6-Max UTG Raising ranges

[Ansky]

5/10 6 max: pretty much any pair, any 2 suited broadways, most suited connectors, AJo+, A7s+, KQ.

[AJFenix]

People don't reraise nearly often enough in my games to where thats a major concern. If you can figure out how much wider a player's RR range is then you can adjust, but otherwise most non-PP hands are hitting the muck (especially OOP), unless its something donkish like a minreraise. With full stacks, I will generally see a flop with a pocket pair regardless of OOP or not, because when they make a pot sized reraise its a premium hand more often than not, and I like my implied odds.

Not to mention when I come in raising UTG with a SPP, they reraise with their AA/KK and low rags flop, it will be much harder for them to get away as 1) the pot will already be bloated and money will be going in fast, and 2) its reasonable that I have a weaker overpair or other holding they beat. Same goes if one overcard flops, such as J26, Q35, etc. Compare that to if you limp/call their raise UTG, and wake up and start playing back on that rag flop. Gonna be wayyyy harder to take their stack, as they have much more room to figure out that you have them beat, and you have already given them a ton of information.

[DrGonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
People don't reraise nearly often enough in my games to where thats a major concern.

[/ QUOTE ]

You could be right about that.

[ QUOTE ]
With full stacks, I will generally see a flop with a pocket pair regardless of OOP or not, because when they make a pot sized reraise its a premium hand more often than not, and I like my implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh! 5-10 blinds, 1000$ stacks.
You raise to 40$ UTG
Player behind repops to 140$
No good odds to play for trips even if you have a good chance of taking his stack when you hit.



Because of this, I don't like to raise with such a large range UTG against aggressive opponents or against thinking opponents.
On the other hand, and this happens more often for me, I don't like to raise with such a large range against opponents that are rather loose either. You don't have much of a chance to steal the blinds and you end up playing a big pot OOP with a weak hand or a hand such as 22 which would love to see the flop cheap preferrably multiway [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img].

The only time I see merit to having a wide raising range UTG is when you are playing against tight players, who are not particularly aggressive and not very good players.

Since I use data-mining and table selection to try to find the most profitable tables with as many loose/maniac players as possible, the tables are actually very seldom filled with weak-tight players. If you can't steal the blinds and often enough get re-popped and have to drop your hand pre-flop, there seems to be no reason for having a wide range of raising hands UTG.

Not saying that everyone else is wrong here, just trying to figure out if my own thinking is flawed anywhere [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[edge]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
{0, 0, 1} for everything

22+
A8s+
ATo+
KQo/KQs

add in a few times i randomly raise stuff like T9s, 75s, 85s, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

This plus all suited Broadways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Edge and everyone else, what is your calling range when you get a healthy re-raise from behind?

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on the player. Some players reraise very liberally against me--up to the point where I can expect a reraise about 1/3 of the time, and therefore I have to call/3-raise light and it makes a lot of variance and is not fun--and others have a tight range where I drop non-premiums really quickly.

[AJFenix]

Gonzo, I simply think that if the only hands I am consistantly limping are small pocket pairs, thats giving away way too much information to anyone paying attention, and it can be avoided by simply coming in for 3.5xBB like I would with anything else I would be playing from that position. Think about how laughably obvious some situations become when you limp/call a raise with a SPP and hit a set (even though many bad players will still ignore this, you mentioned "thinking" opponents). Against certain players and with some of the tables you describe, I definitely won't disagree that you are simply better off folding some of the hands in that range, but even though you can narrow it down in certain situations, that range of hands is still very selective.

[DrGonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
Gonzo, I simply think that if the only hands I am consistantly limping are small pocket pairs, thats giving away way too much information to anyone paying attention, and it can be avoided by simply coming in for 3.5xBB like I would with anything else I would be playing from that position. Think about how laughably obvious some situations become when you limp/call a raise with a SPP and hit a set (even though many bad players will still ignore this, you mentioned "thinking" opponents). Against certain players and with some of the tables you describe, I definitely won't disagree that you are simply better off folding some of the hands in that range, but even though you can narrow it down in certain situations, that range of hands is still very selective.

[/ QUOTE ]

You certainly make a good point about badly disguising small PPs and sets (though you can of course use your opponents ability to "read" you to convince him that you hit the set when you actually missed). When I play against thinking opponents I do mix in raises with small PPs and suited connectors and I will occasionally limp with a raising hand as well.

The tricky part is when you have a mixed table with one maniac, one calling station, two weak-tighties and one pro or something like that. I tend to focus on the calling stations and the maniacs though. These are the ones who will give me most the most value and the ones that will be playing the most hands. If I have to give up some value because of that when I'm up against the pro, so be it. It gives me more to maximize profit against the fish.

You're right about me being too gun-shy in EP though. I think I could benefit from loosing up my raising standards more often than I do. I've thought about it before and after reading this thread I'm convinced about it. Most people put too little value in position, but I've gone the other way I guess [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

I still think raising any suited ace UTG is too much. Of course flopping two pair or low trips will make you happy, but that won't happen too often. Flopping one pair will certainly not make you happy and playing a flush draw OOP isn't that juicy (if you are re-raised and can push, it is pretty nice, but if you are called it sucks).

Good discussion!

[DrGonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
It depends on the player.

[/ QUOTE ]

As always [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img].

[ QUOTE ]

Some players reraise very liberally against me--up to the point where I can expect a reraise about 1/3 of the time, and therefore I have to call/3-raise light and it makes a lot of variance and is not fun--and others have a tight range where I drop non-premiums really quickly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's do some actual calculations here:

Your raising range is 14-15% of your starting hands. It would be reasonable for your opponents to re-raise you with something like 6% of their hands, I guess. You have 5 players behind you and if they re-raise 6% of the time, you will be re-raised 27% of the times you raise. I guess that is ok if you manage to steal the blinds sometimes and have a monster sometimes when you are re-raised. Not as bad as I initially thought...

[Lestat]

In my very limited experience, I'm hesitent to raise with hands like A7s from early. I suppose I could, since I'd never allow myself to get busted on an ace-high flop, but talk about your winning a small pot to losing a bigger one...

I think I'd rather raise with a 54s. At least you have some fold equity when big cards flop. With an ace-high bust however, you either have the best hand when you bet the flop, or you're not getting called.

I stay away from bad aces in limit, so I'm CERTAINLY not gonna play them in NL out of position, unless I can be quite sure I'll get the right price. I realize it's nice to move out the ace/jacks, and ace/tens, when you raise with A7s, but I don't think it's that important, because when another ace does call (or re-raises), you're beat and in a world of hurt.

I view KQ a little differently, because now when you eliminate hands with an ace in them you save yourself the pot when you flop a pair and an ace shows up somewhere along the way. Just my opinion...

[AJFenix]

Lestat, the reason for playing/value of suited aces in no limit is much different than it is in limit.

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
Lestat, the reason for playing/value of suited aces in no limit is much different than it is in limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

But wouldn't the main value be for it's nut flush potential? I don't see much value in making a pair of aces. Especially after you've raised UTG pre-flop and got called.

In limit, this hand plays well in short-handed or steal situations, primarily because of it's big card strength. What value (or reasons for raising this hand UTG in NL), am I missing?