$5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Razz ($5/$10), Ante $0.50, Bring-In $2 (converter)

3rd Street - (0.70 SB)

Hero: 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]___calls
Seat 2: xx xx 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]___brings-in___folds
Seat 3: xx xx A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___folds
Seat 4: xx xx 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___folds
Seat 5: xx xx 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___folds
Seat 7: xx xx 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___folds
Seat 8: xx xx 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___raises

4th Street - (3.10 SB)

Hero: 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___calls
Seat 8: xx xx 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___bets

5th Street - (2.55 BB)

Hero: 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]___bets
Seat 8: xx xx 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]___calls

6th Street - (4.55 BB)

Hero: 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___checks
Seat 8: xx xx 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]___checks

River - (4.55 BB)

Hero: 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___bets
Seat 8: xx xx 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] xx___folds

Total pot: (4.55 BB)

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

3rd street - hero MUST raise.

4th street - hero should fold, pot is too small BECAUSE YOU DIDNT RAISE!

But ignoring pot size I think 5th street is a check, villain raised on third street into that field, you can bet as a heavy favorite that he has a 4 card hand made and didn't pair the 6 on 4th street. I have to admit its might close to a bet, but I think checking is slightly better.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Beautifully executed Razz bluff, playing your boards rather than your hand (and assuming a decent knowledge of your opponent). Well bowled.

3rd Street- Call was fine. You were trying to keep in that extra customer when you were holding the very best possible starting hand. He wound up folding to the Raise, but he DEFINITELY would have wound up folding to the RR. With the nut starting hand, I want as many people in that pot as possible.

4th, call was fine. Fold would've been OK too if you weren't prepared to tell lies later on, but you were, and did so beautifully. You openly represented exactly what you had (2 lows in the pocket) when you bricked with a paired ace and set up subsequent streets for a bluff should your opponent brick.

5th- A perfect card for you and the plans you have with this hand. It doesn't matter that you bricked too- your opponent doesn't know that since your brick is buried and his second open deuce now leaves you both essentially even with open low pairs, but you with all the tempo and initiative, now to mention what looks like a substantial improvement on 5th with the 3.

6th- Again, played perfectly for your plans. You both caught precisely the same card, leaving you in the same strategic position as 5th. No sense putting in any extra money and trying to take it here down since your opponent will just call- that extra bet is better used on 7th as a bluff...

7th- That extra bet you saved on 6th now goes in on 7th as a perfectly executed bluff, forcing your opponent to fold if he catches any high card or any pair card (more likely than not).

Perfectly, perfectly executed Razz bluff.
A+ on this one.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
3rd street - hero MUST raise.

4th street - hero should fold, pot is too small BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T RAISE!

But ignoring pot size I think 5th street is a check, villain raised on third street into that field, you can bet as a heavy favorite that he has a 4 card hand made and didn't pair the 6 on 4th street. I have to admit its might close to a bet, but I think checking is slightly better.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I made a positional error when reading the hand, I though villain was early to act not in a steal position. With that in mind I still raise 3rd street - we have no evidence the 9 will play on drawing poorly. As played 4th street is now super marginal, I fold if the villain is a bluff catching calling station or an excellent player, but against anyone with a brain I call. My correction now comes on 5th street, the action sways me closer to a bet now because its likely the villain is on a steal but I wont bet vs a bluff catcher.

PS: I forgot to mention I love the river bluff in the prior post

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

It's been said in this thread that we should call in order to induce another player to come into this pot. But, speaking in general terms, even though we have the very best possible starting hand, doesn't it play much better heads-up? I'd rather put myself in a position to win the pot simply by catching better than one opponent rather than forcing myself to catch very good against several.

Anyways, that logic doesn't even apply to this situation since the bring-in will almost always fold anyways. I think Andy should just reraise for value.

I'd fold 4th like TT said.

5th street bet is probably good since the 6 may've paired villain and he may fold the "best" hand. He also may incorrectly fold a steal hand that is currently leading.

7th looks like a good bluff.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's been said in this thread that we should call in order to induce another player to come into this pot. But, speaking in general terms, even though we have the very best possible starting hand, doesn't it play much better heads-up? I'd rather put myself in a position to win the pot simply by catching better than one opponent rather than forcing myself to catch very good against several.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this case, the call possibly stood to keep one other fisherman in the pot, particularly if he was attached to his bring and had low cards. The potential downward value of keeping him in by just calling is greater than the expense of one extra bet that we missed by not RR'ing the better.

