Should I fold somewhere before the river?

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
the game was described as being übertight so it would be safe to assume that there is a chance to steal preflop or atleast limit the number of callers...

[/ QUOTE ]Morning Star - I disagree.

When playing in a limit ring game with opponents who know what they’re doing, I don’t think a pre-flop raise serves very well to reduce the number of opponents who will see the flop. There are obviously exceptions.

When playing in a limit ring game with opponents who don’t know what they’re doing, I don’t think a pre-flop raise serves very well to reduce the number of opponents who will see the flop either. Again, there are obviously exceptions.

For the most part, a pre-flop raise in a limit ring game does two things:
• (1) It increases the amount in the pot (but at an added expense to Hero) and
• (2) It makes Hero’s opponents more wary after the flop.

It doesn’t matter much if the ring game is loose or tight (or ubertight). People who think they have good hands are going to tend to see the flop. I’m talking about ring game play; there are different considerations for tournament play.

Think about how you feel when somebody raises and you have a good hand. Aren’t you simply delighted? And even if you merely have a playable hand, one that merits seeing the flop, don’t you still continue to a double bet?

And if you try to put your opponents on cards, aren’t you even more delighted when someone makes a pre-flop raise with a certain type of hand, or even a certain range of hands? Isn’t it good to know that Dum-dum-one is raising with ace-deuce? Isn’t it good to know that Dum-dum-two is raising with ace-ace? Isn’t it good to know that Dum-dum-three is raising with ace-ace or king-king from early position and with ace-deuce or suited ace-three from late position or four coordinated high cards from any position? Or whatever.

You’re going to raise to steal the blinds or get one-on-one because the game is tight? Did it work here? Does it work when you try it in a limit ring game?

It doesn’t work well for me in a limit ring game, and it doesn’t work well for anybody else who tries it in my limit ring games. It doesn’t work well in loose ring games and it doesn’t work well in tight ring games either. It doesn't work well in 3/6 games and it doesn't work well in 6/12 games. The tactic simply doesn’t work well. (There are obviously exceptions).

I don’t think pre-flop raising with A4KKd is a particularly bad play. The hand certainly is a better than average hand and plays well in a full game or in a short handed game. The pre-flop raise is somewhat deceptive and might cause someone with ace-trey or deuce-trey to get out of the pot after not flopping the nuts or nut draw.

However, if you’re raising to accomplish some purpose that you’re not going to accomplish by raising… well… that seems futile.

Buzz

[morningstar]

nice...

...1st time i played stars 1-2 games after playing at paradise i laughed my ass off when they all folded for an early preflop raise, i didn't realise that anyone could actualy play so weak tight, but they did and they still do and in those games it becomes wrong to limp with a lot of hands you should limp with in other enviroments and there is a very real chance of stealing the pot preflop...

...you need something that will pay for blinds seeing the flop for free or cheaply, people with position calling with marginal hands and so on to make limping in early position correct, if it doesn't exist you prolly shouldn't limp

ps. in most games it would bee silly to raise from early position with hands like A279 rainbow or TTJQds, but in the 1-2 games at stars with 25-35% flop percentages it would be silly to limp (no xtra action just an increase in chance to lose the pot)

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
...1st time i played stars 1-2 games after playing at paradise i laughed my ass off when they all folded for an early preflop raise,

[/ QUOTE ]Morning Star - Are you sure they would not all have folded anyhow?

If they all folded, then your games are very much different from mine. And if they all folded, you must not have collected very much for your win. Do you suppose there might be a way to collect more when you win (and lose less when you lose)?

[ QUOTE ]
i didn't realise that anyone could actualy play so weak tight, but they did and they still do

[/ QUOTE ]Folding to an early position pre-flop raise is not what I think of as "weak tight." (Folding to an early position pre-flop raise seems tight, but not necessarily weak). Whatever. Not worth quibbling about.

[ QUOTE ]
and in those games it becomes wrong to limp with a lot of hands you should limp with in other enviroments and there is a very real chance of stealing the pot preflop...

[/ QUOTE ]If Hero actually had a chance of stealing the blinds with a pre-flop raise, then I'll concede that stealing would become a consideration. Stealing might not be the wisest choice, but it would at least be a consideration.

[ QUOTE ]
...you need something that will pay for blinds seeing the flop for free or cheaply, people with position calling with marginal hands and so on to make limping in early position correct, if it doesn't exist you prolly shouldn't limp

[/ QUOTE ]I'm trying to make some logical sense out of what you have written here, but having a difficult time doing so.

There are four betting rounds. If you have a good hand and play cleverly, you may be able to collect optimally. Sometimes optimal collection might involve getting an opponent to bet or call rather than fold on each of the four betting rounds - not just the first. Other times optimal collection might involve getting in more than one bet on a particular betting round, particularly the third betting round.

