to raise in early position with suited connectors, small pairs or whatever. If you pick up a 3xBB pot with a 2xBB bet, that is an excellent result. If there is a lot of action, you can fold with minimal loss. You can fold to a reraise, call and hope to hit your hand or outplay your opponent, or put in a third raise as a semibluff. If you get called, you can represnet an ace, face cards, or an overpair on the appropriate flop. Plus you really might made a really big hand and thn people would have no idea what you have.

Suppose you really do have aces when you miniraise in early position. Then someone might raise and someone else put in a third raise before it got back to you with AK, QQ, or something, not paying a lot of attention to your usual miniraise with some junk. If you have one raiser, they may take your third raise as a move or you can flat call and they will alnmost certainly fire at the pot.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Wouldn't it be great to get the man himself to elicit his views, Alan, where are you? Speak to us. :-)

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

I have been educated out of min-raising (mostly)by 2+2.

However, in the home games in which my poker instincts were first honed, it used to be very profitable. You act in a slightly menacing way by raising all the time, you sweeten the pot and make it more scary dealing with 'reasonable bets' as doyle has it, you get to see a lot of flops with unreadable cards, it terrifies the table when you stack someone with having min-raised 47 pre-flop.

However, it's a style that requires two things:

1. lots of flops
2. Opponents being scared of large bets

It is not, then, a style suited to online tournament play.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
For a player who has mastered post-flop play, this seems like the way to go to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I meet such a player, I'll let him know.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Preflop raising seems to be very inefficient compared to betting on other streets. When antes are not yet involved, a standard 3xbb raise means you are raising 3xbb to win 1.5xbb. How often do you raise double the pot on the flop, turn or river?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're not raising double the pot; you're raising the pot. you put 1 BB in to call, which makes the pot 2.5 Bbs, and raise another 2 which is slightly less than the size of the pot. A minraise is an underbet of the pot.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Wow, I think it shows that the game will accomodate many different styles.

I have never seen Alan play, but I assume he's opening alot of pots (which means he's opening light). I'd be interested how he handles PF reraises.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

a very similar strategy is advocated by Erick Lindgren in his, Making The Final Table book, from the WPT series. as others have said, a few of his main reasons for doing so are his confidence in his post flop play, his ability to disguise his hands, and the ease of letting go of the hand should a tight player come over the top.

i'd still love to hear more from Alan on the subject though.

edit: i believe Lindgren also mentions that he tends to do this early in a tournament when the blinds are small which seems to be contrary to some posts i've read earlier in the thread.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

I read this article last night and was actually going to make a post about it myself.

I've played with Alan once before, on the bubble of the 5K Bellagio tournament that I final tabled. It was definitely an experience. This isn't meant to offend Alan, and he'd probably take it as a compliment, but if I hadn't known who he was I would have thought he was an awful player from what I saw that day.

He was also one of the more frightening players to play againt. He just seemed like a nutjob and I didn't have an idea of what he was doing.

I doubled up on him on the bubble when I defended his button min raise (blinds 1.5-3k) with A7c in the BB. The flop was AT3 with two diamonds. I checked and he bet 9k, I called. The turn was the 7d, I pushed for 50kish (he had me covered by maybe 50k) and after a long time Alan called me with KTo, no diamond.

It's a bad call if Alan knows me at all, and probably a bad call regardless, I had just recently been moved to his table. But like I said, he's a scary opponent.

It really is amazing how he accumulates a stack early in tournaments. Alan, Grinder, and a couple others. They play a ton of hands early and somehow consistently make it work. I swear the Grinder is chip leader at some point of like 50% of the tournaments he plays. WTF!

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It really is amazing how he accumulates a stack early in tournaments. Alan, Grinder, and a couple others. They play a ton of hands early and somehow consistently make it work. I swear the Grinder is chip leader at some point of like 50% of the tournaments he plays. WTF!


[/ QUOTE ]

There are a lot of weak players early on, so I can how it might be possible to accumulate chips by playing a lot of hands.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

I think if you watch the pot sizes closely in the Monte Carlo Millions you'll find the Phil Ivey uses minraises often as well, at least as the chipleader. Of course, he too is exceptional postflop. I suspect that there are many good players who use the minraise when they have a huge chiplead and are raising alot of pots.

It is probably incorrect in most situations if you have a smaller-medium size stack and are playing TAG. The LAG chipleader knows that he will have to draw out on his opponent frequently or will have to bet to win the pot so he doesn't want big pots when he is drawing or having to throw out 2/3 pot with air. Also, the blinds are more significant to a small-medium stack than a large stack so it's not as important to the chipleader to win the blinds any given hand while the shorter stacks may be at the point where they can not afford to lose many of the pots they enter.

Holdemphile

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think if you watch the pot sizes closely in the Monte Carlo Millions you'll find the Phil Ivey uses minraises often as well, at least as the chipleader. Of course, he too is exceptional postflop. I suspect that there are many good players who use the minraise when they have a huge chiplead and are raising alot of pots.

It is probably incorrect in most situations if you have a smaller-medium size stack and are playing TAG. The LAG chipleader knows that he will have to draw out on his opponent frequently or will have to bet to win the pot so he doesn't want big pots when he is drawing or having to throw out 2/3 pot with air. Also, the blinds are more significant to a small-medium stack than a large stack so it's not as important to the chipleader to win the blinds any given hand while the shorter stacks may be at the point where they can not afford to lose many of the pots they enter.

Holdemphile

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't play in that level of event and I generally play TAG. However, when I am putting in a lot of loose raises due to a tight table and or my big stack, I like to make small raises. That way I can get away from the hand easily and it makes it harder for people to play back at me.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

It is not a style suited for neither live nor online play.

