PF Raising Logic
 

I think I take a very different approach to PF play than most ppl and I wanted to know y there is so much reason for let's say re-raising AK pf. To me, it seems that when ur raising AQ or AK pf, although it's true that ur def ahead of their range and could say ur raising for value, isn't it also true that the hands ur ahead of (kq,kj,k10,gj,g10,a10,aj,a9s) will fold out and if u get called u prob either have the same hand or a hand like a small pp or sc which isn't likely to play a big pot unless ur crushed. So, it seems more reasonable to cold call with hands like aq and win big pots when ppl flop an ace with a jack kicker etc. I'm still unsure about blind defending since I do think there is a lot of value in getting as much in pf and therefore cutting down the post flop edge of position, but i think u have to balance the fact that a lot of worse hands will fold out into ur considerations. As for re-raising pp, I see 3-betting small pps as essentially the same as 3-betting SCs (deceptive and hoping to flop big hands) and i c big pocket pairs being fine with raising since u r usually gonna get called by worse pocket pairs all day long, along with the profitable possibiltiy of getting it in pf (whereas I try and avoid getting AK and def AQ in pf). I wanna make sure i'm not saying u should never 3-bet these hands as that is obviously exploitable, just saying that to me, auto-pot mashing against a raise with AQ seems to have some considerable downsides. Also, against loose fishes, its obviously different since they r calling pf very light. Any thoughts?

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

Fold equity agaisnt QQ-88 is why i do it.
also, some ppl will call with AQs, AJs, A10s, KQs if they are tilty/bad. Because you hold 1 A and 1 K your half as likely to run into AA or KK, so your hand is probably at worst a coin flip. If you call a big raise, and dont hit the flop your probably folding to any bet, and if you won't fold then why wouldnt you just push allin PF and get some fold eq.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think I take a very different approach to PF play than most ppl and I wanted to know y there is so much reason for let's say re-raising AK pf. To me, it seems that when ur raising AQ or AK pf, although it's true that ur def ahead of their range and could say ur raising for value, isn't it also true that the hands ur ahead of (kq,kj,k10,gj,g10,a10,aj,a9s) will fold out and if u get called u prob either have the same hand or a hand like a small pp or sc which isn't likely to play a big pot unless ur crushed. So, it seems more reasonable to cold call with hands like aq and win big pots when ppl flop an ace with a jack kicker etc. I'm still unsure about blind defending since I do think there is a lot of value in getting as much in pf and therefore cutting down the post flop edge of position, but i think u have to balance the fact that a lot of worse hands will fold out into ur considerations. As for re-raising pp, I see 3-betting small pps as essentially the same as 3-betting SCs (deceptive and hoping to flop big hands) and i c big pocket pairs being fine with raising since u r usually gonna get called by worse pocket pairs all day long, along with the profitable possibiltiy of getting it in pf (whereas I try and avoid getting AK and def AQ in pf). I wanna make sure i'm not saying u should never 3-bet these hands as that is obviously exploitable, just saying that to me, auto-pot mashing against a raise with AQ seems to have some considerable downsides. Also, against loose fishes, its obviously different since they r calling pf very light. Any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you used entire words, and separate paragraphs, your post would be easier to read. As is, it appears to be a huge jumble of lower case letters with lots of 1-letter abbreviations.

I don't like to make grammar nazi posts, but I honestly can't tell what you're trying to ask. The only question mark is after "any thoughts." Any thoughts about what?

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

I've become a much bigger fan of 3 betting AK pre flop since reading PNL and understanding SPR. Assume a situation at 200NL, player before you raises to $8, and you can either call the 8 or reraise to $25. The benefits of 3 betting all come from making your hand easy to play:

1) if he's the type of player who will only push AA/KK, you can fold to a push, and probably save money vs flopping a pair and being deep stacked.

2) If you flop a pair, you can comfortably get all in on the flop. The stack to pot ratio is nice, and the only hand you worry about is a set here- but because or your pre flop bet they dont have the implied odds to draw to a set anyway, let alone draw to a set with an A/K high board.

3) Sometimes you'll get called by a smaller pair, and they'll fold to a cont bet on the flop fearing a big over pair.

4) You cannot be outplayed post flop at all at this point. No guessing.

