1.00-2.00......KQs in sb

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
IMHO by just calling preflop, esp if CO is aggressive you basically are only going to win the hand if you make a hand whereas CO wont have to actually make a hand to win.

[/ QUOTE ]

good point.

alot of players on this(and other) forums misplay their hands when they have the initiative with position. in your case aussie stated good reasons as to why it's so valueable to have the initiative out of position.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually think that "having the initiative" and "taking control of the hand" are pretty overrated concepts in limit poker. Our opponent can take it right back by capping preflop or raising our inevitable flop bet.

In some ways, three-betting even limits our options and gives our opponent the advantage, because we're going to end up betting a lot of flops we don't necessarily like.

On certain flops, like when multiple paint cards hit, three-betting becomes the preferable preflop action when we have a less than premium hand, because our bet on the flop is believable. Other times, like when all low cards hit, we'll have rather flat-called the raise with our jack-high or whatever, because the lack of a preflop three-bet means we are more likely to have connected with a low, unscary board.

In fact, my decision whether to take the initiative in a hand depends far more on my opponent than on my cards. Some players are skeptical, others easy to convince. Some are aggressive, others let you walk all over them. Still others give you the initiative and call all the way, allowing you to hang yourself with your own rope. It's highly situation specific. It's something to consider, but I think it's overrated here.

-McGee

[SNOWBALL]

I like CCing flop and most turns the way you played it.
I think you should 3 bet this preflop though

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]

as played, c/r.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?
I think that is the 2nd worst line, with the worst being checkfolding.
I don't like giving villain the chance to get away from his underpair, or take the initiative away from him when he likely has few outs against us if we are ahead.

The only way I like your line is with we think he will never 3 bet us without an ace, and always call down with a smaller pocket pair and if we put him on a tight PF range that basically just includes pairs and aces.

[SNOWBALL]

OP,

There is really no real excuse for not having some type of read. If you just sat down, it should be because you have been datamining the game.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
I actually think that "having the initiative" and "taking control of the hand" are pretty overrated concepts in limit poker. Our opponent can take it right back by capping preflop or raising our inevitable flop bet.

In some ways, three-betting even limits our options and gives our opponent the advantage, because we're going to end up betting a lot of flops we don't necessarily like.

[/ QUOTE ]

first things first. just because we 3bet, we don't HAVE to bet the flop. i don't think we're 3betting only for the initiative. we're probably 3betting for value because we're ahead of the typical 1/2 player's CO opening range for a full game.

add to this the benefit of decreasing his stealing for the rest of the session and it adds value to the reraise. inducing an opponent to play more straightforwardly when he has position on us is a good thing. even moreso when we have money involuntarily posted.

as you alluded to, a big part in maintaining the initiative of the action and how it influences the way a hand can play out is dependent upon our opponents and their tendencies. right now, we don't have the level of information to ascertain the truly optimal play against this specific opponent.

[ QUOTE ]
On certain flops, like when multiple paint cards hit, three-betting becomes the preferable preflop action when we have a less than premium hand, because our bet on the flop is believable. Other times, like when all low cards hit, we'll have rather flat-called the raise with our jack-high or whatever, because the lack of a preflop three-bet means we are more likely to have connected with a low, unscary board.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is actually pretty dependent upon our image and our opponent(once again).

it probably doesn't do that much good to speculate the actual action on those particular flops without a read, but even so it's pretty much a wash as described anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, my decision whether to take the initiative in a hand depends far more on my opponent than on my cards. Some players are skeptical, others easy to convince. Some are aggressive, others let you walk all over them. Still others give you the initiative and call all the way, allowing you to hang yourself with your own rope. It's highly situation specific. It's something to consider, but I think it's overrated here.

