Ed Miller's advanced pre flop concepts

[cowboy billy]

ok, got the Ed Miller dvd set in the mail and just finished watching the advanced pre flop concepts disk

it was all pretty standard stuff, but 1 thing stood out: Ed Miller advised to cold call premium hands like QQ, KK, AA and AKs against an EP raiser in a loose game, to induce players behind us to call with all sorts of crap as well, basically bc we have such a large pre flop equity advantage

now, my default line in those situations is an auto 3-bet, never really thought about it much actually, but this got me thinking a little and I was wondering what you guys would think of it

do any of you guys ever NOT 3-bet an EP raiser when you're in EP yourself with a premium hand at a loose full ring table to induce calls from worse hands behind you?

[SNOWBALL]

with enough callers, some of them are going to make correct calls, which sucks for us. Also, you should be 3 betting loose EP raisers with a wider than normal range to isolate. If people catch onto that, they might get angry and call your 3 bets when you DO have AA, which rules so hard. Unfortunately, that won't happen if you listen to Ed Miller.

I actually don't remember that part of the dvd. I might rewatch it, since it's been a while. I actually got it when it first came out.

edit: this also depends on how your EP loose raiser plays after the flop. If he will give you a preposterous amount of action through bluffs or bets and raises with a 2nd best hand, then heads up is really the place to be.

Again, this should probably be the case when you appear to be lagging it up with a maniac who thinks you are also a maniac, because, remember, you're 3 betting him with "trash" like 99, and KQs he's pissed about that.

SUPER EDIT: This is actually an area of my game that needs significant work, so take my comments with a grain of salt. I probably 3 bet maniacs too often, which may be a significant leak for me. However, within that context, also 3 bombing AA just simply RULES.

[cowboy billy]

plz note: I never wrote we were dealing with a loose EP raiser, only a loose table in the sence that we could expect lots of cold callers behind us for 2 bets, assume a standard opening range for the EP raiser

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]

plz note: I never wrote we were dealing with a loose EP raiser, only a loose table in the sence that we could expect lots of cold callers behind us for 2 bets, assume a standard opening range for the EP raiser



[/ QUOTE ]

ok, well, with AA, you'd rather have 9 players in for 2 bets then 2 players in for 3 bets. However, sometimes it doesn't work that way at all. Sometimes the possible results are something like: 7 players for 2 bets, or 4 players for 3.

I'd really like Ed to "show his work" on this one, because there are so many possibilities, and you have to account for a good sample of them to come up with a reasonable EV analysis.

[Maliant]

You want as many people in as possible, really just have to gauge the table, although like snowball said alot of the fishes that cold call 2-bets with two napkins are still calling 3-bets cold.

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]

You want as many people in as possible, really just have to gauge the table, although like snowball said alot of the fishes that cold call 2-bets with two napkins are still calling 3-bets cold.



[/ QUOTE ]

Some people simply do not care how many bets it is to them. People people will play MORE hands if it's capped than if it isn't, especially from the BB. They think BIG POT, and call with 84o. They'd fold that same hand HU vs an UTG raiser.

So yeah, try to gauge the table. As a default, I 3 bet with my big hands. I still have yet to rewatch the Ed Miller dvd. More on this later today. I might as well rewatch it.

[pocketpared]

Does Ed address the phenomenon of a pair invariably flopping when you fail to raise AA in a loose game? AKs plays well enough against a ton of players. AA and KK play very well multiway or short...but I can't bring myself to do anything other than continue to raise them every time and narrow the field. A variance thing I guess. Does Ed balance reducing variance against increasing ev?

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
but I can't bring myself to do anything other than continue to raise them every time and narrow the field. A variance thing I guess. Does Ed balance reducing variance against increasing ev?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you work for less money even though you could easily make more doing the same job?

Same thing applies with AA and letting more people in to see the flop. You shouldn't be raising preflop with AA hoping to 'narrow the field'. You should be raising hoping it will be capped 8 ways.

It's not a variance deal, it's a str8 value deal. The value you get against many players more than makes up for the diminished times it will hold up.

If you're really worried about your AA holding up you're playing for the wrong reasons. OR you're playing a limit that's too high.

b

[pocketpared]

If my chance of losing a finger increased with more pay, I'd probably chose the lesser wage. Balancing ev against variance is used in part by cardcounters to rate the quality of a game. Bankroll considerations are no small part of successful advantage play.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
If my chance of losing a finger increased with more pay, I'd probably chose the lesser wage. Balancing ev against variance is used in part by cardcounters to rate the quality of a game. Bankroll considerations are no small part of successful advantage play.

[/ QUOTE ]

What the hell are you talking about? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

If this has to do with your BR, I'd suggest moving down a limit or 2.

This isn't BJ, which btw, plays itself. There are no deviations in that game based on BR. BJ plays definitively. There is a set move for every situation you'll face. They're balancing variance with EV for the limit of the game, not necesarily the quality. But that's a whole 'nother thread about a completely different game.

The comparison to losing a finger is just ridiculous.

This wreaks of scared money. Especially when your advantage is that much more better yet you don't want to put more money in.

b