Any big starting hand plays better against one player than it does against a few opponents, however, the potential for very big pots and very big profits comes from keeping in customers when you are on a monster. A/2/3 in razz is the equivalent of 2/3/4 suited in Stud 8. With starting hands like that, I welcome all the action I can get on the early streets. If it doesn't improve, then I'm off it without having to abandon too much to the pot. If it does improve, then I'm in the drivers seat in later streets with multiple players who are priced in, right over the edge of a cliff.

A/2/3 is one of the few hands where you welcome action rather than trying to cull it.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

I like it.

I can see reasons for both raising and smooth calling third

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's been said in this thread that we should call in order to induce another player to come into this pot. But, speaking in general terms, even though we have the very best possible starting hand, doesn't it play much better heads-up? I'd rather put myself in a position to win the pot simply by catching better than one opponent rather than forcing myself to catch very good against several.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this case, the call possibly stood to keep one other fisherman in the pot, particularly if he was attached to his bring and had low cards. The potential downward value of keeping him in by just calling is greater than the expense of one extra bet that we missed by not RR'ing the better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your advice shows a lesser expected value in the long run, and may also encourage a fold on 4th where as what we really want to create a situation where the hero can call 4th street regardless of the 4th street cards. Your showing weak tight thinking by not raising to get the hand heads up, it is not the long term winning play.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Unless villain had two pair himself, I don't see why he folded the river because you haven't credibly represented anything. Looks like you got pretty lucky here.

I raise 3rd, fold 4th and check 5th. And if I bet 5th, I bet 6th too.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]


I think your advice shows a lesser expected value in the long run, and may also encourage a fold on 4th where as what we really want to create a situation where the hero can call 4th street regardless of the 4th street cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

With A/2/3, you can take 5th street regardless of the cards, and in the face of raises, seeing as a typically live draw gives you 16 (- upcards) to improve towards a 7 and 20 (- upcards) to improve towards an 8.

[ QUOTE ]
Your showing weak tight thinking by not raising to get the hand heads up, it is not the long term winning play.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, it is precisely a "long term winning play" even though it may not work out in the short term in certain circumstances.
In that situation, with those cards, I'd invite action rather than cull it every time.

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer to this question, as it tends to be stylistic, but when I'm that low on 3rd, ill gladly try to keep in an extra opponent when I know it won't be any more than 3 to 4th.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Putting some numbers to this: If we give the stealer an okay but not great hand and the 9 up has A3 in the hole you get these equities:

As 2c 3h 0.515
8c 5c 2h 0.247
3s 9c Ad 0.238

If you isolate against a typical stealing hand:

As 2c 3h 0.580
8c 5c 2h 0.420

He could have a better hand, he could have a worse one. If we call 3rd and the 9 comes along with 93A we will have 51% of a 3.6 SB pot with 1 SB invested, or about 1.3 SB EV of non-invested bets. If we reraise and isolate we will have 58% of a 5.1 SB pot with 2 SB invested, or about 1.8 SB in non-invested equity.

In the immediate case I think it's clear reraising is more +EV than calling, plus if you just call and the 9 drops out then you just have a premium hand and a smaller pot which is bad. Are your implied odds/idiot player factor/whatever you want to call it worth more than half an SB? I don't know. Someone figure that out for me please lol.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Doesn't matter what the game is, whenever I get 3 pair I move all in. If called, I yell three pair and then act bewildered for the next 10 minutes that my three pair didn't beat whather the villian had.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are your implied odds/idiot player factor/whatever you want to call it worth more than half an SB? I don't know. Someone figure that out for me please lol.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's almost entirely an implied odds issue. The pure math breaks right about even, but in later stages of the pot, the potential for a higher payoff exists with 2 donators rather than 1- without even considering that at some point, you will likely shed at least one of the players who will orphan his previous bets should he brick badly.

One of the most important factors is that the call instead of the raise masks your a/2/3, allowing you the potential to raise ANY lowball even if it pairs. Bet/Raise/RR pretty much tells your opponent that there is an a/2, a/3, or 2/3 in there somewhere.

