33 earns 33 BB... but should I have been in the pot?

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Hope it works.

link

Specifically the response that has the headline of 'a Miller Excerpt'.


[/ QUOTE ]
First, that SSHE quote talks about a raise and reraise. Why would you think that should be applied directly to a straddle and a restraddle? A normal UTG raise indicates some strength, even when made by a LAG. A straddle is made without looking at the cards, and represents no strength whatsoever. Why do you want to treat them the same way?

Second, your recommendations in this thread are not even consistent with that quote. That's mainly a sign that the quote doesn't fit this context, but it also suggests that you are greatly undervaluing hands like AQo. Games where 5 people would dump a ton of chips in blindly exceeds "loose and aggressive," and SSHE recommends playing more hands as the game gets looser, in contrast to your statement that you would not play AQo in a maniacal game.

[bernie]

Sigh....

The AQo part should be contained to the other thread.

[ QUOTE ]
First, that SSHE quote talks about a raise and reraise. Why would you think that should be applied directly to a straddle and a restraddle?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's talking about raises that you don't respect. Such as in maniac/wild games. It's not talking about just typical, normal standard raisers.

[ QUOTE ]
Second, your recommendations in this thread are not even consistent with that quote.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, if you take out my last line following me quoting that where I say I actually play a little looser. OR you could read why he recommends the hands and my range is very consistent. High card value, multiway hands. Many different ways of winning. Where's the inconsistency?

[ QUOTE ]
Games where 5 people would dump a ton of chips in blindly exceeds "loose and aggressive," and SSHE recommends playing more hands as the game gets looser, in contrast to your statement that you would not play AQo in a maniacal game.

[/ QUOTE ]

SSHE doesn't advocate playing looser in wild/maniac games where lots of money is going in up front. I don't know where you keep thinking you're reading that. Every quote you quote refers to looser, more passive games where you can get to the flop cheaper.

You really think since all the money going in now, somehow exceeds loose and aggressive,(note, they're not talking about tough loose and aggressive games here) that somehow your implied odds are better for marginal hands that you recommended in previous threads? Do you understand why you need to be able to get to the flop cheaper with many of those hands?

AQo is the only hand I differ on with SSHE as far as mucking preflop in wild games. Big whoop.

b