Found this PM; maybe it is useful? (preflop play)

[los_toros]

vnh;ty

[Dan Bitel]

tyvm edge

[epdaws]

We've had more than a little discussion about open limping and the like around here lately, edge, and your post is instructive and helpful.

I wonder, if you're still reading this thread, whether you find limp/callers to be advertising a smallish pp or Axs type hand.

Thanks again.

[poincaraux]

thanks, edge.

[dardo]

Thanks for the post edge. I've read several posts from you at the HSNL and they are very good as well.

It's very good the idea of developing a more agressive game as an evolution.

regards,

dardo

[edge]

[ QUOTE ]
Quick question, when you reraise a hand like 87s OTB, and get an unfavorable flop like AK10r, what is your line??? Again, thanks for taking the time to post in SSNL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I personally make a continuation bet almost every single time heads-up and at least 90% of the time 3-way. This will lead to people raising me with air because they realize that my c-bet doesn't show as much strength as someone who plays straightforwardly postflop, which leads to me having to bluff-reraise or reraise one pair at least some of the time. Still, I find that it's worthwhile to c-bet every hand because most players tend to fold too often to my c-bets. If I'm heads-up with a very good tricky player who will play back at me with nothing (there are few such players) I will reduce my c-bet frequency. This means I have to start checking made hands, checkraising air, and mixing up my play even more.

The main strength of the semi-bluff reraise preflop with a hand like 87s is in taking down the pot. I'm not sure how much preflop squeezing is talked about in SSNL, but it's a very useful move and especially so against certain players who will raise and call light and then fold to a c-bet with less than top pair. Same goes with the semi-bluff reraise. When you've failed to take it down and you see the flop of AKTr, the decision of whether or not to make a c-bet should depend on the player you're up against. If he will hang around with any pair on the flop, don't even bother trying to win this pot. If he will fold anything weaker than an Ace, go ahead and toss out 2/3-pot. Similarly, you will want to target specific players with semi-bluff reraises. A player who opens light and plays aggressively postflop (a standard LAG) will not be a good target for this move, even if his opening range is wide. This is because this type of player tends to stick around postflop and you usually need to make a real hand to win the pot. The best target for a semi-bluff reraise tends to be unimaginative weak-tight players. If you recognize someone from 2+2, it works best [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

The style advocated on 2+2 involves trying to outthink your opponents and often involves making "great" folds. This lets you, as the Villain, induce "great" folds at a frequency higher than normal by playing as if you're getting hit in the face with the deck. Thus, against a fellow 2+2 player, your bluff-reraises have to look exactly like a legitimate AA. Whereas you may be able to check behind on a A92r flop with AA after reraising preflop and induce a weak player to bet at you, the same tactic won't work against someone who is trying to outthink you. This means you have to play your reraised 64s the same way when the A92r flop hits--unless you hit the flop better than a legitimate reraising hand, forget what cards you're holding and play exactly as if you hold the AA (unless of course you're facing an all-in and you hold six-high).

Effective preflop semi-bluff reraising essentially boils down to making moves against good players (whether tight or loose preflop; you want to target someone who will make tough folds) and playing tightly against loose bad players who will not make tough folds.

[ChipStorm]

edge, sorry if I missed this but how many tables do you play? Playing this tight should also enable playing substantially more tables....

It is a major eye-opener, at least to me, that 17/14 can be a winning style at 6max high stakes. The mind boggles at what the full ring equivalent numbers might be.

I remember Sklansky's "invisible ante" post, and I found it thought-provoking in terms of whether nearly everyone in the game was playing too loose. Seems like your evolution and current game would constitute evidence to support Sklansky's view.

Great food for thought. Thanks for sharing it with us.

[bent96]

This is definitely a huge difference from a lot of other perspectives. Like samoleus's 40 some/20-30 some style. I admire Hsnl lags like him and Bld (I admit that like many other ssnl I am hooked into reading a few threads up there. Plus you guys have some great drama.)

Have you ever thought that your style might someday hold you back from bigger games though? Like 50/100?

[dazraf69]

[ QUOTE ]
tyvm edge

[/ QUOTE ]


[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] VN Post and thanks! Good insight, your point of developing your own style as opposed to looking for a guidline is the greatest truth I have found on this forum. This should be an automatic response to anyone asking for guidlines. I will go out on an edge and say this has merit to be in the FAQ section under " What style is best?"

[n1nj4.br]

U made some very usefull points. Thx.