The call accomplishes two goals. It serves to potentially bring in another donator while you're starting with the stone cold nuts, and it doesn't betray the fact that you're starting with said nuts. Calling 3rd with A/2/3 is deceptive and is my preferred play almost every time, barring knowledge of my opponents which might dictate a better strategy.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

3rd Street - raise
4th Street - fold

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

with A23, I sometimes raise and somtimes just call on third. I don't think it is correct to play it the same way every time. It may not be correct, but I am not a big fan of re-raising early in razz, because I don't like committing a lot of $ to the pot early when the villian can be way ahead on fourth if I brick and he catches good.

I love this kind of bluff. Very nicely done.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I think your advice shows a lesser expected value in the long run, and may also encourage a fold on 4th where as what we really want to create a situation where the hero can call 4th street regardless of the 4th street cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

With A/2/3, you can take 5th street regardless of the cards, and in the face of raises, seeing as a typically live draw gives you 16 (- upcards) to improve towards a 7 and 20 (- upcards) to improve towards an 8.

[ QUOTE ]
Your showing weak tight thinking by not raising to get the hand heads up, it is not the long term winning play.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, it is precisely a "long term winning play" even though it may not work out in the short term in certain circumstances.
In that situation, with those cards, I'd invite action rather than cull it every time.

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer to this question, as it tends to be stylistic, but when I'm that low on 3rd, ill gladly try to keep in an extra opponent when I know it won't be any more than 3 to 4th.

[/ QUOTE ]

What you call stylistic I call contrary to the advise in Sklansky on Razz. To date that is the most spot on book about any poker game I have read, he nailed 3rd street so well there is no need to deviate from the recommended course.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
with A23, I sometimes raise and somtimes just call on third. I don't think it is correct to play it the same way every time. It may not be correct, but I am not a big fan of re-raising early in razz, because I don't like committing a lot of $ to the pot early when the villian can be way ahead on fourth if I brick and he catches good.

I love this kind of bluff. Very nicely done.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is precisely why you raise (its not a re-raise because the first "raise" was the villain completing), you want to commit too many chips early in the pot so if the villain catches good on 4th you have the odds to call down. Remember the villain is likely on a steal, peeling 4th after you just call on 3rd even with A23 as the 3rd street starting hand is too loose. Think of this as pot size manipulation you WANT to play a big pot.

Not re-raising is like calling with AA in the small blind vs a button raiser in Hold'em - the percentage long term play is to re-raise, not call, yet the local nits always seem to call not realizing its not the best option in the long run.

Lastly consider meta game factors. What happens if the villain re-raises again? Wouldn't that be nice? multiple 3rd street raises tie the villain to the pot just like it ties the hero to the pot, we like that as well when we are such a HUGE favorite to win.What about on future hands - the villain will become hesitant to steal lightly when he feels you will defend vigorously.

Now everyone - repeat after me: "not re-raising third street is weak tight, and will make *TT* want to sit on your left forever and ever." - I like [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

TT - thanks for the great explanation. I will make this adjustment in my play. Any idea where to find a copy of Sklansky on Razz? It seems to be out of print.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
TT - thanks for the great explanation. I will make this adjustment in my play. Any idea where to find a copy of Sklansky on Razz? It seems to be out of print.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its included in Sklansky on Poker as a double book, and is available at the Gamblers Book Store in Las Vegas (mailorder). Andy might want to add this to the FAQ since its asked so often lately.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Thanks for the info TT. Ordering it right now.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Nicely played.

Just one question is this play dependant on your view of the OP and only used after several hands or is this a standard play, that can be used with an unknown villain.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Question: What does Andy think of his play?

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]


What you call stylistic I call contrary to the advise in Sklansky on Razz. To date that is the most spot on book about any poker game I have read, he nailed 3rd street so well there is no need to deviate from the recommended course.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Two things.

1) The play very well may be contrary to what a book says (even Sklansky on Razz!)

2) You don't seem to understand that calling 3rd in this situation isn't a gesture of "passivity" (since you keep calling it "tight passive"). It is a trap, meant to mask a monster hand and to elicit more action.

Juicing the pot early on in order to have the 'proper odds' to call another street is a reasonable philosophy for people who lack sufficient right brain skills to deviate from "standard play" in certain situations.
Here, even in spite of the pot odds, calling 3rd to obtain better action would indeed imply a degree of "tactical commitment" to the pot even if you bricked on 4th.

Sometimes, I forget that all poker players are, fundamentally, either creative or procedural in nature. While creative players can be aware of the proper procedural plays and act in spite of them, procedural players are usually stymied by the creative play, since their methodology is functionally rigid.

