Basic 5-10 NL Question: Small Pairs

[raptor517]

its fine to limp 22-66 type stuff, but throw in some limp reraises just for fun to mess with ppl.

[Big_Jim]

[ QUOTE ]
In a 5-10 NL game, where everyone has $1000, what is the correct play with small pairs UTG?

[/ QUOTE ]
Move down.

[STOPRAKEGREED]

I've been a pro for 7 years, so I appreciate your candor. But this is the best game for me now. I'm about even in it after 20 sessions despite running pretty salty. It's a very very good game. I just need to figure out how to play NL against very mediocre opponents (some of whom are rich).

[chicheebee]

depends on the type of bad player. if they're weak-tight, and easy to push around, a raise is good, as you can probably take down the pot without having to hit your set. if they're very loose, and happy to put lots of money in the middle with mediocre holdings, and chase draws not getting the corret odds, limping is probably best, since if you hit your set, you're likley to be well rewarded. are there any kinds of bad players i've missed out?

[Big_Jim]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been a pro for 7 years, so I appreciate your candor. But this is the best game for me now. I'm about even in it after 20 sessions despite running pretty salty. It's a very very good game. I just need to figure out how to play NL against very mediocre opponents (some of whom are rich).

[/ QUOTE ]
The question you pose in the OP is impossible to answer.

You don't even mention the context of the game, reads, or even how many players are at the table.

The fact that you didn't even consider these factors when you made the post tells me that you are a long way from understanding some very basic principles of NLHE, and poker in general.

[STOPRAKEGREED]

I never claimed to be a great NL player. Of course I consider the context of the game. The game is a bit odd. It is 5-10 NL. The buy in is 100-500, so during the first couple of hours, nobody is that deep. But after several hours, there are usually some fairly deep stacks. The players are all pretty bad. Some are weak tight. Some are just weak. Others are aggressive, but are capable of losing their whole stack with two pair. The trickiest thing is that there always seem to be a few short stacks making it 100 with 125 left with their AJ type hands. There is one real player who comes in from time to time and he just demolishes this field. Nobody has the balls to challenge him and he just cleans them out. I'm trying to learn from watching him, but he doesn't come in that often. Honestly, I think that if I could just get some guidelines for starting hands, I'd be fine.

[CopTHIS]

[ QUOTE ]
Others are aggressive, but are capable of losing their whole stack with two pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should damn well hope so!

[pocketjesuits]

Well for the game you described you should be folding small pairs in early position. With such short stacks (10-50 BB's ?!?!) you clearly don't have any odds for set value.

It is fairly basic poker strategy that in short-stack situations (not ultra-short though) small pairs and suited connectors lose value and big pairs and broadway cards gain value.

[STOPRAKEGREED]

OK, great. Next question. Suppose two weak people limp in middle position and I'm in the cut-off with KQ. What's the play here? Assume 60BB is the effective stack size.

[pocketjesuits]

Well you really should be able to figure this out. As I stated, high cards increase in value. KQ is one such hand that increases in value if stacks are shorter than usual.

KQ is late position is pretty much the same thing as AK/AQ, since you don't usually have to worry about being dominated (unless you get a call from the blinds).

So raise to $60.

Do the same thing with at least AK/AQ/AJ/AT KQ/KJ/KT