|
|
#22
02-20-2007, 10:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Small pp\'s in FR
Let's try to make a long theorical post about openraising every pp in every position.
I'm deeply convinced that raising 22 UTG should be the rule and not the exception. Of course you can find some particular condition when it is clearly a very bad idea but upon 'normal' conditions and I'm not arguing that limp and limp/call with these hands is Ev-. Anyway here are the reasons why you should allways raise them: 1) Because when you don't hit your set you don't want to play a marginal hand without the position nor the aggression. Let say you limp, a MP good player raised and you called. Floating oop is really really a bad idea and thus the two only moves you can do on a favorable flop (but not a set or an OESD) are lead into the pfr or bluff c/r. Those moves aren't Ev- but can become really costly against an agressive player once he understand what you are doing, much more than raising 22 UTG. Otherwise you have to fold so you're going to lose the pot nearly each time both of you miss the flop and that's not a good result at all. That often means folding the best hand. OTOH when you raise 22 UTG you have 3 opportunities to win the pot UI : Preflop, on the flop with your cbet, on the turn against a floater with properly timed second barrel. You greatly compensate your positional disadventage. 2) Because when you hit your set you want to play a big pot. It's quite frustrating to have 22 on a board like Q72r against 3 vilain including the bb, to bet and to see only one caller, to bet again on the turn and the river and to win a pot with something like 30BB against AQo while you perfectly know that if you had raised, he would have called and called the c-bet, bet strongly the turn and sometimes (not allways) called a c/rai on the turn or a c/r on the river... 3) If the table are too loose passive both pre and post flop, raising 55 UTG is the best road to value town. The bigger the pot is, the bigger the mistakes bad players do. My biggest win in bb was about 6 month ago. I was at a NL50 table and raised UTG with 66, I get called by UTG+1 a very passive player (0%PFR), a MP player, and button I think, all of them have something like 100-120bb and I covered. Pot was something like 17bb on the flop and the flop was QT6b. I fired a pot, the 3 players called and the turn came blank. The pot was about 75bb letting all of us with a psb left. I fired a pot and all of them called. The river was a blank and I won the pot against AA for UTG+1, KJo for MP, Axs for the last player (NFD). If I have limped I think all of them would have called and the pot would have been only 8bb on the flop, 40 on the turn and I wouldn't have been able to be AI on the turn letting both of them escape with their draw without getting stacked. 4) Because you don't want to see a big raise after you. Raising allow you to decide the size of the initial raise something like 4BB while if you have limped you often see a bigger raise after you (something like 6+ bb). The smaller the intial riase is the better are your implied odds. You are okay to call a raise after you ? Then you are okay to put 4bb as a semibluff preflop allowing you a long shot bluff on the flop/turn or a very well disguised 'nuts type' hand. 5) Because at higher lvl (stakes) you want to be able to put a maximum pressure on your opponent. PP are the best drawing hand preflop. 12% of the time you'll have a set and could go for a very strong line (bet/3betAI). You raise AKo I guess ? It's just a 26% odd to make a pair/2% to make a double pair/1.3% to make a trips/0.1% to make fh... The flop come AhJs3s, let's say that you have AcKd you are in a really bad shape if vilain is not a maniac, let's say you have 33 and know for sure that he would have 3bet you with AA and quite often with JJ... If you don't raise all your pp UTG you will not be able to put pressure on vilains quite often (in fact only with AA UI, NFD with hands like AKs/AQs, high pp hitting a set but most of the time it will be top set and you won't get called quite often by anything else than good drawing hands). 6) Because you don't want to flop a set with 33 on a board like 8s4s3h with both blinds in the hand and a few other players having a really hard time to decide if you hold the nuts or not. Set in raised pot are usually the nuts (even bottom set) while in a big multiway unraised pot that's not allways the case. On the previous exemple, suppose you bet and get called by 2/3 players, turn come 7h and suddenly both of the player become crazy, what's your plan ? I think that I can find a few other reasons to raise those hands but I have spent enough time of this thread now. 
|
|
#23
02-20-2007, 10:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Small pp\'s in FR
jetsetboy
My main problem with raising is this - your main profit with a low pocket pair is when you hit trips and your opponent has AA/KK/an AK which hits the flop. Any other pair is getting scared that you have a better pair. Those hands are reraising you preflop. You will still have the implied odds to call a single reraise, but not as much as limp/calling. Secondly, although your idea of playing 22 out of position sounds good, it's actually pretty scary. Unimproved 22 is virtually the same hand as AK unimproved - do you want to be playing that OOP? And while I agree that once you miss, you're more likely to pick up the pot if you raised PF, I'm not convinced this is sufficient, given that you miss 7 times out of 8.