Again, let me address the three critical precepts that you don't seem to be getting which warrant a call in this very specific situation.

1) Welcoming action while holding a monster. Implied Odds.
2) Masking your monster hand. Deception.
3) Establishing the ability to bluff paired 2's and A's in the event of a brick, without telling your opponent on 3rd that's what you have.

For the rest of my life, I wish nothing more than to have ABC gamers to my table. Their play is infinitely manipulatable and they're easily deceived, and the beauty of it is, they just don't know it (and they never will)
I know precisely what they're doing (because I've read the books too), but they have absolutely no idea what I'm doing.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Landon, I think one big problem with the 'smooth call 3rd' argument is that the majority of the time the 9 will fold anyway which then means all that happened was you missed getting another SB in from the stealer which you can expect to win about 60%, so there goes an immediate 2 tenths of an SB I'd say about 75% of the time or so. In order for your argument to be complete you will need to address this as well.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

I'd reraise third here, but since I didn't I'd fold fourth.

If UTG raised and you were UTG+1 I'd just call with this ante structure, in this spot you have to raise to make stealers pay.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]

...
1) Welcoming action while holding a monster. Implied Odds.
2) Masking your monster hand. Deception.
3) Establishing the ability to bluff paired 2's and A's in the event of a brick, without telling your opponent on 3rd that's what you have...


[/ QUOTE ]

For #1, others have pointed out that the bring-in is probably folding anyways, so calling with our monster is more often giving away action rather than getting it.

For #2, the only good defense against a possible steal is to raise with any playable hand. If you're playing that way, raising with A23 doesn't give away any information beyond that you have a 3-card hand, because you'll be doing the same thing with 875 here. Sometimes deception means taking the same hand and playing it different ways. Sometimes it means taking different hands and playing them the same way.

Because a 3rd street raise tells our opponent nothing more than we have 3 cards eight or lower, we still retain our ability to bluff our paired hands, taking care of #3...

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
the only good defense against a possible steal is to raise with any playable hand. If you're playing that way, raising with A23 doesn't give away any information beyond that you have a 3-card hand, because you'll be doing the same thing with 875 here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't disagree with this concept more (generally speaking, barring opponent-specific information that might dictate otherwise). Since it's basically the predicate for your entire rationale, I guess it's what I should address.

I believe that it is "usually" proper to raise any playable 3 card hand, however, it is far, far from being a "rule".
I suppose that for those who play a "trained ape" style of Razz where certain stimuli elicits a certain specific reaction in hope for being rewarded with the banana, this might be a simple and easy rule to abide by. However, I can think of, oh, i'd say a bazillion situations where raising "any playable hand" is not the appropriate response or play. I guess i'm one of those Donks who give Razz a bit more credit as a nuanced game than maybe "the book says".

So, in this respect, I guess that yes.. If your response is to raise any playable hand on 3rd in order to achieve sufficient pot odds to potentially call a brick on 4th and then reevaluate depending on what hits on 5th, then raise A/2/3 (which in and of itself is a remarkably unsophisticated style that will, as Eli Elezra says, "leave your children unprotected" in any situation where you don't improve, or, force you to perpetually bluff your paired bricks and pray your opponent folds.

If your style is such that 3rd and 4th are more carefully evaluated, then raise or call are equal, depending on the specifics.

I agree 100% that getting the 9 to call is marginal. However, when I have A/2/3 against reasonable opponents who are capable of folding, the more people in that pot, the better and ill gladly forgo the one bet on 3rd to potentially get another person in with a marginal hand like 9/Low/Low. If 9 is a real rock, then I suppose I might lean towards raise, but absent that, i'm calling 100% of the time for more action.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

I used to have a moderately thorough discussion of various books in the FAQ. Mason didn't want any book recommendations in any FAQ, because he doesn't want the forum to appear biased. It's part of the reason that the book forum doesn't have an FAQ.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Well, I'm not unhappy with how I played, and I certainly was pleased when the other guy folded. Maybe he couldn't beat AA anyway. I definitely agree that I should have popped third street, and I'm not sure why I didn't. Especially with the pair showing, I should have ditched fourth, but A23 is just so damned pretty I couldn't do it. All the more reason to pop third street as you say. On fifth, maybe I should just give up, but the Trey appears to be a good card, and maybe the other guy is weak. I doubt that I'll buy the pot there, but maybe I can take it away from him on sixth. Sixth doesn't come down especially well and I chicken out. On the river, my hand is hopeless, not even good enough to catch a bluff. Maybe I have a 20% chance of buying the pot, maybe I don't. I thought it was an interesting hand, debatable on pretty much every street, and it looks like I was right.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
...If your response is to raise any playable hand on 3rd in order to achieve sufficient pot odds to potentially call a brick on 4th...

