Printing money at bodog - KTo

[Todd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't even matter if MP is unknown, this is a very straightforward preflop raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This advice is killing me in real life. I go from limping with crap hands like KTo to trying to convince myself to raise with crap hands.

From trying to follow some semblance of SSHE to ignoring it in favor of game texture and raising any sooted Ace in MP3, CO and Btn after one limper.

It is a puzzle to me. But I am having a poker crisis after last nite.

[/ QUOTE ]
Todd, this is a raise far more because of the player that limped, than the cards we hold.

It might be difficult to put together right now because you're perhaps in a stage that has more important things to work on. Sometimes I think that those of us who went through the stages occasionally give more advanced advice than a poster is ready to hear. I think that's why I often right posts like this that say, "Keep what is being said in mind, but sometimes a player is working on too many concepts at a time."

That being said, raising in these types of situations very often leads to easier postflop play w/ fewer opponents, thus granting you decisions that aren't so damn tough when the population of China isn't in the hand with you.

Basically, I found that once I started raising more, poker became far easier to learn...and quicker as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I have played a hsit-load of poker, for a long time, but I still go back and try to resolve the concept of aggression. I know I dont PFR enough (only 8% or so), and revisiting the reasons why I sometimes regress back to passive/calling poker is critical to keeping the BB/100 numbers as high as possible.

T

[Befolder]

[ QUOTE ]
I know I dont PFR enough (only 8% or so), and revisiting the reasons why I sometimes regress back to passive/calling poker is critical to keeping the BB/100 numbers as high as possible.

T

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it conflicts with your personality? I had to learn to be aggressive when I very first started (you're obviously not) and I had to be okay with it. It took some time, but is now very natural...too much every once in a while.

[Todd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know I dont PFR enough (only 8% or so), and revisiting the reasons why I sometimes regress back to passive/calling poker is critical to keeping the BB/100 numbers as high as possible.

T

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it conflicts with your personality? I had to learn to be aggressive when I very first started (you're obviously not) and I had to be okay with it. It took some time, but is now very natural...too much every once in a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. This is exactly right. For decades, as a kid, I was a passive player. Bet when I had it, check fold when I didnt. Works fine with the same guys over a long period.

Also, your game starts to take on the attributes necessary to beat the table, which in my case was very loose and passive. I could play tight passive, until I had a hand, and then let it fly and collect the money.

Going to Casinos was always a crisis, since I didnt show nearly enough aggression to hold my own, even in the 2-4 and 3-6 games in the mid 90s.

Recently, I get it, aggression in the abstract, but just have to keep focusing on it, because in my zeal to be as aggressive as necessary, I sometimes become way too aggressive and spew chips with TPTK when villain has a set, for instance.

T

[Befolder]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know I dont PFR enough (only 8% or so), and revisiting the reasons why I sometimes regress back to passive/calling poker is critical to keeping the BB/100 numbers as high as possible.

T

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it conflicts with your personality? I had to learn to be aggressive when I very first started (you're obviously not) and I had to be okay with it. It took some time, but is now very natural...too much every once in a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. This is exactly right. For decades, as a kid, I was a passive player. Bet when I had it, check fold when I didnt. Works fine with the same guys over a long period.

Also, your game starts to take on the attributes necessary to beat the table, which in my case was very loose and passive. I could play tight passive, until I had a hand, and then let it fly and collect the money.

Going to Casinos was always a crisis, since I didnt show nearly enough aggression to hold my own, even in the 2-4 and 3-6 games in the mid 90s.

Recently, I get it, aggression in the abstract, but just have to keep focusing on it, because in my zeal to be as aggressive as necessary, I sometimes become way too aggressive and spew chips with TPTK when villain has a set, for instance.

T

[/ QUOTE ]

I have gone through the following stages:
1) Tight aggressive/weak
2) Tight Aggressive/aggro
3) Chameleon: My style now adjusts to the game dynamics.

For tonight's live game at the casino, I'm going to need to remember to limp in Axs early if the table is as loose as it might be. A maniac on my left will make me reconsider though.

I don't get to use the live style very much anymore, so I'm always out of practice to the preflop changes.
I'm prepared for Suckout City though on my top pair hands.

[Dam]

[quote
I have gone through the following stages:
1) Tight aggressive/weak
2) Tight Aggressive/aggro
3) Chameleon: My style now adjusts to the game dynamics.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm bouncing back and forth between Stage 1 and Stage 2. It is hard to find a happy medium. One game your too aggressive, you tone it down, and go the other way.
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[fretelöo]

[ QUOTE ]
38% is 5% more than 33%
54% is 4% more than 50%

So, maybe you are at a bigger advantage over random expectation, if that is what he is saying/

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that was my point. I would have raised myself and pot size is a good argument and also that we'll probably be able to realize more of our advantage vs. one player than vs. two. But still, I'd have thought, that our equity should go down, not up...