5) Most times, they'll fold pre flop.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

After limpers one can always choose the amount one wants to raise, no need to limp after limpers (though weak kickers can still be played carefully by limping, but raising one or two can be the better move than playing against them and the blinds with a pay them hand). AK when the first one in from any position should come out raising if it has any chance of being called by hands it dominates. The weaker slick hands could open-raise less or they could limp, and as the position gets better one can think e.g. an AQ being an AK. It does make sense to limp with slick hands that simply do not steal the blinds often enough and are more often than not dominated when they get cold called/3-bet. One though can't limp with them if one gets raised like half the time, but other than that it's cheap to limp at NL holdem. When the game has loose players limit holdem is the easier game as one is getting the top pair as the nuts vs. all kinds of weak hands (that's harder to make so at nl and they get bigger compensations when they hit their junk stronger), also the blinds may call so loose that the KT is the nuts when it would be in a hard situation even when limped at nl as it's always possible someone, e.g. the BB, has a better kicker and it costs too much money and one gets lesser compensations when one wins (wins a small pot, loses a bigger one, so this is nl).

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
4) You cannot be outplayed post flop at all at this point. No guessing.

[/ QUOTE ] Of course you can be outplayed postflop.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
4) You cannot be outplayed post flop at all at this point. No guessing.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was the case 6-12 months ago but not now. Everyone (even some of the fish) have wakened up to the amount of 3-betting going on and there are many, many people that are calling with a wide range of hands and floating c-bets just like they would in a normal raised pot. The problem here is that if you are unimproved or raised JJ and the board came A-Q high you still have the 'no guessing' mentality and are prone to go into fold mode because surely nobody floats in a 3-bet pot, etc.

A few months ago I greatly increased the amount of hands I was 3-betting. Recently I've reduced my 3-betting again with greater success and I don't automatically c-bet any pot when I've 3-bet (still 90%+) though.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I take a very different approach to PF play than most ppl and I wanted to know y there is so much reason for let's say re-raising AK pf. To me, it seems that when ur raising AQ or AK pf, although it's true that ur def ahead of their range and could say ur raising for value, isn't it also true that the hands ur ahead of (kq,kj,k10,gj,g10,a10,aj,a9s) will fold out and if u get called u prob either have the same hand or a hand like a small pp or sc which isn't likely to play a big pot unless ur crushed. So, it seems more reasonable to cold call with hands like aq and win big pots when ppl flop an ace with a jack kicker etc. I'm still unsure about blind defending since I do think there is a lot of value in getting as much in pf and therefore cutting down the post flop edge of position, but i think u have to balance the fact that a lot of worse hands will fold out into ur considerations. As for re-raising pp, I see 3-betting small pps as essentially the same as 3-betting SCs (deceptive and hoping to flop big hands) and i c big pocket pairs being fine with raising since u r usually gonna get called by worse pocket pairs all day long, along with the profitable possibiltiy of getting it in pf (whereas I try and avoid getting AK and def AQ in pf). I wanna make sure i'm not saying u should never 3-bet these hands as that is obviously exploitable, just saying that to me, auto-pot mashing against a raise with AQ seems to have some considerable downsides. Also, against loose fishes, its obviously different since they r calling pf very light. Any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you used entire words, and separate paragraphs, your post would be easier to read. As is, it appears to be a huge jumble of lower case letters with lots of 1-letter abbreviations.

I don't like to make grammar nazi posts, but I honestly can't tell what you're trying to ask. The only question mark is after "any thoughts." Any thoughts about what?

[/ QUOTE ]

grammar nazis r losers... this is 2p2 an internet forum not my english HW, zomg abbreviations r standard, ldo... he even used punctuations and capitals to begin new sentences several times

OP ur message was fine to read, if the guy had any real useful response to ur question he would have given it

all I can say is that ur thinking about this issue seems to clearly be off, folding AQo in the blinds or vs tight early raises is fine (cold calling sux tho) but 3betting mid- low PPs should not be the norm while cold calling AK should never be done, post specific preflop spots in the strat forums to find out what to do when with which hands. One thing I will say is 3betting these hands (and latter SCs when u get better) is valuable to expand ur 3betting range so players cant play perfectly vs it and just fold JJ and lower without thought, it makes them make more mistakes and u get more action with ur big PPs and other hands in position but u should know what ur plan is for after u 3bet when he calls and u flop or dont or when he 4bets

