Harrington on Holdem III Discussion Group

[Leavenfish]

Again, why is calling the $60 'significantly inferior' as you imply? That's my only realy question.

A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] HU I would likely chose the raise. Against two limpers (and three players yet to act...any one of which could have a real hand) and with a hand that is vulnerable to so many holdings, I would prefer to call and see a flop in hopes of looking to outplay these 'not very competent' players post flop should, say an A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] be in when the flop comes A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. If a flop came not to my liking, I could get away from it easier...and it might not be so easy for the A9 to get away should an ace come out as he is loose. If they were more competent, I would be more likely to raise.

But, raising isn't bad by any means, you could get both to bite and keep others out...but again AQ suited is vulnerable to a flop. I just think Harrington believes there could be more to be gained with a call. I could well be wrong though. My 'forte' is Limit and Stud not, NL...I'm still early in the learning process there.

Keep in mind though the only real point of this problem - fear of flopping. That's why it's so short. I think we are over analyzing the situation here.

---Leavenfish

[Raiseren1]

Ok. Let me change the by far. Just better. Now lets assume the small blinds has 86s. If you raise 5bb he is making a mistake by calling. Now if you limp he will limp as well (probably). Flop comes 6-8-Q. Can you get away? By not raising you don't allow your opennents to make big mistakes preflop.

[spikeymikey]

I scored 405. I was hoping for 450 or 475. If I would have made 500 that would be sweet. There are a few things I didn't agree with ie: one the 1st problems....he says you should just call with AQ suited, I would raise, but then again I'm not a world champion....yet.

[sahaguje]

[ QUOTE ]
These are the some of the problems where I disagree with Harringtons solution, and which haven't really been discussed:

Problem 2) Raising is by far the best play I think. Against loose players. You have position as well, and I think that you gain a lot by raising.


[/ QUOTE ]

Debatable. Against loose players, you dont want to play smallball. You want to play all streets and double up if you have a hand. By raising there is a good chance you play head's up, he check, you bet he folds. Not bad, but I prefer calling and trapping A9 or suited connector of my suit. If you raise, you will moslty be called by hands that have easy fold /big hand on flop (middle pairs), and smaller big cards and suited middle cards will fold. Gimme AK (cause AQ can call) or AQos (cause I cant double up with a flush) and I raise.

[ QUOTE ]

Problem 12) I like a raise here preflop with k9o. My hand is decent, and I want to get heads up with the CO while I have position with dead money in the pot (the blinds). The fatc that CO has played solid isn't bad. That only increases the chance of him folding to my CB.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are on the button, the only limper has a short stack... You raise does not indicates strenght. I dont like my position if one of the blinds call. Now F certainly calls, there is 700 in the pot and I have only 1500. Not enough leverage to fold against a better K. I would raise only if I am pretty sure the blinds will fold (very tight or a tell if it is live) AND I think player F is tight enough not to reraise all-in with a decent hand (middle pair, big cards) just to end it (if he calls he is pretty much pot commited)

I'll anwser your other comments another time.

[Raiseren1]

Lets just ignore the AQs hand. I think raising is the better play because loose players call these raises with Aj/AT as well and make a mistake by doing that. But I agree that there is no play that is far better than anything else.

Usually player F doesn't have a very good hand. Then he would have raised preflop. Very often the blinds aren't calling a 4bb raise oop, when it doesn't looks like a directly steal attempt (blinds are still relativily low, and there is one limper in front of the raiser). Lets assume you are one of the blinds. You have 88 and decided to call, and the origianlly limper folds (he will probably fold preflop around 50% of the time I assume when you call). Hero will always CB if checked too. Flop comes 9,Q,5. You check-fold right?. What if the flop came A-3-5? 3-5-Q. Will you call here? Getting heads up is almost always + EV when you have position and was the aggressor preflop.

[sahaguje]

[ QUOTE ]
These are the some of the problems where I disagree with Harringtons solution, and which haven't really been discussed:

Problem 13) I really hate limping here. I probably raise with ATo to 200. If he calls and an ace hits on a non drawheavy bord I just check-call for pot control. I generally think Harrington limps to much, which doesn't give him the oppurunity of making an CB and winning a decent sized pot.


