Deep stack (300-1000bb+) theory--common scenarios PREFLOP

[jlocdog]

Kirk,

That is a very good post. Was gonna post something along similar lines but you did it justice. Well done.

[jk3a]

To address the issue of deception and how to deal with not revealing your hand with your pf raise size...

Why would someone vary the size of their pf raises significantly enough as to "give away their hand" if we're too deep to stack off with one pair anyway?

I would undoubtedly be nicer to take the flop 2-3 way with AA and 5-7 way with 98s, but I really struggle to see why we would try so hard to accomplish that if we are revealing too much information about our hand.

btw, really enjoy your CR videos david. nice perspective

[ob1]

fwiw i think this post hits a few important points about games with the dynamics that OP has described playing in, however your 4th and 5th points seem to contradict each other, if pot size becomes bloated and players are pot committed to the hand, how exactly are they getting away from 2nd set, two pair and low flushes if the game is effectively playing as a larger game, thus with less money behind in relation to the pot? in an uncapped game i think that most live player realize that the blinds really dont do all that much for some players, the size of the game is really dictated by the amount of money in the pot on flop which is in turn dictated by several factors like stack size, looseness of the game etc. with respect to your 5th point ..... obviously in a deeper game, bigger bluffs can be run on players with a strong read and history, but if the game is playing bigger than the blinds might imply, the game is effectively not as deep and these big bluffs get harder to run.
[ QUOTE ]
couple of points

1. The size of the raise often depends on the order of players that have limped already. Generally in these games if the first limper calls your raise, then its going to cause a chain reaction. In other words, a raise to 300 gets the same number of callers as a raise of 600 if the first limpers are the looser players. If you have a couple of the tighter players as the first limpers, a smaller raise is often enough. That to me this is independant of the hand you have...this point also makes me defend more hands from blinds as usually this triggers a string of calls behind me...

2. Obviously position is very important. However, a lot of times "position" players become very exploitable in these games. Late in a session it becomes obvious which players like raising their position - and they like a robot will try to raise from late position every orbit or every other orbit. These players become very exploitable by reraisers out of blinds or bluff limp reraisers...

3. The actual size of blind doesnt really matter anymore...a lot of 25/50 games that are playing 500+ BB deep just end up playing like 50/100 or 100/200 games...people always say "NY games are ridiculous since people raise 10 BB to open"...the reality is the game is just playing like 100/200...

4. I think for a skillful player, limping in to pots is often superior to raising pots as more mistakes are made in later streets...and you cant play later streets unless you get through the first few streets. Also, bloated preflop pots make weaker players feel more committed to hands and takes a little of the skill out of play...this is all magnified by the deeper stacks.

5. 2-barrel and 3-barrel bluffs become a lot more effective as people start getting away from bottom sets, 2 pairs, small flushes etc...i always think metagame/shania is completely overdone on 2+2, but if it matters anywhere, it matters in these deep stack games...

[/ QUOTE ]

[SunOfBeach]

In superdeep live games, I'm trying to get into pots as often as possible. That means limping alot, limpraising often enough with a large range of hands so that I can keep limping, and playing ALOT of hands from the button and cutoff (and the hijack). I'm thinking position at all times, and I'm thinking of how to get in there and win middlish pots against guys who call extra bets past the commitment threshold with TP-type hands (which happens alot more in big live games than in big online games, in my experience).

[stephenNUTS]

Position is the MOST important factor in a LIVE deepstack NLHE FR game!

All options as to limping,raising,bet-sizing,# of villains in pot,etc, are table/player/read dependent ....and should be evaluated as well as adjusted during each particular session.

On-line poker where some players are 10 tabling,playing HU,short handed six-man,extremely aggressive,etc ..are a completley diff. animal,and comparison of the two is real tough IMO

~stephen [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[ghbond]

Here's how I view the psychology of live deep stack. I play mostly live, and it is a totally different mindset from online. I can't comment on the card play because that is going to depend on who's at the table and where they are sitting. Might as well write a book. The "online ban" in the US has pushed lots of online players to casinos and made the games less predictable.

An online player thinks in terms of buy-ins, and variance will produce runs of 8-10 buy-ins lost no problem. The effective stack size for an online player is then more like 1000 BB or more. This is why they stack off relatively easily, because it is effectively macro-limit holdem.

What is in front of the online players NOSE, however, is 100BB or less, so 10BB is 10% or more of his chips. That's why you don't see the big preflop raises as much. It is too big of a percentage of the stack IN PLAY, and leaves too little room for post-flop play.

The live player is mostly PLANNING on one buy-in, so the whole table has a vested interest in keeping the commitment to any one hand small, thus the limping. When you threaten the limp with a raise, that's money that can't be replaced, plus they expect more fold equity to enter the pot, so the investment to keep it in play seems more reasonable. That's also why bluffing works better, because there is less reloading. Each additional bluff requires a higher percentage of the remaining chips, vs. an online player who has basically decided yes/no to a stack-off possibility.

Preflop play is based on the value of two cards vs. any other two cards, but the EV goes away if you are against multiple players. If you want to visualize this, just watch the first hand in freeroll tournaments, and see how the odds of the best two cards are destroyed when 4+ players push. I know that everyone knows this intrinsically, but to see it in action has an extra impact.

So unless you can open betting late position, adjust your focus to post-flop play, and play stronger hands than you would online. AA-QQ unimproved is often a fold.

