Stoxtrader open raising range?

[NinaWilliams]

JTo is profitable for me on the CO.

[danzasmack]

Suited hands have higher variance than offsuit ones, I think he mentions this in the book.

I strongly disagree with this method of analyzing hands, especially with the availability of things like pokerace. Only playing profitable hands is simply not possible IMO, especially in aggressive, shorthanded games, which is what this book was about. As I understand it, the books gives a rough starting hand guide for the game. I don't think you should be taking that as the be-all-end-all of what makes money from where and if you should play something from this position.

1st off, if you are not comfortable with something don't do. You're not going to play it correctly postflop.

2nd, what to open in the CO is really a much bigger question based on the game you're in, how you play, what your image is to other players (which should honestly be different from 'how you play'), and what you think of other players (which should honestly be how they play [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img])

Take 2 players who are polar opposites and put them both in the CO. So I am a lag in the CO with JTo and I open raise. Rule out a button who is a LP fish or hypermaniac or just terrible, these are separate situations. Talk about some abc-tag sitting on the button with 600 mined hands on me who basically fills 2-3 seats in your typical online 5/10 or 10/20 game.

So he sees me open. With my big ATSB. His 3-betting range is going to include a much wider range. A8o. KTs. All these things that he assumes are profitable against me because, well, I open raise a ton of [censored].

*************************************

Now put someone with a tight open raising range. Go to extremes, say a 15/12 opens in the CO 6 handed. Are you 3-betting A8o? What is profitable here? What do you have to assume he opens here for you to be 3-betting him with specific hands? What's your 3-betting range vs. a 22/16? Again, these numbers, I'm talking about types of players not a number-based approach to the game, throw your favorite 2p2er in here.

How would you play top pair vs. both of these players? As I mentioned in another post, vs. a lot of players I'll cap/lead AJ on a J54, against some I'll call a 3-bet and c/c down because i'm chopping or losing or he's doing his "lol i decide to bluff".

Now on the other end of JTo, we have AA in the cutoff. Who is going to make more with AA in the CO? Easy answer to that.

So basically, I don't see why we care what hands are profitable in the CO. It doesn't matter. All that should matter is whether or not your play is profitable in the CO. What is your winrate in the CO? Should you tighten up/loosen up? Should you seat select better? There are a lot of other things that go into it. If you find that JTo is profitable for you in the CO, I don't see why you would stop raising it.

I don't think this really gets my point across as well as I'd like, if i didn't make any sense here let me know.

I'm in no way criticizing the text btw, just the way a LOT of people seem to be approaching it.

[yourface]

nice post, holla. very shania-esque

[TheWunderkind]

btw its a pretty funny video(-:

@danza sure you should adjust hands that youre playing from all positions slightly by the table makeup youre image and maybe how youre running lately,
however it seems that stox is using defaults as i dont think he does table or seat select in his videos or having stats on his opponents on AP wich is where he played.

However it seems odd that raising T9s UTG and 67s in CO is is standard while mucking JT0 in CO is his standard too especially if the CO is UTG i think mucking JTo is -EV.

Maybe JTo i often dominated by other broadwyays wich noone seems to fold vs a CO open while 67s isnt and 76s makes a nice little flush now and then too makes up winning or loosing,
youre also get called by A high more often on 7 high Boards then on broadway heavy boards or if u make a str9 or 2 pair with 67s it also gets called down lighter if you make the same with JTo i guess.

I dunno it just seemed very odd to me that folding JT in the CO 1. in is a standard for him wich is why i made this thread.

I think stox open TJs UTG though. But maybe ppl fold QJ or KT more often vs an UTG raise (wich seems to never happen in my games) or does only the suitedness makes up for winning and loosing?

I think JTo is a default open and a winner from the CO for most ppl, just curious why not for him or JTo is really a looser for a lot of ppl or the games i he plays in.

[UtzChips]

[ QUOTE ]
well 2/3 players loose money with K8s from the CO but all 3 make money with K7s, there are plenty of this examples. I think its results oriented.

ILP iam not saying open T9s UTg is bad its just to show how it confuses me that TJo is not an open raise for him from the CO while iam not judging this or anything. Iam just wondering why JTo is not profitable form 1 off while for example T9s is profitable 3 off.

Iam curious about your results , for me it shows a decent profit while my sample is very limited.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it reflects the power of being suited with your high card 1 less than it's opposing offsuit connector.

Also, as Abdul stated, since the results were based upon simulations using TTH, it has not been proven to work in the real world.

[UtzChips]

[ QUOTE ]
fwiw he also raises T9s UTG 6 handed, thats really confusing how he cannot raising TJo in the Co 1st in

[/ QUOTE ]

Abdul Jalib also recommended open/raising 3 off the Button with T9s. There is little difference between Stox's chart and Abdul's chart of back in 2000.
Abdul opens up more in the small blind, but the only major difference is that Abdul gave his out for free by posting it on the internet.

[vmacosta]

you guys are weird--when it comes to borderline decisions how can you possibly put more stock into your qualitative opinions than a large database of results?

Not saying I don't do the same thing, but let's at least admit that the whole "I think xx has more postflop playability blahblahblah" is hardly a foolproof way to devise a strategy.