[/ QUOTE ]

We should pay attention to the reasons he gives, especially this one : the position of the limper (2nd). I think it is very important. I used to raise without paying attention to the position of the limpers, whereas it is a very valuable information. If limper is EP, you will rarely be against a smaller A. AJ, even AQ are common. If late limper, sometimes A9 or A8 is possible. Anyway, I think raising is ok, but calling is better



[ QUOTE ]

22b) Harrington advices the miniraise because a bigger raise just says: I have a monster. Oh really? We are playing against pros here and they should be able to identificate the min.raise as a monster (?).

[/ QUOTE ]

You aim at doubling up. In order to do that, it would be nice if you could without betting more than 1/2 pot on the river. If you call, then 2/3 bet on turn and 1/2 river and get called (possible against a small pair, or an overcard hit), you put 20+60+100=180. Not even close. You have to be raised or to make really big bets comparing to the pot size. If your raise 40k, it is better : 40+100+160=300k, for example. But not neough. So raising 60k looks better if you wish to double up. But your opponent gets 1 to 3 for his call, not enough to call with 2 overcards, whereas he gets irresistible 1 to 5 if you make it 40k instead of 60k. Player dependent, I guess. The situation is also important : doubling up or making 200 k leads to the same stack position . You go from 5th to 2nd stack. Of course, doubling up is better, but I would be happy enough to win 50% of nguyen's stack. So I think Harrington is wrong when he gives the 60k 0 points, but in this situation the 40k raise seems better. I would have called, but it is not a very good strategic play at the end of a live MTT in my opinion : I prefer to give credit to my future raises made with much lesser hands.

++

[sahaguje]

[ QUOTE ]


Usually player F doesn't have a very good hand. Then he would have raised preflop. Very often the blinds aren't calling a 4bb raise oop, when it doesn't looks like a directly steal attempt (blinds are still relativily low, and there is one limper in front of the raiser). Lets assume you are one of the blinds. You have 88 and decided to call, and the origianlly limper folds (he will probably fold preflop around 50% of the time I assume when you call). Hero will always CB if checked too. Flop comes 9,Q,5. You check-fold right?. What if the flop came A-3-5? 3-5-Q. Will you call here? Getting heads up is almost always + EV when you have position and was the aggressor preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess it is problem 12. It depends which blind calls. If I am SB, I am likely to go all in, either PF or on the flop, if I decide to play the hand, for example with 88.
Getting heads up with position is very good, of course, but only if the money is deep enough that your OOP opponent wont be pot commited anyway.

If I have 88 in the BB, I am likely to fold if I think player F has a good chance to go all in if I call (classic), and otherwise to probe bet most of the flops. I am not sure Hero is comfortable seeing another middle stack betting, even if he has hit a 9 or K.

If I feel I am better than my opponents, I prefer (careful, heretic sentence) a 4 handed pot where I have enough leverage to outplay my opponents, than a head's up with pot commited opponent situation. So here, with a short-stacked limper and a short stacked SB, I just call.

[OJCIT]

[ QUOTE ]
Problem #10

Dan's reasoning: "You didn't invest $300 in this hand to check if you missed the flop."

Surely this is a [censored] joke.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're Phil Ivey though, you can't check, or you'd be somebody else. Quite an out of body experience. Unless you're trying to lay a trap with your 93...

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
You're Phil Ivey though, you can't check, or you'd be somebody else. Quite an out of body experience. Unless you're trying to lay a trap with your 93...

[/ QUOTE ]

Phil Ivey does not bet every flop.

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
Phil Ivey does not bet every flop.

[/ QUOTE ]Harrington did not say that he did.

The point is, when you play a hand like 93o, you aren't trying to hit a flop or make a hand. You are trying to outplay your opponents, which you can't to by checking. So checking this flop is incosistent with being in the hand at all. Limping in and folding 93o is simply spewing chips because you give yourself no chance to make the hand profitable. If you're going to be loose and win, you have to be agressive, not weak. Obviousloy Ivey plays this differently if someone shows an interest in the pot, but since no one has a bet is mandetory or you shouldn't have limped in the first place.