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

"all I can say is that ur thinking about this issue seems to clearly be off, folding AQo in the blinds or vs tight early raises is fine (cold calling sux tho) but 3betting mid- low PPs should not be the norm while cold calling AK should never be done"

Why is cold calling with aq, especially in position, bad? I agree that if opener is utg or utg + 1 and u don't want any overcallers behind u, then it makes a lot of sense to raise. Other than that, I find cold calling with aq and ak can extract a lot of value from hands like aj, a10 and a9s when the flop is a-high as they expect u to be 3-betting better aces pf. Also, what's the difference in between 3-betting small pps and 3 betting scs? Both r deceptive cause they could hit low flops very hard and in fact ur more likely to flop a set with a pp than a made hand or good draw with a sc. If i am cold calling oop with hands like aq or kq or ak, then i either lead the flop regardless or look to c/r dry flops. BTW, i'm not advocating limping with these hands for two reasons (other than the fact that i never open limp in 6-max):
1) When u open, u will get called by hands like a10s, aj, kq, kj etc. whereas when u 3-bet, pretty much all hands u dominate r thrown away
2) Hands like aq and ak r most comfortable in heads up situations where u can feel safe with tptk whereas in multi-way limped pots, u'll have to be a lot more cautious.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

"2) If you flop a pair, you can comfortably get all in on the flop. The stack to pot ratio is nice, and the only hand you worry about is a set here- but because or your pre flop bet they dont have the implied odds to draw to a set anyway, let alone draw to a set with an A/K high board."

That's the thing though, when the flop comes a or k high and u 3-bet pf - its very unlikely u'll be getting action from hands u beat unless the guy is a complete fish (worse aces and kings fold out and underpairs arent going to give u action - so u'll either be close to even with a good draw or way behind a two pair or better hand). Also, if ur sum1 who auto c-bets and get auto stacked when flopping tptk or an overpair, then there r def good enough implied odds to take a flop with a pp or sc - especially in position.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fold equity agaisnt QQ-88 is why i do it.
also, some ppl will call with AQs, AJs, A10s, KQs if they are tilty/bad. Because you hold 1 A and 1 K your half as likely to run into AA or KK, so your hand is probably at worst a coin flip. If you call a big raise, and dont hit the flop your probably folding to any bet, and if you won't fold then why wouldnt you just push allin PF and get some fold eq.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think pps especially jacks and queens r gonna be folding to 3-bets close to ever. And u contradict urself, u say u have fold equity versus queens and down but if u get it in ur prob a coin flip...
And lastly, I specified that 3-betting these hands versus bad players was fine but versus decent to good ones who pitch all dominated hands - it has some big drawbacks

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
"2) If you flop a pair, you can comfortably get all in on the flop. The stack to pot ratio is nice, and the only hand you worry about is a set here- but because or your pre flop bet they dont have the implied odds to draw to a set anyway, let alone draw to a set with an A/K high board."

That's the thing though, when the flop comes a or k high and u 3-bet pf - its very unlikely u'll be getting action from hands u beat unless the guy is a complete fish (worse aces and kings fold out and underpairs arent going to give u action - so u'll either be close to even with a good draw or way behind a two pair or better hand). Also, if ur sum1 who auto c-bets and get auto stacked when flopping tptk or an overpair, then there r def good enough implied odds to take a flop with a pp or sc - especially in position.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'd be surprised. You'll find guys who called pre flop with AQ, AJ, KQ, guys with QQ who convince themselves you must have JJ, and guys who flop some kind of draw and can't let it go.

And NO, if you 3 bet large enough they won't have enough implied odds to draw to a set. If they commit 1/8th of their stack pre flop, they're already losing money, even if they get paid off every time they flop a set. Once you factor in that that they must flop a set AND I must flop a pair, it's not even close. You cannot set mine profitably in this spot. If its a standard 4BB raise pre flop and you call, totally different. They can set mine profitably.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
4) You cannot be outplayed post flop at all at this point. No guessing.

