Why you guys aren't crushing these Microlimit games...

[Ed Miller]

You guys should read this thread. Decide what you would do and then read Sklansky's advice.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...mp;sb=5&o=

[Vehn]

I'll just say a couple things.

First off I basically never fold top pair for one bet on the flop. Never. To even consider doing that in kong's example hand is a ridiculous way to play poker.

Also situations where I have to actually think about pot odds are rare. I mean once an hour type stuff. And usually your implied odds are much more important that your actual pot odds.

Finally my comment at the very end the linked thread rules. That is all.

[TheRake]

[ QUOTE ]
Regardless of what people think or say on this board weak/tight is not a terrible way to play micro limit games. It is true that it may not maximize winnings, but it WILL make you a winning player at this level.

I agree. You can play tight before the flop, and weak-tight poker after the flop and beat small limit games. You will not beat them for that much, but you will beat them.

But why learn to play that way? If you learn to play that way, you will not be prepared to move up. If you play that way in mid-limit games, you will not win. You will never be more than a mediocre player. The time to start learning to play correctly is now, in micro-limits. Why learn a simple strategy that beats only very soft games when you can learn a more complex strategy that can beat any limit hold 'em game? Especially when the more complex strategy will win much more in the soft games as well.

You guys are here to learn to play solid, winning poker. Solid winning poker means playing tight before the flop, tight in small pots, and aggressively in big pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree with this. My concern was in the context that this forum is a beginning/intermediate forum. Of course everyone is here to learn how to become better poker players. I believe there is an evolutionary process that most poker players go through on thier way to becoming a good player. There are many people who post here that need to learn to crawl before they can walk. My concern was that this post may be misconstrued.

I really struggled with wether or not I should post my opinion because I have niether the experience or knowledge that you have of the game, but I thought it was important that I express my concern.

All that is required is to look at the amount of dialog this thread generated to realize what a great post this really was. I am sure I am not alone when I say I really appreciate all the time and effort you put into teaching us newbies how to play better poker.

Thanks, TheRake

[Gomez22]

After a nice hiatus, I saw this post, and although I will never claim to be the poker player kong and others who have replied are, I do have a few thoughts about this (Be patient, please..... I've just come back to poker after 10 days away from it).

Some of what MK says makes great sense to me, and some I have to disagree with.

I am guilty of folding a few times for 1 or 2 bets, and thus mucking what would have been the winning hand. I hate to admit it, but I've done it.... maybe more times than I would like to remember to tell the truth.

Now, I can see how this post has gotten so much attention, but there are other things to consider in the equation here:

1. I think you have to have some sense of the types of players you're playing when it gets to marginal calls. Many micro-limit players are nothing more than calling stations or chasers. There are however, many decent players at micro-limits. Differentiating between these types of players, I think, is a must for when to make marginal calls or not. This translates into: Know Your Enemy. I read the Art of War a few months ago, and there's a quote in it that goes something like: "If you know yourself and know your enemy, you need never fear any battle, if you know yourself and not your enemy, fear should arise, but if you not yourself nor your enemy, you are doomed to defeat." I think that sums it up pretty well...... I think you have to have SOME type of read on your opponents.

2. I have seen other remarks, and I must agree to an extent that a pure newbie/beginner will struggle with this advice. I think a good understanding of hold em, pot odds, implied odds, etc. may be necessary to understand in detail what MK is talking about.

3. The advice here pertains to big pots, but alot can be said for the small pots you can steal by playing fearlessly. These can make up alot in earnings over the long run. I don't think small pots should be discouraged here, but I also agree that you may need to play "smarter" when the pot is small.

4. The advice about folding in low limits books, is, I believe, there to get players to play tighter and not so recklessly. I know I've had problems with knowing when to fold in the past (sometimes I still do), and it can get costly. I see nothing wrong with folding, but you wnat to make sure that it's not a bad fold. Top pair/big draws should never be folded..... unless you know your opponent isn't likely to be bluffing and is the type of player that "knows" what they are doing.

I think MK made a good post here, but I would like to emphesize that I believe it isn't for everyone. Those jsut starting out should play tight (even weak/tight) until you "pick-up" on the game a little more. This can be a very confusing game that takes years to learn to play proficiently, and taking it in small steps is, I believe, the best way.

PS - Nice post, MK.

'Mez

[slogger]

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]


Now, just because you called or raised the flop does not mean that you will necessarily show the hand down. ... there is no rule that says that if you call the flop, you have committed to calling two more big bets.



[/ QUOTE ]

majorkong, I think your advice is spot on and belaboring this particular example isn't important to the advice....nevertheless I'm gonna do it simply because I think its an interesting example (heck, or maybe I'm just a jerk, kinda hard to tell...)

Calling one small bet on the flop with the 10.5-1 the pot is laying you and the top pair does lead you to three positive posibilities. 1). You hit two pair on the turn. 2). You pick up a flush draw on the turn. 3). You pick up nothing but the blind and middle player both check to you.

