The 99 Preflop SB Debate

[cashy]

rejohnkaneme

[john kane]

[ QUOTE ]
I play poker?

wtf

building a pot when we have a big edge against our opponent's range is not a bad thing

[/ QUOTE ]

imo, not when there are streets still to go and he'll always be able to see where in your range you are playing (by your turn action) and you won't be able to see where in his range he is playing (by acting first on turn), and that he can represent he is in a higher region of his range when he sees you are representing a hand lower in your range (if you check turn) thus i think you are committing yourself to betting the turn.

thus the only way to compensate that is to represent a hand lower in your range than it actually is, and to then induce him to represent a hand higher in his range than he actually does, i.e. by playing it passively on previous streets/preflop.

doubt that makes much sense, but hopefully some.

for example, on the turn, if we bet again, we have committed ourselves to engaging in a bet regardless of the turn card becuase we have bet on both preflop and flop, that isnt a good situation being the guy who is blindly making bets and letting the opponent choose whether to accept it.

meh, maybe thats a load of crap, but i think there is some truth in that. if by raising pf and betting flop, you are committing yourself to betting turn vs a tricky smart opponent, i don't think that is a good situation to be in at all, especially as your other option is to check-call and that screams out showdown value.

[john kane]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
smaller pairs i'd probably limp and fire most flops given im then likely ahead.

i'd rather do this than raise, get called, and then fire on a flop, then when he calls his hand range is infinite, whereas if he calls when i limp-bet flop i know he likely has something.

i think fold equity in SB on flop is much higher when you limp-bet than raise-bet.



[/ QUOTE ]

So do I want to

a) create a small pot and get no action unless I am behind

or

b) Create a bigger pot and get called by an "infinite" range on the flop of which we are ahead of a large part.

[/ QUOTE ]

tbh i think you are thinking in 1 street terms of option b)

are you then always betting turn? becuase if your not then i assume sometimes your check-calling turn and clearly showing a marginal showdown value hand

and if you are always betting turn do you not think it is a bad play it be committed to making a bet regardless of the turn card vs a player who you have no idea what his hand range is (as is my thought)?

as for option a) it's a standard odds bet imo. limpcall+3/4 bet flop = 2BB
to win 1.5BB put in from forced blinds

[Leptyne]

I think the case you make is sound and is basically the same case against 3-betting 99 in the blinds.

[dtan05]

then check call again on river?

anyway, i don't think we can only raise our premiums here in the sb, as that makes us very vulnerable, thoughts?

[ikestoys]

[x] hero has a nasty case of FPS

[ikestoys]

john - if you play 99 as a cbet, c/f everytime we dont have an overpair, your argument may have a point. But we can c/c a lot of flops and turns, double barrel and other postflop plays to counter someone floating pretty easily.

you are losing money c/c pre or on the flop b/c villain will have control of the pot size, and if he is any good, he'll won't work that to our advantage

[ipokeder]

LOL 99 is such a bad hand i open fold it pf all the time cuz i can't win at poker unless i have at least top pair

[john kane]

dtan, i just don't like the line of pf-raise, bet flop, check-call turn, check-call river. it's just seems to 'guessy' that you have not been able to work out his hand and just hope you have him beat. if the flop is draw heavy it's an okay line, but otherwise i think your too often paying off better hands and not getting anything when you have him marginally beat.

i dont think it makes us that vulnerable as we can then start limp-reraising trash, premium, and just messing with his head.

ikestoys, i understand your reasoning and agree that a mix of postflop plays based on history is the way to play 99 if you've raised preflop, i'd just rather limp and get a bit of action from low flopped pairs than having to choose between a variety of plays oop in a blinds hand when action could be on all 4 streets and come river 4 in 5 times i've got a mid pair.

agreed as well that villain's advantage of being able to pot size control given his positional advantage, but i feel that applies to when we have raised preflop, he can choose which hands to given action and which not to, whereas by betting religiously we are always giving action, and by not betting we are thus letting him control pot size.

either way, vs a smart good regular, position is crucial, so i don't see why i'd want to escalate a pot with what is 80% a pair of 9s.

99 looks great pf vs a random. it doesn't look so good when an good tricky player has called our flop bet or has lead out on the turn/river.

meh, maybe we have to ignore our hand and play with what we are representing, i think treating the hand as '99' is the problem. but that is far easier in position than oop, so hence i recently i have focused far more on position than (probably ever) before.

[donkeykong2]

i dont think you can make a definite statement how to play one hand everytime, it has to fit together with the generell style you play and you have adjust the frequencies against players you play a lot with. you might occasionally bet the mediocre/bad hands and check/call the good ones but dont overdo it.