Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread
[ QUOTE ]
There is a problem I'm having with some of the SPR stuff.
While it's great that the idea is presented to manipulate the pot preflop to make it correct to stack off with our good "top-pair" type hands, nowhere does it discuss the adverse effects, or collateral damage, of doing so in certain spots. I'll give you an example.
On page 270 hand no.2. We have kings UTG+1. We want to get close to 10% of our stack in preflop to hit our SPR, and our effective stack size is 100bb. So we limp and then do a mini-reraise when the button raises to 4BB. We have achieved our correct SPR so everything is good, right? Wrong. While we were achieving this goal, we left a huge area to be exploited in the process. Namely, we:
[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Gave out a ton of information about our hand.
[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Made it profitable for our opponents to play against us.
Our astute opponents are going to really tear us up by playing this way...
[/ QUOTE ]
Hi 1pOkerboy,
First, thanks for your later compliment!
Hey you've got a point. As I've said a few times the split between volumes was changed late in the game as we realized the whole global way to approach hands wouldn't fit. We wanted to get SPR out. PNL1 is more introductory, so we gave the parts most relevant to loose easier games. You should _NOT_ plan primarily for commitment in "tougher" online games unless you or your opponent are shortstacking.
One of the concepts we pound on in discussing the global approach is information and ranges, which speaks to your concerns. Yes, if you give up too much about your range, limp-reraising can create a big problem. So you can either not limp-reraise or you can do something to expand your limp-reraising range enough that the information leak isn't too costly. However, unless you can easily get to "happy commitment" SPRs you always have to be careful about allowing someone to put you on a very narrow range early in a hand.
In terms of "offered implied odds," adding in AK (or better half of AKs and a couple other hands so you're mixing up yur AK play) reduces that problem b/c you won't be stacking off every time to their sets.
Does that answer your concern?
Matt
|