Unless you force the table to accept it.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It is not a style suited for neither live nor online play.

Unless you force the table to accept it.

[/ QUOTE ]
This miniraising style doesn't give people a big target to attack. You can reraise, but that may be the one time when the miniraiser has a hand. Or he can play back at you with his mediocre hand. He can also call a reraise with a suited connector or whatever and hope to hit something or outplay you.

It is not a style that is easy to play or to pplay against.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

I tried the minraise for 4 100+ buy ins based on Lindgren's book where he advocates the minraise early on, as he likes to play a lot of pots in position to a caller in the blinds.

It also keeps the pots small so you can try to outplay the caller even with an inferior hand without getting hurt too badly if that doesn't work out.

I got a LOT of calls from the blinds, and picked up quite a few chips, but you find yourself having much tougher decisions to make.

I settled on, and am now using a range of 2.5x to 3x the BB as an open raise during the first 4 or 5 levels rather than the 3-5x I used previously. The results are better, but I don't know that I can attribute it to this specific change.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

I've been thinking about this recently as I've been a strong follower of Eric Lindgren's 2BB raise in early position and 3BB raise in late position philosophy.

I've noticed a lot of times in later stages of tournaments my 2BB raise from UTG is folded around. Does anyone think there's a certain "tell" part to this? That is in later stages of a tournament people who are trying to blind steal and don't want a call will raise 5BBs but if they have a powerful hand and want a call they'll miniraise and hope to induce some calls. Thus, your miniraise, to them, looks like you have a powerful hand and are inducing them to call.

Any thoughts on that?

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A little while later Peter Costa opened in first position for 600 and everyone folded to Alan in the big blind and he called. The flop came 4h Jc Jh. They both checked. The turn was (4h Jc Jh) 9s. Alan bet 800, about half the pot and Peter called. The river was (4h Jc Jh 9s) 4c. Alan again bet about half the pot, 1500. Peter thought about it for a while and then he folded the AA face up! Alan then turned over KK!!!! Wow, wow. How did he do that? He didn't double Peter up before the flop, and then he managed to beat the AA without improving or risking a lot of chips.

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow. File this under Peter Costa's misplayed hands file, not the Alan goehring's a genius file.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, i thought the same thing

furthermore, way to showboat and fold faceup [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've been thinking about this recently as I've been a strong follower of Eric Lindgren's 2BB raise in early position and 3BB raise in late position philosophy.

I've noticed a lot of times in later stages of tournaments my 2BB raise from UTG is folded around. Does anyone think there's a certain "tell" part to this? That is in later stages of a tournament people who are trying to blind steal and don't want a call will raise 5BBs but if they have a powerful hand and want a call they'll miniraise and hope to induce some calls. Thus, your miniraise, to them, looks like you have a powerful hand and are inducing them to call.

Any thoughts on that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know Jesus Ferguson says he makes smaller raises from early position. I think there is some advantage to this as you don't commit a lot of chips with the whole table to act and OOP postflop. Also, you often really have a strong hand, so you want action.

This is similar to the approach of limping in early position with a speculative hand, a marginal high card hand, or a big hand, when you would generally raise with those hands of folded to you on CO.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Preflop raising seems to be very inefficient compared to betting on other streets. When antes are not yet involved, a standard 3xbb raise means you are raising 3xbb to win 1.5xbb. How often do you raise double the pot on the flop, turn or river?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're not raising double the pot; you're raising the pot. you put 1 BB in to call, which makes the pot 2.5 Bbs, and raise another 2 which is slightly less than the size of the pot. A minraise is an underbet of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

say its the 15/30 level. The pot is 45. You bet 90. You're betting 90 into a 45 pot. On the flop, if the pot is 1000, when do you bet 2000? Therefore, its an overbet. Wrong?

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Preflop raising seems to be very inefficient compared to betting on other streets. When antes are not yet involved, a standard 3xbb raise means you are raising 3xbb to win 1.5xbb. How often do you raise double the pot on the flop, turn or river?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're not raising double the pot; you're raising the pot. you put 1 BB in to call, which makes the pot 2.5 Bbs, and raise another 2 which is slightly less than the size of the pot. A minraise is an underbet of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

say its the 15/30 level. The pot is 45. You bet 90. You're betting 90 into a 45 pot. On the flop, if the pot is 1000, when do you bet 2000? Therefore, its an overbet. Wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to call the big blind preflop. That automatically makes the pot larger. Postflop streets so not start with any bets to call.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

Preflop bets go by terms of Big Blinds, post flop bets are discussed as fractions of the pot. It is correct to "overbet" preflop because aggression works in that particular situation when your opponent only has 2 cards of information rather than 5.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

I understand these things, I'm just saying if you look at preflop bets like you look at other bets, a preflop bet is not an effecient use of chips in that way to me.

Re: Alan Goehring on min raising - do you agree?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Preflop raising seems to be very inefficient compared to betting on other streets. When antes are not yet involved, a standard 3xbb raise means you are raising 3xbb to win 1.5xbb. How often do you raise double the pot on the flop, turn or river?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're not raising double the pot; you're raising the pot. you put 1 BB in to call, which makes the pot 2.5 Bbs, and raise another 2 which is slightly less than the size of the pot. A minraise is an underbet of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

say its the 15/30 level. The pot is 45. You bet 90. You're betting 90 into a 45 pot. On the flop, if the pot is 1000, when do you bet 2000? Therefore, its an overbet. Wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]


Yes, wrong. You are calling the bet of 30 which makes the pot 75, and raising 60 more. This is not overbetting the pot.

Also, even if you minraise, by your thinking you would be betting 60 to win 45, so it's impossible to make an efficient raise preflop by your definition.