The pretend (preflop) blinds and the real (position based) blinds

[aejones]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OK I will clear up some of the arguing that has been going on...

[/ QUOTE ]

lol thx dad!

[/ QUOTE ]

actually I'm just big brother. dad would have cleared it up, but he said he was too drunk too. either way, i'm sure dad will stop by this thread and lay down the law.

[T-God]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OK I will clear up some of the arguing that has been going on...

[/ QUOTE ]

lol thx dad!

[/ QUOTE ]

actually I'm just big brother. dad would have cleared it up, but he said he was too drunk too. either way, i'm sure dad will stop by this thread and lay down the law.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or maybe Jeff

[KRANTZ]

if you start raising to 7bb pre while deep, people will just fold all but premium hands. then when they realize (after a few orbits, probably) that you've just changed your standard opening size, they will adjust and play as normal. i don't understand how you could even construct an argument that says changing your pfr size drastically makes much sense. also, it's not as if the table will change its raise sizes - when you're not in the hand the rest of the players will be opening as usual. it's also rare to even BE at a table full of all deep stacks (or even more than 3, and 3 isn't even that common), so i don't really think much of that rhetoric is applicable

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]

Another thing I want to strike on, it's wrong to change your raise size to % of stack vs multiples of the blinds. That is wrong. No, you should not open to 7x with 300bbs. If you have 300bbs and you want to open to 4x instead of 3x, I think that is fine. However, increasing it too much based on the size of stacks is quite simply playing embarrassingly scared. There are a million levels and reasons to why this was wrong, someone may have hit them in the thread, I'm not sure. The bottom line is that it is incorrect in thinking, there are reasons, but I'm not going to post them because this thread has made it apparent that people in MSNL really don't understand a lot of basic concepts as well as I thought they did.

[/ QUOTE ]


AE I'd like to see you respond to what I've said here (which has been garnered from several very good players, but maye I've misapplied/misunderstood some concepts) --


[ QUOTE ]
There's definitely a correlation to stack size and the amount you open to, however I think something missing from DB's equation is the type of player that is also deepstacked. If it's another nittish TAG at the table, then there pretty much is no point in doing so since you won't be playing many hands with him anyway. If it's someone who's a bit looser, and position on you and is going to play deepstacked poker, then you would want to adjust your opening size in order to lessen his implied odds. Otherwise, he can call you with a TON of hands if your bet is a mere 1.5% or less of his stack (in the case that you cover or you're both evenly stacked). In doing this, you also put a lot more pressure on the rest of the 100 bb stacks at the table and cause them to have to make adjustments. Don't know if you guys have noticed this but a lot of TAGish players are not very good at making good adjustments. Some inevitably will and you'll just have to watch for that, but the great thing about this is that it is more likely to induce tilt, looser play, etc etc. Obviously the bad players will also be more apt to get the money in with weaker holdings preflop, etc. Basic point is that you're going to be increasing the action and your open sort of acts as a live straddle.

If the other deep stack is a bad player then this should be a no brainer. You DEFINITELY would want to adjust the size of your open raise: isolation, action, profit.

Anyway... this is less than detailed but hopefully this gets the ball rolling. Good thread, DB.

[/ QUOTE ]

[oyvindgee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I try to play as few as possible save for times when I am taking shots at a guy in position by calling his raises to fkk with him postflop or overcaling preflop with good relative position (ie co opens button calls sb calls im in the bb with 9to I call b/c of good relative position. Compare this to absolute position which is having the button. Relative position usually deals with your position in relation to the preflop raiser or the person you expect to make the first bet on the flop. Relative position can change street to street though, while absolute position cannot).

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you or someone else enlight me about this " relative good position " ?
I am really lost.
Is it to use the idea of a check raise on an interesting flop? ( may be my comment is dumb ... )

[/ QUOTE ]

Like he said, relative position is position in relation to the likely bettor(on the flop this would be the preflop raiser). Say there is a raise UTG and you call on the button with 87s and both the blinds call as well. You will certainly act last on the flop, but a very likely flop scenario is that both blinds check to the preflop raiser who bets and suddenly you are first to act. The blinds have given up nothing about their hand, but you are defintely about to. If you have a draw calling or raising becomes less appealing because the blinds could wake up with a monster behind you. If you have a made hand it will be harder to get any dead money from the blinds because they will act after a bet and a call. Suddenly the BB becomes a much sweeter position.

[jrbick]

wtf this conversation about stack sizes/open raises seems to have altered from deep stack v. deep stack to just YOU being deep. Obv the latter situation would be retarded but someone please address the scenario I've discussed (multiple deep stacks, bad players).