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree with almost all of what you are saying here.

i'm not convinced the initiative can't help us, though. all things being equal, not many typical 1/2 opponents are going to up and cap hands behind our KQs. we should usually be able to not only 3bet for value(even if the BB comes along we're likely making money) but to help define the CO's(and maybe even BB's) range in some situations. even if it's rare, the info we gain early might allow us to find out about the strength of our opponents' holdings which might help avoid losing multiple bets on the big streets when we flop a decent hand but happen to be behind.

being out of position costs you. assuming your image is solid, being the aggressor can make it easier to play when out of position. against the correct opponents, you can combine this with the right of first bluff(which is a sometimes overlooked benefit to playing OOP) and you can increase you chances to win at the cost of small bets, not big ones.

calling is a good optiongiven KQs plays well multiway and shorthanded. i might call some % of the time. it also increases our implied odds.

but there are several other factors that come into play when making this decision and it still lends me to think 3betting and taking the preflop initiative is the play.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
first things first. just because we 3bet, we don't HAVE to bet the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but if we want to retain the initiative, we do. You know that, but that's the point I'm trying to make.

[ QUOTE ]
we're probably 3betting for value because we're ahead of the typical 1/2 player's CO opening range for a full game.



[/ QUOTE ]

The lower the limit, the less likely it is we are ahead of his range IMHO -- and it should be noted that we're behind, albeit only slightly, to any ace or any pocket pair.

Regardless, yes, this is often a value 3-bet. My post pertained less to this hand and more to the overall concept of "taking the iniative."

[ QUOTE ]
i'm not convinced the initiative can't help us, though

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not trying to argue that it can't. Only that "taking the initiative" is one of those concepts that gets thrown around a little too much here. It's not at the level of "raising for information," but I do think that many people -- not necessarily you, or AussieBattler, for that matter -- apply it without thinking about what it actually accomplishes.

-McGee

[OziBattler]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not trying to argue that it can't. Only that "taking the initiative" is one of those concepts that gets thrown around a little too much here. It's not at the level of "raising for information," but I do think that many people -- not necessarily you, or AussieBattler, for that matter -- apply it without thinking about what it actually accomplishes.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. generally speaking, if Im going to use 'raise for information/initiative' as a reason to raise then I almost certainly want it coupled with other reasons (value, freecards, isolation yadayadayada). Some of my biggest sessions of spew have come when (because Im boozed up or tilty) I have pushed way too hard and tried to take the lead in every damn hand I play...for me whenever i do this Im on the path to spewville.

fwiw I stand by my first post in this thread as that contains the reasons for why I would raise in this spot.

I dont want to detract from your valuable comments about what to do here can be very villian dependent because I agree with you but I will just and that for a particular site/limit I do try and get a feel for what the average player (and hence unknown) might do and for 1/2 stars I think most players are capable fo stealing light when folded to them in the CO so without any further info Ill guess that this particular unknown is not a nit until proven otherwise. hope that makes sense. ozi.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not trying to argue that it can't. Only that "taking the initiative" is one of those concepts that gets thrown around a little too much here.

[/ QUOTE ]

okay, now i see where you're coming from. i'm sort of slow and really need things spelled out for me. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

out of boredom, i've played a few 15BB challenges lately and the .50/1.00 and 1/2 games are retarded-aggro. it's actually to the point that you want to relenquish "initiative" in most HU pots because every time you check to the average player at those limits they consistently prove that most of what they know how to do is bet.

i agree with your point about it being an overused term. i was also(in a roundabout way) arguing that the biggest misconcpetions when it comes to "initiative" were those associated with being a)the PFR and b)with position on your opponent. generally, we are in a agreement. sorry i misunderstood you.

[Mitke]

This is off-topic to the original post, sorry for that. Mods feel free to move this or whatever you see appropriate.

This discussion on "having/taking the initiative/control of the hand" is very interesting and in my opinion would merit a dedicated thread.

It is something I feel I'm currently doing too much and in the wrong places and has creeped into my play more after I began to learn and play 6-max as well.

If some of the old hands here would care to elaborate on this subject in the "pooh-bah dissertation"-like spirit I'm sure I wouldn't be the only newbie (70k online limit hands) greatly appreciating it.

I understand that it is a highly situational subject but would applaud an attempt to generalize or at least discuss the issues to consider, like when to take control of a hand and when to relinguish it, etc.

EDIT: hints to book chapters etc. discussing this would also be appreciated.

[Oink]

I havent read all the posts, but you need to 3-bet preflop and its not close.

You dont want BB in the pot and your eq + folding eq warrants a 3-bet.


As played flop is an easy c/c. Dont c/r. You are most often way ahead or way behind. c/c and let him bet the turn with his 77 or KJ, or avoid getting 3-bet by AK.