It's about time we had this discussion

[mikechops]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It was more of a big hand/big pot logic, but yes I'd rather play a multiway pot with SCs ect.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which of these situations is better?

1) you raise to 4BBs with 67s and get 2 callers
2) you raise to 6BBs with 67s and get 1 caller

And these two?

3) you raise to 4BBs with AA and get 2 callers
4) you raise to 5BBs with AA and get 1 caller

[/ QUOTE ]

These are great questions. Perhaps I should have said, I was playing FR at the time so the choices were probably more like between 2-3, rather than 1 and 2 callers. And my raise sizes were 3-5BB. But as I said great questions so after a few minutes thought, here are my answers:-

Hmmm... My optimum number of callers with 67s by a long way is 0. I guess I'd marginally prefer 1 over 2 because I have more chance to win with a CB. I think this is more important than the extra implied odds you get with 2 callers.

I'll take 2 callers with AA. You are still 85% to be ahead of two guys on the flop and you are usually good when you get calls on a CB - though it is expensive when you aren't!

I think I see where you are going: raise more when you want to win the pot pre-flop? The trouble is it costs more when you get called or worse, reraised.

[winterGT]

Isn't the general idea:

SCs: we want more people in the hand so if we hit a strong (conceiled) hand, there's bound to be someone to pay us off

AA: we want less people to decrease the risk of getting sucked out on.

[Dan Bitel]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't the general idea:

SCs: we want more people in the hand so if we hit a strong (conceiled) hand, there's bound to be someone to pay us off

AA: we want less people to decrease the risk of getting sucked out on.

[/ QUOTE ]

no.

With AA, we want more callers, as then we get more $$ in when we have the best hand and we also have much higher chance of some1 flopping a 2nd best hand.

With SCs, we cant play the hand on the value of the hand alone, we need FE most the time, so the less callers the better

[4_2_it]

Dan,

I think Ed Miller would agree with almost everything in your original post. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[winterGT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't the general idea:

SCs: we want more people in the hand so if we hit a strong (conceiled) hand, there's bound to be someone to pay us off

AA: we want less people to decrease the risk of getting sucked out on.

[/ QUOTE ]

no.

With AA, we want more callers, as then we get more $$ in when we have the best hand and we also have much higher chance of some1 flopping a 2nd best hand.

With SCs, we cant play the hand on the value of the hand alone, we need FE most the time, so the less callers the better

[/ QUOTE ]
So if you raise AA and you get 4 callers you think that's a good thing? I really have to disagree. With SC I can somewhat agree.. I think there are two sides to look at it: 1. multiway pot for implied odds to hit big (what I said), or 2. few callers for good FE.

Take the following scenario: There's a FFR and two callers before you. You have 1) AA, 2) 56s. What do you do? I think the answer is an obvious: 3bet with AA to cut their odds to suck out on you (even though you get less people to see the flop) and with 56s you call behind to see if you can hit big.

Thoughts?

[Mr_Donktastic]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, Chen and Ankenman recommend raising less when opening in EP than in LP.
I would love to see thoughts on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do this in full ring but I don't see a point in 6 max since there is not really EP, just mid and late!

[Dan Bitel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't the general idea:

SCs: we want more people in the hand so if we hit a strong (conceiled) hand, there's bound to be someone to pay us off

AA: we want less people to decrease the risk of getting sucked out on.

[/ QUOTE ]

no.

With AA, we want more callers, as then we get more $$ in when we have the best hand and we also have much higher chance of some1 flopping a 2nd best hand.

With SCs, we cant play the hand on the value of the hand alone, we need FE most the time, so the less callers the better

[/ QUOTE ]
So if you raise AA and you get 4 callers you think that's a good thing? I really have to disagree. With SC I can somewhat agree.. I think there are two sides to look at it: 1. multiway pot for implied odds to hit big (what I said), or 2. few callers for good FE.

Take the following scenario: There's a FFR and two callers before you. You have 1) AA, 2) 56s. What do you do? I think the answer is an obvious: 3bet with AA to cut their odds to suck out on you (even though you get less people to see the flop) and with 56s you call behind to see if you can hit big.

Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

If I raise AA preflop and get 4 callers, I'm very happy. Sure, I'll lose the pot a lot more often, but my +EV will improve in the long run, which i think is the point you are missing.


Again, when we 3bet AA, its not so much to cut down other people's odds, its to get value for our hand. If I 3bet AA preflop...I want as many people to call me as possible!

[dd323]

I'm just replying at the end, but I wanted to add a few things.

I don't often vary my preflop bet sizes too much online, and mostly in position like carrotsnake was suggesting (raising pot unless in the blinds than slightly over pot usually).

I don't think its a leak to do so, even in a game with regulars who will pick up on your tendancies. What I mean is that I have a lot of tendancies that smart opponents can pick up on, and as long as you am aware of what they are, and can play other hands in that way or take a non-standard line for you, then I can use these tendancies to exploit them regular opponents.

Sometimes I think its worthwhile, if you think you are better than your regular opponents (who are thinking), to build patterns into your play that you know they will notice, and then switch things up.

When I play live I often use varied bet sizes to accomplish what I want to accomplish, I think the difference is one table, less hands, and better reads so you know which bet sizes will do exactly what you want to happen.

[winterGT]

Ofcourse if I 3bet AA I want everyone to call because then the pot will be insanely high compared to stacks, but if many people call your 4BB PFR (assuming 100BB stacks allround), you're basically sitting on one pair (unless you hit a set) that is hard to get away from, hence big reverse implied odds.. and the more people that can see the flop, the higher the chance someone hit it hard (2p+).

Anyway, I find this discussion very interesting because I always thought my perspective was a 'given' so it's cool to see someone thinks of it in the exact opposite way [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]