[/ QUOTE ]

That is not the reason to raise 3rd street (although it is one (of many) reasons for raising A23). We raise any playable hand here because there is a good chance that the villain is on a steal. Since we raise a wide range of hands facing a possible steal, we already have deception when we raise with A23, and there is no reason to give up our equity edge by smooth calling the completion.

If the completion came from early position, and the villain was much more likely to have a legitimate hand, then just calling with A23 on occasion would add deception to my play, because I'll be just calling with a lot of weaker hands in that situation as well.

Out of curiosity, when facing a possible steal, what hands do you raise with? What hands do you call with?

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

There is indeed a chance that villain is on the steal in this situation. Whether it's a "good chance" or not has a lot more to do with very specific game-play indices that Andy hasn't elaborated upon, so it isn't a presumption any of us can make (as you just did). No matter, the steal is an undeniable consideration of this particular situation where villain had a strong up and only has to overcome one other up-low and the bring.

The fact that he is walking off a cliff into A/2/3 is just gravy.

In the event villain is trying to steal by raising Andys up-ace, the RR might accomplish nothing more than a fold, leaving you with a hand full of wasted potential. A/2/3 is a hand I would MUCH rather play through than accept the consolation prize of a couple bets by catching an opponent in a bluff and taking it down on 3rd.

"Defending against the steal" is probably the very worst possible reason to raise A/2/3 in this situation, seeing as you are far, far from being in a "defensive" position with A/2/3. All it does is serve to end the action early in the event you're right.

When facing a steal (or what I believe to be a steal), I would usually raise with a decent low or even a half-assed low with a strong low upcard if the opponent is known to be capable of folding his bluffs. Monstrous lows, I call. Every time, 100% of the time, if there is even the slightest chance I can elicit another customer into the pot.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]

2) You don't seem to understand that calling 3rd in this situation isn't a gesture of "passivity" (since you keep calling it "tight passive"). It is a trap, meant to mask a monster hand and to elicit more action.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Not re-raising means you like to play small pots, and have small returns on your investment. I bet your also the guy who cold calls after 3 limpers and a raiser on the button with AA in Hold'em - incredibly weak passive but I LOVE to have guys like you in my games because you keep it cheep for me.

2) The only person you are trapping is yourself. Hello 4th street fold if the villain catches a good card! Hello bring in with a 9 fold on 3rd street 85% of the time! Howdy no concept of the Fundamental Therm of Poker!

3) re-raising has immense meta value, cold calling has no meta value at all.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

Elaborating on "very specific game-play indices" would involve paying attention, which I'm not very good about online. Also looking up "indices."

I don't mind taking down $10 uncontested with A23.

Re: $5/10 Razz--Three Pair
 

[ QUOTE ]
1) Not re-raising means you like to play small pots, and have small returns on your investment.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, actually, that isn't what it means. At all. Stupid assumption. I've been pretty clear on the thinking, and no where in what I've said would it suggest that i'm calling because "I'm a guy who likes to play small pots and have small returns on my investment."
Your retort to my thinking is levying charges based on nothing more than your own dumb assumptions.


[ QUOTE ]
I bet your also the guy who cold calls after 3 limpers and a raiser on the button with AA in Hold'em - incredibly weak passive but I LOVE to have guys like you in my games because you keep it cheep for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hell no. That's a field I would definitely want to cull.
Stop making these stupid (and incorrect) assumptions.
Here's a good way to help yourself. Whenever you feel someone is wrong about something, make your case without using phrases like "I bet you..." or citing anecdotes.

[ QUOTE ]
2) The only person you are trapping is yourself. Hello 4th street fold if the villain catches a good card! Hello bring in with a 9 fold on 3rd street 85% of the time! Howdy no concept of the Fundamental Therm of Poker!

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't understand about 40% of what you just wrote there, what with the disorienting hellos, therms and howdies.

[ QUOTE ]
3) re-raising has immense meta value, cold calling has no meta value at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL @ "immense" meta value.