[/ QUOTE ] Of course you can be outplayed postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose if you miss the flop and c-bet, this is true. But if you flop top pr, its all in. No TPTK-atitis. No SPR of 13 and getting pushed off top pr.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fold equity agaisnt QQ-88 is why i do it.
also, some ppl will call with AQs, AJs, A10s, KQs if they are tilty/bad. Because you hold 1 A and 1 K your half as likely to run into AA or KK, so your hand is probably at worst a coin flip. If you call a big raise, and dont hit the flop your probably folding to any bet, and if you won't fold then why wouldnt you just push allin PF and get some fold eq.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was a suprisingly good 1st post, except you usually have to c-bet AK

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

You'd be surprised. You'll find guys who called pre flop with AQ, AJ, KQ, guys with QQ who convince themselves you must have JJ, and guys who flop some kind of draw and can't let it go.

And NO, if you 3 bet large enough they won't have enough implied odds to draw to a set. If they commit 1/8th of their stack pre flop, they're already losing money, even if they get paid off every time they flop a set. Once you factor in that that they must flop a set AND I must flop a pair, it's not even close. You cannot set mine profitably in this spot. If its a standard 4BB raise pre flop and you call, totally different. They can set mine profitably.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this post, against bad players as i mentioned, players who will be getting stacked with underpaired queens, or calling with worse kings or shoving fds with no fold equity etc. As for set mining, this is the typical situation: hero raises to 3.5bb (pot)with 88 in BTN, BB 3 bets to 12 - so, u r calling 8.5bb into 17. Now, if we assume he auto c-bets (very likely) - thats now calling 8.5 into about 37.5 (he c-bets 20 into 25.5 minus ur initial 8.5), now if consider the fact that ur ahead on the flop a certain amount even if dont flop a set and the fact that u can stack his overpair or tptk if he has it when u flop a set: then i think its def worth it. I do obviously think that playing them in position makes it much much easier. As an added bonus, by calling more pf in these "marginal" situations, u deter light 3 betting against u and make it more difficult for opponents to narrow ur range once uve called a 3-bet

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

better posters than myself have described this issue previously so I wont try to replicate it... ur a bit off from thinking about preflop optimally so I encourage u to check out the strat forums for NL

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
You'd be surprised. You'll find guys who called pre flop with AQ, AJ, KQ, guys with QQ who convince themselves you must have JJ, and guys who flop some kind of draw and can't let it go.

And NO, if you 3 bet large enough they won't have enough implied odds to draw to a set. If they commit 1/8th of their stack pre flop, they're already losing money, even if they get paid off every time they flop a set. Once you factor in that that they must flop a set AND I must flop a pair, it's not even close. You cannot set mine profitably in this spot. If its a standard 4BB raise pre flop and you call, totally different. They can set mine profitably.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this post, against bad players as i mentioned, players who will be getting stacked with underpaired queens, or calling with worse kings or shoving fds with no fold equity etc. As for set mining, this is the typical situation: hero raises to 3.5bb (pot)with 88 in BTN, BB 3 bets to 12 - so, u r calling 8.5bb into 17. Now, if we assume he auto c-bets (very likely) - thats now calling 8.5 into about 37.5 (he c-bets 20 into 25.5 minus ur initial 8.5), now if consider the fact that ur ahead on the flop a certain amount even if dont flop a set and the fact that u can stack his overpair or tptk if he has it when u flop a set: then i think its def worth it. I do obviously think that playing them in position makes it much much easier. As an added bonus, by calling more pf in these "marginal" situations, u deter light 3 betting against u and make it more difficult for opponents to narrow ur range once uve called a 3-bet

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this is, you're assuming the player with 88 knows the other guy has AK. If he's pushing with 88 in this spot, he's getting crushed by larger pairs, and in honestly is spewing. And again, if you bet 1/8th stack pre flop as a 3 bet, 88 does not have enough set equity. So either he plays fit or fold with 88 (tries to hit a set without the odds, -EV), or he assumes the player has AK, winning a cbet when it misses, and gets stacked when opp has a larger pair (also -EV).

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You'd be surprised. You'll find guys who called pre flop with AQ, AJ, KQ, guys with QQ who convince themselves you must have JJ, and guys who flop some kind of draw and can't let it go.

