Adjusting preflop and postflop to the....

[midnightpulp]

the texture of the game.

Oink brought up an important point in another thread about the inherant inflexability of starting hand charts and the like, saying that 6max is so dynamic that you have to constantly adjust both your preflop and postflop play. I think we can all agree with this.

Everyday a player will post his PT stats and ask for advice in relationship to those stats. General advice is recommended without further elaboration given by the player as to exactly what type of game he plays in.

For example. My stats after 12k hands at 1-2 on Stars are 21/13/1.23, brought down by my PFR and my low river stat 1.34. My WTSD is around 33. I steal less than 30% of the time and defend less.

These stats look contradictory to the more successful players, but the games I usually play in often resemble full ring. 4-5 players seeing the flop, a lot of limping. In these games, marginal hands lose value, thus the lower SD stat. Higher postflop aggression is needed to defend your hands against the field. The odds are greater to chase, thus the lower river stat due to check folding missed draws. There will be less stealing and defending scenarios. Maniacs aside, players tend to be more honest with their raises. The list goes on.

That said, I'd like to pick everyone's brain as to how they adjust when the context of the game changes. For us converts new to 6max who will start at the low-limits before moving up, I like to ask all the experienced players how they changed their game when they moved from fullring to low-stakes 6max that basically resembles fullring.

Will the fundamentals in Small Stakes HE, with a few tweaks to accomadate 6max play, be sufficient to win at these types of games?

From playing years of FR, I'm totally comfortable with my postflop play. What gives me trouble is judging the relative hand values in 6max. I'm reminded of a thread where a player called with J8off in the BB in raised multiway pot. Sure the price was good, and everyone seemed to endorse the call. However, the issue of being reverse implied or dominated didn't really come up. In fullring that hits the muck. I'm confused as to why it would not be a fold in this case since the pot was multiway?

Any advice and contribution is appreciated.

[Oink]

[ QUOTE ]
For example. My stats after 12k hands at 1-2 on Stars are 21/13/1.23, brought down by my PFR and my low river stat 1.34. My WTSD is around 33. I steal less than 30% of the time and defend less.


[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt that its good to have a low river AF vs passive players. I would guess that you c/c too much and b/f too little. But I obviosuly dont know enough about your game to be sure.


Also. Thats a low ATSB. I think its fine that its not above 40. But you could prolly find some more spots to steal. For example. If you are on the button and a tight player is in the SB, say he folds his SB 70% or more, and a huge donk is in the BB. Here you should steal a LOT. At least 45% to 50% of your hands IMO. Whats gonna happen mostly is SB folding and BB calling. Then you have one of the most profitable situations in LHE; HU vs a loose passive with position. Your hand strength is not that important in that spot. To be sure that you still look good when SB calls you should try and steal with hands that do well multiway. I.e steal with hands like 64s and fold Q4o.

Reverse the situation such that the huge donk is in the SB and the fairly tight but not overly tight player is in the BB. Now the pot will be 3-way a lot more often so you should steal a lot less.


[ QUOTE ]
Will the fundamentals in Small Stakes HE, with a few tweaks to accomadate 6max play, be sufficient to win at these types of games?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, with good table selection. But prolly not at 3/6 and up. This however doesnt mean that you cant win even more by improving your postflop and preflop play by reading this forum and adjusting your play accordingly. Sklanskys books are good, but they are written for a different game than online shorthanded.


[ QUOTE ]
From playing years of FR, I'm totally comfortable with my postflop play. What gives me trouble is judging the relative hand values in 6max. I'm reminded of a thread where a player called with J8off in the BB in raised multiway pot. Sure the price was good, and everyone seemed to endorse the call. However, the issue of being reverse implied or dominated didn't really come up. In fullring that hits the muck. I'm confused as to why it would not be a fold in this case since the pot was multiway?


[/ QUOTE ]

Partly because FR players are huge nits. Reading the micros and small stakes will prove this. They fold WAY too much

But also because the players ranges in 6max are so much looser. People simply raise and coldcall a lot more so the domination issues are mitigated.