[ QUOTE ]
ps. in most games it would bee silly to raise from early position with hands like A279 rainbow or TTJQds,

[/ QUOTE ]I don't buy that. I might or might not raise with either of those hands from any position, just depending on the effect I thought a raise would have on particular opponents. (But I have to admit I would not generally raise with either of those hands from any position). I would not rate either of those starting hands as very strong, particularly the TTJQds hand.

[ QUOTE ]
but in the 1-2 games at stars with 25-35% flop percentages it would be silly to limp (no xtra action just an increase in chance to lose the pot)

[/ QUOTE ]25%-35% is something like the range of starting hands I play myself. Most of my opponents are looser, but a few are tighter.

It doesn't follow that you just increase your chances of losing by limping. You do, of course, increase your chance of losing by making it easier for your opponents to continue (pulling). But you also increase your profit if you have more customers when you do win. Thus you don't "just" increase your chances of losing. And depending on the cards and situation, by limping, you may not increase your chances of losing very much if at all.

Buzz

[morningstar]

i'm pretty sure big blind wouldn't fold if i limp (should i waste time by explaining what leads me to this assumption?)...

...folding to a btf raise is not "weak tight", but folding too often is (i believe the term is pretty clearly defined)...

...there are no hands in O8 that are worth more than the blinds, but if you can induce action by limping and you have a very small chance to steal the blinds then it's correct to limp with certain hands you would raise in different enviroments...

...in the game that the original poster describes you can't induce action and you have reasonable chance in stealing the blinds so you never gain anything by limping and no i'm not saying you can never gain anything by limping nor that i can never gain anything by limping (is that clear?)...

...so you disagree it would be silly to raise A279 or TTJQds from ep in most games, but you admit you generally wont raise with either of those hands from any position [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

ps. your chance of losing the pot against 1+ player/s vs 0 is pretty much

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
...there are no hands in O8 that are worth more than the blinds

[/ QUOTE ]Morning Star - I don't understand. (Your statement doesn't make sense to me).

[ QUOTE ]
...in the game that the original poster describes you can't induce action and you have reasonable chance in stealing the blinds so you never gain anything by limping

[/ QUOTE ]What do you mean by "you can't induce action"? (I don't understand how that relates to anything under discussion).

Perhaps "steal the blinds" has a different meaning to you than to me. To my way of thinking you "steal the blinds" when (1) you raise before the flop, (2) everybody folds, and (3) you are awarded the pot (which consists of the blinds and your own money). In other words, you don't steal the blinds when you knock out the blinds but you still have other opponents.

Are you telling us everybody gets out of your way when you make a pre-flop raise in a 1/2 game?

[ QUOTE ]
.....so you never gain anything by limping

[/ QUOTE ]In my humble opinion, your conclusion doesn't logically follow from "you can't induce action and you have reasonable chance in stealing the blinds." At least I don't see the connection.

[ QUOTE ]
(is that clear?)...

[/ QUOTE ]No.

[ QUOTE ]
...so you disagree it would be silly to raise A279 or TTJQds from ep in most games, but you admit you generally wont raise with either of those hands from any position

[/ QUOTE ]That's not quite the way I would put it.

I might raise with any hand from any position. But I generally would not raise before the flop with either of those hands from any position.

Although the cards I hold do have bearing on whether I fold, call, or raise, once I have decided not to fold, the particular action I choose (call or raise) generally depends more on the effect I think my action will have on various opponents - on this betting round and in the future.

In other words, I might, or might not, raise from any position with any hand I'll play, and for various reasons.

But the reason I raise before the flop in a limit Omaha-8 ring game is never to steal the blinds, because that tactic doesn't work well. It doesn't work well in any ring games I have ever played in anywhere. It doesn't work well for me and it doesn't work well for anybody else I observe trying it.

You insist it works for you in this 1/2 game. If so, good for you, but I'm not buying the bridge.

Buzz

[morningstar]

In lo8 you will always rather steal the blinds than have an equal opponent call you with a random hand because your edge is never worth more (in HE AA is a hand that is ahead so much that you would rather have a caller than just steal).

I doubt i have talked a whole lot about MY 1-2 game, because it has no relevance in the matter, but i do know the enviroment that the original poster described.

I have no desire to try to explain you what inducing action means.

When the poster only gives away his hand and the table he played in then that is the only information to base your analysis.

In your 1st post you claimed that he made a stupid raise pre-flop, but the raise wouldn't be stupid if he had a chance to steal the blinds then now you claim that there are no lo8 tables where stealing blinds works for you or ppl you have observed (why do you hangout with retards?).

My only argument was that the poster described a table where stealing blinds is a real possibility and that his pre flop raise is not stupid, but it's actually the ONLY correct way to play the hand (limping with the hand would be stooooopid and so is folding) and advicing him to do anything else in this particulat situation is simply wrong (stoooopid/retarded/corkyish).

ps. this is my last reply to you, i get easily bored when reading worthless drivel