I realize most ppl assume that everyone at your table will simply adjust to your change, but I think you over-estimate most of your opponents (unless you're assuming game selecting is not a factor here). If I'm sitting at a table w/ (which I probably wouldn't) CTS, KRANTZ, kratzer, jones, and Big Jim then obviously this would be a really stupid thing to do.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
if you start raising to 7bb pre while deep, people will just fold all but premium hands. then when they realize (after a few orbits, probably) that you've just changed your standard opening size, they will adjust and play as normal. i don't understand how you could even construct an argument that says changing your pfr size drastically makes much sense. also, it's not as if the table will change its raise sizes - when you're not in the hand the rest of the players will be opening as usual. it's also rare to even BE at a table full of all deep stacks (or even more than 3, and 3 isn't even that common), so i don't really think much of that rhetoric is applicable

[/ QUOTE ]


One of your students advocated doing this and I assumed he got this from you. Maybe that student was FOS at the time and would now not advocate this. This was at NL200 or NL100 or something like that and versus another very deep donkey at the table. The dynamics were pretty interesting. I'm guessing that he didn't get this from you though based on what you just posted.

[Hiltonian]

[ QUOTE ]
wtf this conversation about stack sizes/open raises seems to have altered from deep stack v. deep stack to just YOU being deep. Obv the latter situation would be retarded but someone please address the scenario I've discussed (multiple deep stacks, bad players).

I realize most ppl assume that everyone at your table will simply adjust to your change, but I think you over-estimate most of your opponents (unless you're assuming game selecting is not a factor here). If I'm sitting at a table w/ (which I probably wouldn't) CTS, KRANTZ, kratzer, jones, and Big Jim then obviously this would be a really stupid thing to do.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why would you ever want to essentially create shallower stacks when playing against bad players?

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wtf this conversation about stack sizes/open raises seems to have altered from deep stack v. deep stack to just YOU being deep. Obv the latter situation would be retarded but someone please address the scenario I've discussed (multiple deep stacks, bad players).

I realize most ppl assume that everyone at your table will simply adjust to your change, but I think you over-estimate most of your opponents (unless you're assuming game selecting is not a factor here). If I'm sitting at a table w/ (which I probably wouldn't) CTS, KRANTZ, kratzer, jones, and Big Jim then obviously this would be a really stupid thing to do.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why would you ever want to essentially create shallower stacks when playing against bad players?

[/ QUOTE ]


Why does it matter? One of the advantages of being deep is maneuverability which also pretty much happens to be useless against a bad player who will call you down light and spew a ton of chips w/ weak hands. Greater implied odds are nice and all w/ deep stacks, but when playing against an unreasonable player, against whom it is borderline difficult to estimate IO's, I can see some advantages in just shortening up the stacks again.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here and trying to learn something/test my understanding of the game.

[aejones]

[ QUOTE ]


AE I'd like to see you respond to what I've said here (which has been garnered from several very good players, but maye I've misapplied/misunderstood some concepts) --


[ QUOTE ]
There's definitely a correlation to stack size and the amount you open to, however I think something missing from DB's equation is the type of player that is also deepstacked. If it's another nittish TAG at the table, then there pretty much is no point in doing so since you won't be playing many hands with him anyway. If it's someone who's a bit looser, and position on you and is going to play deepstacked poker, then you would want to adjust your opening size in order to lessen his implied odds. Otherwise, he can call you with a TON of hands if your bet is a mere 1.5% or less of his stack (in the case that you cover or you're both evenly stacked). In doing this, you also put a lot more pressure on the rest of the 100 bb stacks at the table and cause them to have to make adjustments. Don't know if you guys have noticed this but a lot of TAGish players are not very good at making good adjustments. Some inevitably will and you'll just have to watch for that, but the great thing about this is that it is more likely to induce tilt, looser play, etc etc. Obviously the bad players will also be more apt to get the money in with weaker holdings preflop, etc. Basic point is that you're going to be increasing the action and your open sort of acts as a live straddle.

If the other deep stack is a bad player then this should be a no brainer. You DEFINITELY would want to adjust the size of your open raise: isolation, action, profit.

Anyway... this is less than detailed but hopefully this gets the ball rolling. Good thread, DB.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

OK well first of all, if there is a bad player, he will not understand implied odds. He will say I have K 4 suited but it's just K 4 suited it doesn't matter that you opened to 3.5x and I have position and we have 300 big blinds, it's just K 4 suited.

Secondly, if he's on the level that he understands that and starts repopping you very light and/or calling you very light. Do the same thing in return from position. You should be able to notice right away "wtf this 22/18 is suddenly cold calling a lot from the button when I open from MP, I had not normally seen him calling that much." You probably won't even need to see him show down 9T off or 68s to know that he's suddenly trying to play a whole bunch of hands. Adjust to that. There are a few different ways you should be able to figure out to adjust, they're fairly basic.

In raising to 7x, you make yourself vulnerable to anyone who is decent enough to adjut. you make yourself vulnerable to any 100 bb stacks at the table and really allow them to play nearly perfectly vs you. It's just not correct, it's pretty basic I think.