[midnightpulp]

Yes, I bet fold way too little. My only concern is I don't want to condition my opponents to take shots at me. I've been raised with junk on the end more often than not only to make a crying call and finding out MHIG. But I agree, this is something I have to get into the habit of doing. I know I'm losing some value. At 2-4, my river A is higher due to there being less multiway pots.

I don't think us full ring vets are rocks [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] In FR, when there's a preflop raise and half a dozen cold callers, the only way trash is going to win is to flop something devastating. Pair outs with hands like J8 and 10-7, etc, are pretty much worthless.

That's my biggest stumbling block thus far in 6max. Relative hand values.

Would you say 6max requires a more "take it to SD and hope it's good mindset?"

For example, I'm sitting with 77 in the BB. Two limpers, SB completes and I check (unless you prefer raising for value). The flop is 63Q. SB leads. He has a history of leading out when catches any piece of the flop. I raise and get a cold-caller who I have no read on. SB calls. I'm really not comfy with my hand anymore. The turn is a 9. SB checks. I check. Cold-caller bets, SB calls, and I fold. River a blank. At SD, SB has K3 and cold-caller has A6 and takes the pot.

Then of course there's the flip side where I'll take it to SD and see QJ.

Seems I'm constantly overvaluing/undervaluing middle pairs and the like. And I absolutely hate being out of pos. with them.

[Oink]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you say 6max requires a more "take it to SD and hope it's good mindset?"


[/ QUOTE ]

Not really but I think it takes better poker skills and hand reading abilities because your opponents ranges will be wider and because the play is more aggro in general.

[ QUOTE ]
For example, I'm sitting with 77 in the BB. Two limpers, SB completes and I check (unless you prefer raising for value). The flop is 63Q. SB leads. He has a history of leading out when catches any piece of the flop. I raise and get a cold-caller who I have no read on. SB calls. I'm really not comfy with my hand anymore. The turn is a 9. SB checks. I check. Cold-caller bets, SB calls, and I fold. River a blank. At SD, SB has K3 and cold-caller has A6 and takes the pot.


[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldnt raise in the first place. This is a flop where people who learned poker "the Sklansky way" raise way too much. If you just call you will offer players behind you 6:1 which isnt enough for them to call with 2 overacards. Since the board is so dry I dont think you need to raise. Also, raising might induce SB to fold a 6 or a 3 on a later street while calling will keep him betting.

Play aggro in big pots and passive in small pots.

As played tho I would always bet the turn. People cant fold pairs and gutters so just bet again on turn brick because your eq is fine. If the guy behind you was good and tight I would prolly give up as you did.

[midnightpulp]

"Not really but I think it takes better poker skills and hand reading abilities because your opponents ranges will be wider and because the play is more aggro in general."

I agree, but on the flip side when you're up against a bad player be it LAG or Calling Station, reading their hands is just about impossible. Even putting them on a general range is tough. A loose-passive plays bottom pair the exact same way as he plays top-pair and/or a draw: call, call, call. And a LAG, raise, raise, raise.

Since these games are filled with these type of players is why I reasoned the play of marginal hands against these folks is something of an odds game. Since we're better players, most of the time we'll be ahead and it'll be profitable to go to SD anytime we have something decent. Sure they'll be times when they seem to always have it, but in the long run we'll profit.

Don't you think that sometimes we psyche ourselves out trying to "read" these players, inducing bad play from ourselves?

Bill Chen talks about this in his book. How sometimes we over-estimate our hand reading abilities, which sometimes prevents us from making the overall +EV play.

Of course, some are easier to read, like the LAPs who only bet on the riv with TP or better, but often times they play so erratically and irrationally, putting them on a hand is downright impossible. Like the guy who called me down with 95 high on a broadway thick board after I raised PF. He had no pair or draw.

"I wouldnt raise in the first place. This is a flop where people who learned poker "the Sklansky way" raise way too much. If you just call you will offer players behind you 6:1 which isnt enough for them to call with 2 overacards. Since the board is so dry I dont think you need to raise. Also, raising might induce SB to fold a 6 or a 3 on a later street while calling will keep him betting."