And NO, if you 3 bet large enough they won't have enough implied odds to draw to a set. If they commit 1/8th of their stack pre flop, they're already losing money, even if they get paid off every time they flop a set. Once you factor in that that they must flop a set AND I must flop a pair, it's not even close. You cannot set mine profitably in this spot. If its a standard 4BB raise pre flop and you call, totally different. They can set mine profitably.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this post, against bad players as i mentioned, players who will be getting stacked with underpaired queens, or calling with worse kings or shoving fds with no fold equity etc. As for set mining, this is the typical situation: hero raises to 3.5bb (pot)with 88 in BTN, BB 3 bets to 12 - so, u r calling 8.5bb into 17. Now, if we assume he auto c-bets (very likely) - thats now calling 8.5 into about 37.5 (he c-bets 20 into 25.5 minus ur initial 8.5), now if consider the fact that ur ahead on the flop a certain amount even if dont flop a set and the fact that u can stack his overpair or tptk if he has it when u flop a set: then i think its def worth it. I do obviously think that playing them in position makes it much much easier. As an added bonus, by calling more pf in these "marginal" situations, u deter light 3 betting against u and make it more difficult for opponents to narrow ur range once uve called a 3-bet

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this is, you're assuming the player with 88 knows the other guy has AK. If he's pushing with 88 in this spot, he's getting crushed by larger pairs, and in honestly is spewing. And again, if you bet 1/8th stack pre flop as a 3 bet, 88 does not have enough set equity. So either he plays fit or fold with 88 (tries to hit a set without the odds, -EV), or he assumes the player has AK, winning a cbet when it misses, and gets stacked when opp has a larger pair (also -EV).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya, i agree with u, thats y i guess i would specify that calling pf 3-bets with pps depends on two things: if u know that villain's 3 betting range is very narrow (a lot of ppl only 3bet big pocket pairs) and u guys both have full stacks, its profitable to call a 3bet both in position and oop IMO. Also, if ur in position against a blind defendor or something (sum1 with a pretty wide 3-betting range), u can call 1 c-bet on decently safe flops without having hit a set and be confident that if he bets the turn ur beat, most ppl will just check down ak or aq high after sum1 calls a c-bet - especially when they (3 bettor) r oop. I balance this by cold calling in position with sets a lot and if ppl want to shove ak high on the turn (not very common) then sure they will make me fold my unconnected pps but they will just run into my sets with a-high and any overpair which makes the implied odds of set mining worth it. So, what i think is correct if folding bad pps (9 and under) to light 3 bettors oop, because ur not gonna stack them enough of the time to justify it and ur gonna be pushed off ur hand too often when u cold call flop and check turn. Ill continue after gtg.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think I take a very different approach to PF play than most ppl and I wanted to know y there is so much reason for let's say re-raising AK pf. To me, it seems that when ur raising AQ or AK pf, although it's true that ur def ahead of their range and could say ur raising for value, isn't it also true that the hands ur ahead of (kq,kj,k10,gj,g10,a10,aj,a9s) will fold out and if u get called u prob either have the same hand or a hand like a small pp or sc which isn't likely to play a big pot unless ur crushed.

[/ QUOTE ]


"I am upset that people will fold and not draw out on me, and I am upset that people will call and draw out on me."

So are we all, dude. But the times you get called by a small pair and flop an A or K, you have won a bigger pot because you made it bigger preflop.

[ QUOTE ]
So, it seems more reasonable to cold call with hands like aq and win big pots when ppl flop an ace with a jack kicker etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the same players willing to pay you off with TP3K are going to call reraises PF a lot.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still unsure about blind defending since I do think there is a lot of value in getting as much in pf and therefore cutting down the post flop edge of position

[/ QUOTE ]

But you think there's no value at all in getting money in to maximise the postflop edge of position?

[ QUOTE ]
but i think u have to balance the fact that a lot of worse hands will fold out into ur considerations. As for re-raising pp, I see 3-betting small pps as essentially the same as 3-betting SCs (deceptive and hoping to flop big hands) and i c big pocket pairs being fine with raising since u r usually gonna get called by worse pocket pairs all day long

[/ QUOTE ]

But the same guys who won't make a big pot when they have a small pair against AK will suddenly make one when you have AA?

Your argument would make more sense if you said that you are sometimes going to lose your c-bet against small pairs, but you didn't say that. And it's not a strong argument, because on most flops, the other guy will fold his small pair.

[ QUOTE ]
along with the profitable possibiltiy of getting it in pf (whereas I try and avoid getting AK and def AQ in pf).
I wanna make sure i'm not saying u should never 3-bet these hands as that is obviously exploitable, just saying that to me, auto-pot mashing against a raise with AQ seems to have some considerable downsides.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's kind of player dependent.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, against loose fishes, its obviously different since they r calling pf very light. Any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the last sentence was the one you should focus on. What matters is the range of hands you face and what you think the other player will do.