[hizo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know I dont PFR enough (only 8% or so), and revisiting the reasons why I sometimes regress back to passive/calling poker is critical to keeping the BB/100 numbers as high as possible.

T

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps it conflicts with your personality? I had to learn to be aggressive when I very first started (you're obviously not) and I had to be okay with it. It took some time, but is now very natural...too much every once in a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. This is exactly right. For decades, as a kid, I was a passive player. Bet when I had it, check fold when I didnt. Works fine with the same guys over a long period.

Also, your game starts to take on the attributes necessary to beat the table, which in my case was very loose and passive. I could play tight passive, until I had a hand, and then let it fly and collect the money.

Going to Casinos was always a crisis, since I didnt show nearly enough aggression to hold my own, even in the 2-4 and 3-6 games in the mid 90s.

Recently, I get it, aggression in the abstract, but just have to keep focusing on it, because in my zeal to be as aggressive as necessary, I sometimes become way too aggressive and spew chips with TPTK when villain has a set, for instance.

T

[/ QUOTE ]

I have gone through the following stages:
1) Tight aggressive/weak
2) Tight Aggressive/aggro
3) Chameleon: My style now adjusts to the game dynamics.

For tonight's live game at the casino, I'm going to need to remember to limp in Axs early if the table is as loose as it might be. A maniac on my left will make me reconsider though.

I don't get to use the live style very much anymore, so I'm always out of practice to the preflop changes.
I'm prepared for Suckout City though on my top pair hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find getting to 3)/chameleon stage is essential when you start playing 3/6-5/10 (SH), as different opponents at the same table will require radically different approaches and lines.

[OrigamiSensei]

fret, I completely don't get what you're talking about. The moment the hand goes multi-way your equity falls precipitously. As shown in your example your equity goes from over 50% to under 40 and that's a huge hit. KTo is not the hand to go to war with when it's multi-way. Heads up against a loose limper I'm happy to play it.

KTo is significantly better than the limper's range and it's a hand that plays much better heads up than multi-way. A raise will put immense pressure on those who have yet to act, is likely to buy you the button and in fact may fold out hands such as weak aces and suited connectors that you'd prefer to not deal with. It also prevents a cheap limp from SB and a checked option by BB, in which case a random flop can result in the dreaded "big blind special".

Marty, the thing to remember here is not to fall in love with KTo as some sort of great hand on its own intrinsic merits - it's not - but what matters is that it's most likely better than the limper's hand. Also, raising here may fold out hands on the button and in the blinds such as weaker aces, KJ or smaller pocket pairs, it makes the hand much easier to play post-flop and gives you a much higher likelihood of taking the hand down. Think about it - how do you want this hand to play out? What you want is that you raise, the button and blinds fold and then you come out firing on the flop and take the hand down without a fight.

[Grease]

[ QUOTE ]
If MP plays any two, raise pf. Bet flop and turn for sure. What exactly was the question? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, especially since the BB is TP.

Don't give them a free chance to outdraw you. They might even fold a weak A PF, which would be a great coup.

[milesdyson]

[ QUOTE ]
fret, I completely don't get what you're talking about. The moment the hand goes multi-way your equity falls precipitously. As shown in your example your equity goes from over 50% to under 40 and that's a huge hit. KTo is not the hand to go to war with when it's multi-way. Heads up against a loose limper I'm happy to play it.

KTo is significantly better than the limper's range and it's a hand that plays much better heads up than multi-way. A raise will put immense pressure on those who have yet to act, is likely to buy you the button and in fact may fold out hands such as weak aces and suited connectors that you'd prefer to not deal with. It also prevents a cheap limp from SB and a checked option by BB, in which case a random flop can result in the dreaded "big blind special".

Marty, the thing to remember here is not to fall in love with KTo as some sort of great hand on its own intrinsic merits - it's not - but what matters is that it's most likely better than the limper's hand. Also, raising here may fold out hands on the button and in the blinds such as weaker aces, KJ or smaller pocket pairs, it makes the hand much easier to play post-flop and gives you a much higher likelihood of taking the hand down. Think about it - how do you want this hand to play out? What you want is that you raise, the button and blinds fold and then you come out firing on the flop and take the hand down without a fight.

[/ QUOTE ]
He thinks all that matters is whether or not equity is > 1/(# of players), as if you're going to make some agreement with the other people in the hand to put bets in postflop regardless of the board.