|
|
#24
02-20-2007, 11:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Small pp\'s in FR
[ QUOTE ]
You limp 44 UTG. 2 other limpers. Button makes a standard raise of 7BB. His range is actually quite wide. You are not sure the other limpers will come along if you call. What is your play? [/ QUOTE ] Depends on players and stack sizes. Even if we assume that the limpers will fold, is bb sufficiently deep and aggressive enough that we can stack him if we hit?
|
|
#25
02-20-2007, 11:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Small pp\'s in FR
[ QUOTE ]
I'm deeply convinced that raising 22 UTG should be the rule and not the exception. [/ QUOTE ] Then I'm deeply convinced that you are an idiot. Why do you never see this as a suggestion from a pro unless you are doing it to vary your play once in a while. (i.e. game theory) As someone else has posted it is because of your implied odds going WAY down when you raise with it. Typical example, you raise 4xbb UTG with 22 and the button raises you to 12xbb. Now you have to win 48+bb just to break even each and every time you hit your set and that is just not going to happen. Sometimes you will hit your set but he will have AK/AQ and not put anymore money into the pot so you lose. Sometimes he will hit TPTK but keep the pot small. Sometimes he will have a short stack and you will have to fold to his raise/push period, end of story... again -EV. If you always raise with hands like 22 UTG you will lose money in the long run, period. If you don't believe me then ask yourself again... why is it that all these pro's who write books (some of which are mathmaticians) never recommend this as a standard play and yet suddenly you know it is the correct play...
|
|
#26
02-20-2007, 01:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Small pp\'s in FR
[ QUOTE ]
Depends on players and stack sizes. Even if we assume that the limpers will fold, is bb sufficiently deep and aggressive enough that we can stack him if we hit? [/ QUOTE ]Effective stacks 100BB. Button is aggressive, but will not always have a hand. He may be raising A8s+/ATo+/any pocket pair/any suited broadways (not at all unreasonable) so he will not hit the flop hard often enough to want to stack off.
|
|
#27
02-20-2007, 01:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Small pp\'s in FR
[ QUOTE ]
Typical example, you raise 4xbb UTG with 22 and the button raises you to 12xbb. Now you have to win 48+bb just to break even each and every time you hit your set and that is just not going to happen. [/ QUOTE ]Where do you get the 48bb figure? [ QUOTE ] If you always raise with hands like 22 UTG you will lose money in the long run, period. If you don't believe me then ask yourself again... why is it that all these pro's who write books (some of which are mathmaticians) never recommend this as a standard play and yet suddenly you know it is the correct play... [/ QUOTE ]LOL at thinking mathmaticians (sic) know the right play. The real question is what do the HSNL folks do when they play FR deepstacked. The only problem is that we may never know as most of them wouldn't give you the time of the day never mind a serious answer to that question.
|
|
#28
02-20-2007, 01:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Small pp\'s in FR
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Typical example, you raise 4xbb UTG with 22 and the button raises you to 12xbb. Now you have to win 48+bb just to break even each and every time you hit your set and that is just not going to happen. [/ QUOTE ]Where do you get the 48bb figure? [/ QUOTE ] You are roughly 8-1 to hit your set. If there were 64bb in the pot and you had to pay 8bb you could correctly call. But since you have to call 8bb to win only 16bb you need to be able to make up the remaining 48bb after the flop. However since you will not make this everytime you hit your set you actually need to make more on some hands. Therefore 48bb+ which you aren't going to do which means you will lose money in the long run. I'm not saying to *never* do it, I'm saying if you do it everytime you will lose money. The times you pick up the small pots will not outweight the times you have to fold to a raise pf or cbet on the flop and get called and have to let the hand go. [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If you always raise with hands like 22 UTG you will lose money in the long run, period. If you don't believe me then ask yourself again... why is it that all these pro's who write books (some of which are mathmaticians) never recommend this as a standard play and yet suddenly you know it is the correct play... [/ QUOTE ]LOL at thinking mathmaticians (sic) know the right play. The real question is what do the HSNL folks do when they play FR deepstacked. The only problem is that we may never know as if you ask a question in their forum you get flamed for being a donk and belonging in SSNL. [/ QUOTE ] No that is not the right question to ask. The HS players use a branch of math called game theory to vary their plays so they can't be read easily by the other opponent. At the micro's there is no need for this strategy so the correct question is "Why is it not correct to raise with baby PP's in ep in a full ring game". The correct answer is "Because you kill the implied odds you need."
|
|
#30
02-20-2007, 01:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Small pp\'s in FR
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Then I'm deeply convinced that you are an idiot. [/ QUOTE ] I'm deeply convinced that I will not waste 1 more minute to answer one of your post [/ QUOTE ] Given your thoughts on playing small PP UTG I'm not sure I'm missing anything that's +EV for me if you don't. I apologize if you don't like my bluntness, but your idea to make raising UTG with small pocket pairs standard is in fact idiotic.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
