TPTK in general

[Arcturus]

I orginally posted this in the micro-limits, but the responders were not sure of which action to take. I figured since most of the posters in Small Stakes are more experienced, you might have a more straight-forward answer.

Something that I have had a problem with when I started out playing NL is getting too crazy with TPTK. I would think that having AQ on a Q high board meant giving the thumbs-up for going all-in. Fortunately, I have toned down the action a bit after reading a lot of posts on 2+2 and some NL books. I have read that TPTK is an good holding, but not outstanding. It especially helps if you are in position. It is even easier to play with specific reads and known player tendencies. Obviously, HU would be optimal, but it could be played against 2 people frequently.

My main concern with TPTK deals with my play when sitting down early at a table without any reads on other players. I have read in some posts that it may be better to err on the side of caution when you don't have any reads. However, how far do you take this? I guess the best way to get my point across is to use an example. I will use an example against two other players since it involves a little more strategy.

You just sat down at a table, have played a few hands, and you don't have any reads. Assume the effective stack is 80BB. You are on the button looking at AQo. Two people limp in front of you. You decide to raise it up to 6BB. The blinds fold and both limpers call. The pot is around 20BB. The flop comes Q84r. The first limper checks and the second limper opens for 18BB.

What is the best course of action here? Let's say you raise. How much do you raise? If you raise to 36BB, you are putting almost half your stack into the pot. Doesn't this commit you to the pot? What about going all-in? The open-raiser has something on this dry board or he wouldn't have bet so much. Let's say you decide to call. Doesn't that show weakness and set you up for an all-in bet by an aware opponent on the turn?

Until recently, I would play my hands without taking into consideration the possible consquences of my actions. Here, I would have put in a significant raise. But lately, I have been trying to determine my pot commitment earlier in the hand than on the turn or river. This example is just one area where I feel I don't have a good grasp on correct playing strategy. Any comments on this topic and the example I provided are appreciated.

[AceofSpades]

this a tough hand, usually TPTK is good if opponent is calling your bets, but getting bet into can be tricky especially if your opponents are solid...

[AceofSpades]

calling > folding > raising
or
folding > calling > raising

[Hince]

Your post, while long, still only brushes level 1 thinking.

You need to consider your opponents range before you can determine what the correct action is. Not only the hands that he probably has, but also the hands that he calls with, raises with and folds.

For example, the action you take against a nit would be totally different from the action you would take against a drooler.

Since you don't have a read in your example, you will need to base your decisions off the typical opponent at your level. If typical opponents are stacking off with worse, by all means get it in with TPTK. If not, you may need to work on some alternative lines. For example, calling his lead and re-evaluating on the turn.

[orange]

tptk? im allin.

[TwistedEcho]

[ QUOTE ]
tptk? im allin.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Ted Williams]

If you're playing micro limits, you will see players overplay hands like top pair with a bad kicker. I see players who do that pretty frequently at $0.25 big blind. I usually assume a player is decent until they show me otherwise, though.

I'm not sure what you mean by being pot committed if you raise. When people talk about being committed to the pot when half their stack is in, that's preflop. The reasoning is that you will be getting at least 3:1 to call the rest, and you are rarely that big of a dog pf.

If you're up against someone who flopped a set there, you don't have many outs. In that case you have to be getting enormous pot odds to make a call. If you get half your stack in on the flop playing NLHE, and the action leads you to believe you only have 2 outs, you're not committed to stick the rest in. Laying down the second best hand when faced with big bets is a pretty essential skill.

That said, I'm not a fan of the min raise here.

The additional problem here is the first player. Whatever you do, he will still have an action after you. If he hits a monster and checks, the second player drives you back into him with his bet.

I think folding TPTK in the face of one bet is pretty weak. Without knowing more about the players I would most likely call, and see what happens with the first player and what the turn card is. If the second player was betting their draw, or bluffing, they may even shut down on the turn.

Ted

[robert jordan]

[ QUOTE ]
Your post, while long, still only brushes level 1 thinking.

You need to consider your opponents range before you can determine what the correct action is. Not only the hands that he probably has, but also the hands that he calls with, raises with and folds.

For example, the action you take against a nit would be totally different from the action you would take against a drooler.

Since you don't have a read in your example, you will need to base your decisions off the typical opponent at your level. If typical opponents are stacking off with worse, by all means get it in with TPTK. If not, you may need to work on some alternative lines. For example, calling his lead and re-evaluating on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]


very well said

[Arcturus]

I totally agree with what you are saying Hince. With reads, this example changes greatly. I stated that there were no reads in this case because I occasionally find myself sitting down at a table and getting in a position like this, which really stinks when you don't know your opponents.

I play 0.25-0.10. So, in general the players are pretty loose and wild. However, not all of them are. It can get pretty expensive to figure out if they are or not by making the wrong plays early in a session. The other twist I added to this example was having one of the limpers lead into you after you raised preflop. I have read a lot of NL books and most of the examples similar to this one have the limpers check to you if you raise preflop, and sometimes they check-raise. I haven't seen a lot of examples of the case I presented.

Anyway, thanks very much for all the comments given.