But won't we be offering implied odds? I can understand not raising when it's heads-up and I get the general concept, but if we flat call and invite an overcall or two, the "schooling" phenomenon begins. An overcard draw to our 77 is about 8.5 to 1. He's initially getting a 6 to 1 price, but if he makes his hand, he stands to make 2 more BB, either from us if we decide to pay off or from the SB. So considering implied odds, he's getting 10 to 1 on the call. Plus, how do we assess what card is safe on the turn?

"Play aggro in big pots and passive in small pots."

I agree. But in the above case, isn't it better to try and get heads up with the betting station and have him pay you off with something like 55, K3, etc, rather then let one of the players behind sneak in and beat you?

That said, thanks for all your advice. You have been extremely helpful.

[sethypooh21]

I disagree with Oink - give the read, I raise in that spot with 77, bet the turn (folding to a raise from the cold caller, calling down if C/Red by the SB most likely).

OP, I think you have a misunderstanding of how AF is calculated - it's simply bet+raise/call. So folding a lot will actually cause your AF to be higher. Given your low WTSD, you AF actually looks pretty low.

Anyway, as to your original question re: adjusting starting standards to the table dynamic and/or your current image, this is important. It's also important to realize when/if the need for adjustments do and do not apply. At lower limits, are your opponents really observant enough?

I'd focus more on the hands you are showing down rather than overall frequencies - to a not-terribly skilled opponent, they are going to remember you showing down 66 3-bet from the SB, so maybe it's time to tighten up for a bit. On the other hand, if you showdown a monster that you fastplayed, you probably have *some* license to get a little loosy-goosy for a bit (people expect monsters to be slowplayed, so they'll remember that you played yours "straightforwardly".

This is actually an area where playing a fair bit of NL has helped my limit game, as the table dynamics in NL are crucial because the post flop decisions often carry so much more danger and opportunity.

[Apanage]

[ QUOTE ]

I wouldnt raise in the first place. This is a flop where people who learned poker "the Sklansky way" raise way too much. If you just call you will offer players behind you 6:1 which isnt enough for them to call with 2 overacards. Since the board is so dry I dont think you need to raise. Also, raising might induce SB to fold a 6 or a 3 on a later street while calling will keep him betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don´t know.I would raise 77.Even if they are individually making mistakes here I would like to get rid of some combined outs since that is what matters to me.
And mentally this hand would play a lot easier for me when I´ve raised since I often get rid of the player acting behind me and that allows me to check river behind if I would find that to be the best choice.
I do however agree that we should bet turn the way the hand was played. That is something I struggle with.I tend to give way too much credit to bad players cold calling two on flop.

[Oink]

I think its close and my suggestion not to raise was because I think hero should think more about flop play than just raise it. Check/folding the turn is a much bigger mistake than raising (or calling) the flop.

There is definetly value in a flop raise since Hero is ahead of SB's range so raising might both get rid of people and get value from SB.

However, protection of the hand is not the issue. If the pot was HU and hero knew for sure that villain had 6 outs then its close whether he wants villain out on the flop or have him call 1 bet. But adding a 3'rd player to the mix will not only decrease Heros equity but it will also decrease the marginal effect on heros equity when he gets the third guy to fold.

Put in another way. If Hero is behind to SB 100% then he has nothing to protect and shouldt worry about folding out anyone. If hero is ahead of SB 100% then he should worry about both protecting and getting value from SB. When heros percentage vs SB's range is somewhere between 0% and 100% the marginal effect of folding a hand that has 6 outs vs hero when hero is ahead of SB decreases.

Ok, long story. I hope I made myself clear. If hero is ahead of SB often he has a value/protection raise. If hero is not ahead that often he has neither a value nor a protection raise but can call and reevaluate turn.

[milesdyson]

it was unraised so i do think the correct play is c/f turn. also if we raised preflop and SB b/c, c/r Q639 and we had 77 i think calling that c/r is a disaster..

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
also if we raised preflop and SB b/c, c/r Q639 and we had 77 i think calling that c/r is a disaster..

[/ QUOTE ]

100% agreed