[Albert Moulton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You know with two 'weak' players in the blinds, if you look down on J9s, then you should prefer to just limp on the btn, in order to give the blinds the chance to make expensive postflop mistakes

[/ QUOTE ]

This is something that I am not sure if you are being sarcastic about.



[/ QUOTE ]


I'm not sure if I being sarcastic or not either. I is just an illustration of the general wierdness of the book.

A 'weak' player, where you prefer to limp and see a flop instead of raising. So basically you have some dude, that will fold pf if you raise with your J9s (which is obv less EV than playing a flop with him (them))

It is hard to envisage such a player, and simply the description 'weak' as all there is to guide us does not cut it. Is it weak as in someone who folds too much, but if it is, then why does he suddenly start to commit too much post? (or do you want to let him hit something of medium strengt and then bluff him with a big bet on the river, since he is laying every thing down when faced with really big bets, ei. the the weak-tight chapter ...)

Or is it weak as in fish, but those guys call with a far to big a range both pf and post flop, so you prefer to pad the pot pf, so that if they call post, their mistakes will be even bigger

And finally, what is it exactly that J9s is supposed to flop, that will allow us 'punish' this weak player, most likely is some sort of (combo)draw, which is fine is you are planning around stealing, as that is what gives your strategy an extra bit of punch, your pounding away and flopping draws gives you extra leverage.

But here, where the previous section clearly states that planning around stealing is not really desired in NL ??



[/ QUOTE ]

The point he is making is that implied odds are more important than pot odds. If you raise preflop with J9s in the example, then you cut down your implied odds whether you get called or not.

For example, If you have a good drawing hand, deep stacks, and players in the blinds who will stack off for 200bb if you have J9s, and flop a Q8Tr straight vs. BB's QTo top-two, then you would be silly to raise 4bb pre-flop and fold out the guy with QTo. And yes, there are players in many of the live games I've played in who would fold QTo to a raise, but call/bet all-in with top two-pair on a Q8T flop.

So, in this instance, the book recommends that you should let the QTo player have enough rope to hang himself.

Now, if you are playing a TAG/LAG 6-max table with 100bb or less effective stacks and only 5 guys at the table, all of whom are never going to stack off with Q8o from the BB, then obviously this particular tactic in this one example doesn't apply to your game. But the larger concept of playing for implied odds and creating situations in which weaker players can hang themselves OOP is still relevant.