Also, you can still fold here with three big bets in and save four more, if the play seems to indicate that.

I just didn't think that it would be your advice to consider folding to one bet on the turn based on:
"you fold too damn much"
"did I mention that you have top frickin pair? "
and: "you should NOT be looking to fold in big pots"

And I thought the way you phrased your advice could lead to too much chasing. I loooove players who time after time turn over ace-weak kicker.

So having quibled this thing to death (sorry about that), still a great post majorkong.

--Zetack

P.S.
My girlfriend, when I told her about this thread said, "Gee, you complain frequently when you don't get enough action on your big hands....maybe he's trying to to drum up action...."

Now that made me laugh.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]




Also, you can still fold here with three big bets in and save four more,

[/ QUOTE ]

Sheesh....three SMALL bets of course. somebody shoot my editor.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
Good post! You're math just got a lot better. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Rotfl. Yeah, my head may still explode though....

[Gildersneeze]

Had a situation just like this a couple of weeks ago in my home game (No Limit with .25/.50 blinds). Picked up red Aces on the button (first no-brainer hand pre-flop all night. Coooold cards until then). Whole boatload of limpers, and needless to say, I raise to get a few of these drawing turkeys the hell outta my AA pot. I kick it up five bucks, making it $5.50 to go. I only catch one caller in middle position.

Board shows up 5c 6c 8s.

MP bets $.50. I raise by $4.50 to bring the total bet to an even $5. MP calls (sweet, either he hit something on the board that he liked, or I've got this guy on a draw he just can't let go).

Turn is the 6s.

MP bets $3. I have a feeling that he's representing two pair or trips, but I'm determined not to let him scare me off with a $3 bet. For f***'s sake, I've been betting out $5 per round! But then the old nagging doubts come into my mind. "What if he does have that six? Hell, what if he's got POCKET sixes? What if I was beat on the flop and now, drawing dead on the river? What if? What if? What if?"

Earlier that night, since this was only the second No-Limit game I'd played ever, I re-read the No-Limit section in Super System (yeah, yeah, Brunson's a cheater, or his book sucks, or whatever, don't know for sure, don't really care), and some advice here on the No Limit subforum. Brunson's advice in No Limit is a lot like Major Kong's here. Once you start playing a pot, especially when the pot odds are giving you decent odds on a raggedy-ass board to your huge over-pair, play that mahfah agressively, and KEEP LEANING on the other guy until the other player gives you a reason to slow down, not the cards on the table.

So I count my chips, look at the pot, suck it up and go All-in over the top of this guy's $3.00 bet by another $10.70, to bring the total to $13.70 (what, we're all waiters, valets, McJob holders and college students, not bankers [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]). I figure with the blinds/limper calls, my bets and his calls/last bet, there's already between $25 and $30 in the pot, and it's the biggest we'd had all night.

My all-in bet added another $10 I want him to be pot committed to try and snag. He thought about it, and called. We turned up cards, and I couldn't believe the craziness. He turns up 7c8c. Caught him with his hand in the cookie jar trying for the straight flush.

River is a beee-yutiful red 7, giving him eights and sevens to my Aces and sixes.

Back in the proverbial day, I would have folded with the possibility of two (straight) flush draws, a pair on the board, straight draws, and a guy suddenly betting hard (by comparison) in to me after the board pairs. But I finally decided that I wasn't going to be a nancy boy, and ended up dragging a pot.

I think most of the time that my pocket Aces haven't held up isn't because they got cracked on the river, or whatever, but more along the lines of I was scared when certain boards would show up and someone who'd been quiet before makes some sort of weak-assed bet, trying to represent.

So cheers, Major Kong, I agree wholeheartedly. Stop being wusses, guys. There's more to poker than what's told to you in a book.

Edit: I know, one hand doesn't mean crap overall. But before more research, reading, and thinking about things, I would have never raised, and automatically assumed I had just been bet into by trips instead of an open ended SF draw, and mucked my Aces up.

But seriously, had I lost it all by a rivered straight, flush, trips, full, or SF, I still would have realized that I made the right play by making this guy sweat over an All-In bet, and then have to make the call on a draw.

[GuidoSarducci]

Mez,

Excellent points. I'd like to revisit the idea that Kong's advice is for players that have a good command of how to identify a hand that is a potential winner.

Though the advice in the beginner poker books doesn't make a heck of alot of sense to the experienced player, they are VERY valuable in getting the novice player to understand what constitutes a playable hand from trash. It's the old "learn to walk before you can run" philosophy. These novice players, if they play "by the book", will turn out to be tight/passive players, but they will certainly stop such chip hemmoraging plays as calling down with 49o to the river when they hit bottom pair. Once you get the newbie to figure out starting hand selection, then they can move onto understanding odds and finally to such advanced concepts as betting for value.

The concept here is that, for the most part, you can expect your average low limit player to

a: play marginal hands to the river and
b: not have the knowlege to pick up on the fact they they're being smacked around by you.