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I take a very different approach to PF play than most ppl and I wanted to know y there is so much reason for let's say re-raising AK pf. To me, it seems that when ur raising AQ or AK pf, although it's true that ur def ahead of their range and could say ur raising for value, isn't it also true that the hands ur ahead of (kq,kj,k10,gj,g10,a10,aj,a9s) will fold out and if u get called u prob either have the same hand or a hand like a small pp or sc which isn't likely to play a big pot unless ur crushed.

[/ QUOTE ]


"I am upset that people will fold and not draw out on me, and I am upset that people will call and draw out on me."

So are we all, dude. But the times you get called by a small pair and flop an A or K, you have won a bigger pot because you made it bigger preflop.

[ QUOTE ]
So, it seems more reasonable to cold call with hands like aq and win big pots when ppl flop an ace with a jack kicker etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the same players willing to pay you off with TP3K are going to call reraises PF a lot.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still unsure about blind defending since I do think there is a lot of value in getting as much in pf and therefore cutting down the post flop edge of position

[/ QUOTE ]

But you think there's no value at all in getting money in to maximise the postflop edge of position?

[ QUOTE ]
but i think u have to balance the fact that a lot of worse hands will fold out into ur considerations. As for re-raising pp, I see 3-betting small pps as essentially the same as 3-betting SCs (deceptive and hoping to flop big hands) and i c big pocket pairs being fine with raising since u r usually gonna get called by worse pocket pairs all day long

[/ QUOTE ]

But the same guys who won't make a big pot when they have a small pair against AK will suddenly make one when you have AA?

Your argument would make more sense if you said that you are sometimes going to lose your c-bet against small pairs, but you didn't say that. And it's not a strong argument, because on most flops, the other guy will fold his small pair.

[ QUOTE ]
along with the profitable possibiltiy of getting it in pf (whereas I try and avoid getting AK and def AQ in pf).
I wanna make sure i'm not saying u should never 3-bet these hands as that is obviously exploitable, just saying that to me, auto-pot mashing against a raise with AQ seems to have some considerable downsides.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's kind of player dependent.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, against loose fishes, its obviously different since they r calling pf very light. Any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the last sentence was the one you should focus on. What matters is the range of hands you face and what you think the other player will do.

[/ QUOTE ]


I sorta agree with a some of what u r saying, but here r my counter arguments:
Point 1)
"I am upset that people will fold and not draw out on me, and I am upset that people will call and draw out on me."

So are we all, dude. But the times you get called by a small pair and flop an A or K, you have won a bigger pot because you made it bigger preflop.

But what about when u don't flop an a, k or q and the opponent peels the flop (especially in position) with his small pp - essentially ur getting in more money as a coin flip. I'm not sure if i understand what ur saying with "I am upset that people will fold and not draw out on me" but what I'M saying is that I wanna get called with dominated hands and have ppl have to draw out on me to win pots (obviously).

Point 2) The reason they would pay u off with tp3k is because they expect tp better kicker to be raising them pf.

Point 3) u DECREASE the effect of position by getting in more pf obviously because u have less maneuverability (less money/bets behind u). Which means there is less "playing" postflop and therefore u r reducing ur edge of position.

Point 4) I want small pps to call my big pair raises not because i think they r gonna pay off the flop but because im an 80% pf favourite whereas with ak/aq im 50/50 (plus i open the possibility of getting it in pf)

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

[ QUOTE ]
better posters than myself have described this issue previously so I wont try to replicate it... ur a bit off from thinking about preflop optimally so I encourage u to check out the strat forums for NL

[/ QUOTE ]

do u have links to threads which r particularly helpful? thx

Re: PF Raising Logic
 

OP, I think you underestimate how many people raise PF with any Ace from any position and how many of them see a flop after a reraise.

Premium hands are pretty easy to play, there are no hard decisions involved and I don`t think that overanalyzing clear situations helps your game.
Most of the hard decisions in poker come from marginal situations with marginal hands.
That`s the time when skills, reads and experience lead you to the right decisions.

I have a good idea of why so many people find AK a difficult hand to play but I don`t feel like making a huge post so I`ll just skip that part for now. [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]