For me, most money live is made reading players and bluffing/giving off false tells. Also, with live lags be careful when they get quiet and don't raise, because that's usually a big hand.

And for God's sake, don't wear sunglasses!

[stephenNUTS]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's how I view the psychology of live deep stack. I play mostly live, and it is a totally different mindset from online. I can't comment on the card play because that is going to depend on who's at the table and where they are sitting. Might as well write a book. The "online ban" in the US has pushed lots of online players to casinos and made the games less predictable.

An online player thinks in terms of buy-ins, and variance will produce runs of 8-10 buy-ins lost no problem. The effective stack size for an online player is then more like 1000 BB or more. This is why they stack off relatively easily, because it is effectively macro-limit holdem.

What is in front of the online players NOSE, however, is 100BB or less, so 10BB is 10% or more of his chips. That's why you don't see the big preflop raises as much. It is too big of a percentage of the stack IN PLAY, and leaves too little room for post-flop play.

The live player is mostly PLANNING on one buy-in, so the whole table has a vested interest in keeping the commitment to any one hand small, thus the limping. When you threaten the limp with a raise, that's money that can't be replaced, plus they expect more fold equity to enter the pot, so the investment to keep it in play seems more reasonable. That's also why bluffing works better, because there is less reloading. Each additional bluff requires a higher percentage of the remaining chips, vs. an online player who has basically decided yes/no to a stack-off possibility.

Preflop play is based on the value of two cards vs. any other two cards, but the EV goes away if you are against multiple players. If you want to visualize this, just watch the first hand in freeroll tournaments, and see how the odds of the best two cards are destroyed when 4+ players push. I know that everyone knows this intrinsically, but to see it in action has an extra impact.

So unless you can open betting late position, adjust your focus to post-flop play, and play stronger hands than you would online. AA-QQ unimproved is often a fold.

For me, most money live is made reading players and bluffing/giving off false tells. Also, with live lags be careful when they get quiet and don't raise, because that's usually a big hand.

And for God's sake, don't wear sunglasses!

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice post with,some very good points GHB,

IMO ,the immediate glaring diff. in ON-LINE vs LIVE play is the 100bb maximum B/I compared to uncapped LIVE buy-ins at higher stakes.

I agree that this results in the higher than standard on-line open raise of 3-4xbb bets,by being directly related to (as you said) a greater percentage of their stack size,compared to a live game.Limping is a rarity as well in comparison ONLINE,as aggression is the norm.

This also makes post/pre-flop play much different.Besides ...being only a click away,this is why stacking off and re-loading ONLINE is so common,besides being quite convenient,but dangerous as well.In fact I am sure there are many on-liners that can go through 4,6,10+ buy-ins in ONE session.

You will rarely see a LIVE player buy-in mulitiple times after getting felted,unless the game is extremely juicy, credit is handily available,or some wealthy tourist donk is at the table.

Throw in straddling and a good aggressive LIVE 25/50 game can easily play like 100/200+ or higher!

~sf [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[NMcNasty]

I wouldn't worry too much about exploitability and optimal play, don't give your opponents too much credit. In live games your opponents are a lot worse on average, the stacks are deeper (better implied odds), and you can take advantage of physical tells. All of this leads to you being able to play a lot more hands preflop, perhaps even twice as many.

However, you can't play your marginal hands as strongly as you could before. Online when you raise or reraise with 57 suited or something you're making a semi-bluff. In a live game that semi-bluff is just getting called too often to be profitable. What this means is that your bigger hands give you more value. So generally you should only be raising your better hands for value. If you still get called a lot, then just raise bigger for more value. This will in fact make your play a little more predictable and thus exploitable, but don't assume your opponents have the discipline and awareness to make corrections. I think money saved from all the times you decide not to bluff and spew with 7 high will be much more than money lost when a good player decides he can push you off a 567 flop.

[ActionJeff]

I think some of the discussion in this thread shows a mindset that is successful and logical in normal NL games but is fundamentally illogical in very deep stacked games. Limp reraising, 3-betting from the blinds HU, raising in early position to disguise ones hands with a varied range, etc, are all plays that are reasonable in a 100 bb game, but often do not make sense in a deeper stacked game. Raising in bad position to build pots doesn't make sense. Limp re-raising to "protect your limps" doesn't make sense this deep either. Occasionally these plays can be viable, but in general they don't follow logically when we try to create a strategy that maximizes our EV. I think this is one of the largest possible fundamental adjustments that should be made for these super deep stacked games, and I think most players who are used to a set way of thinking about NLHE fail in this regard. I don't want to go into great detail, but I think this is a good framework for a winning strategy that won't be exploitable by good regs long term, as well as giving the fish plenty of room to make huge mistakes.

-Jeff

[FoxwoodsFiend]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's how I view the psychology of live deep stack. I play mostly live, and it is a totally different mindset from online. I can't comment on the card play because that is going to depend on who's at the table and where they are sitting. Might as well write a book. The "online ban" in the US has pushed lots of online players to casinos and made the games less predictable.

An online player thinks in terms of buy-ins, and variance will produce runs of 8-10 buy-ins lost no problem. The effective stack size for an online player is then more like 1000 BB or more. This is why they stack off relatively easily, because it is effectively macro-limit holdem.

What is in front of the online players NOSE, however, is 100BB or less, so 10BB is 10% or more of his chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

i stopped reading here but so far this post is the worst post i've read in a long time.

lol @ stephennuts loving it