20 replies to this topic

[Swift_Psycho]

At a casino in a $2/$4 LHE game. Game is what you would expect for live low limit hold'em, all players are pretty weak and pretty loose.Hand in question involves Villain OTB, who has been playing a decent number of hands, but almost never raised pre-flop. The only times I can remember Villain raising pre-flop so far was when he had Aces and another time Kings. He's a decent player compared to the others, but that's not saying much since mostly the table was filled with terrible calling station-type players.I'm dealt Three callers to me in HiJack position, I call, Villain (OTB) raises, BB calls, Three previous callers all call, I call.FLOP: Action checks around to me. Assuming I'm putting Villain on a big pair who will likely bet this flop if checked to (but I don't know how he'll react if I bet), how do I best proceed from here? Bet/raise flop? Check/raise flop? Check/call flop, look to check/raise turn?

[DinkDonk]

With this many players in and a flop texture that should appeal to limpers, our plan should be to get as many bets in on this flop as possible. With our relative position, we're in a great spot to check/raise the field. The most common situation is us checking to the raiser, him betting, and one or more of the limpers peeling, so c/r and cap if it's 3-bet. If it's not 3-bet, we should look to bet-3bet the turn. The only other alternative would be to bet out if we think the PF raiser is going to check back the flop a lot, but given that we've seen him raise with such a narrow range, he should be firing this flop near 100%.

[dead money]

Swift_Psycho, on Saturday, February 26th, 2011, 12:21 AM, said:

At a casino in a $2/$4 LHE game. Game is what you would expect for live low limit hold'em, all players are pretty weak and pretty loose.Hand in question involves Villain OTB, who has been playing a decent number of hands, but almost never raised pre-flop. The only times I can remember Villain raising pre-flop so far was when he had Aces and another time Kings. He's a decent player compared to the others, but that's not saying much since mostly the table was filled with terrible calling station-type players.I'm dealt Three callers to me in HiJack position, I call, Villain (OTB) raises, BB calls, Three previous callers all call, I call.FLOP: Action checks around to me. Assuming I'm putting Villain on a big pair who will likely bet this flop if checked to (but I don't know how he'll react if I bet), how do I best proceed from here? Bet/raise flop? Check/raise flop? Check/call flop, look to check/raise turn?

You should be raising preflop when entering hands in live 2/4 lhe. The players are so bad they cant fold and when you hit hands you will build huge pots. As played bet and raise flop. Bet and raise turn. If reraised on turn call down.

[DinkDonk]

dead money, on Saturday, February 26th, 2011, 8:45 AM, said:

You should be raising preflop when entering hands in live 2/4 lhe. The players are so bad they cant fold and when you hit hands you will build huge pots. As played bet and raise flop. Bet and raise turn. If reraised on turn call down.

I think that limping behind here is much more profitable than raising.

[dead money]

DinkDonk, on Saturday, February 26th, 2011, 9:59 AM, said:

I think that limping behind here is much more profitable than raising.

I would agree if this wasnt 2/4 where you will routinely see 8 players see a flop, 6 see a turn and 4 or 5 go to showdown. Why wouldnt you want to build bigger pots against players you know will make numerous mistakes? Ive played a lot of 2/4 live. I have found that playing a very aggressive pre flop strategy is very profitable. If Im playing a hand Im raising or reraising. You build monster pots when you hit. Also, if you flop draws or marginal hands you can control the hand as you have taken the lead and most players will just go with your flow. And if you miss completely you pass. It is a highly exploitable strategy against real players. But we arent playing real players. We are playing casual players, mindless drones, and blue hairs playing with their social security.

[DinkDonk]

dead money, on Saturday, February 26th, 2011, 12:42 PM, said:

I would agree if this wasnt 2/4 where you will routinely see 8 players see a flop, 6 see a turn and 4 or 5 go to showdown. Why wouldnt you want to build bigger pots against players you know will make numerous mistakes? Ive played a lot of 2/4 live. I have found that playing a very aggressive pre flop strategy is very profitable. If Im playing a hand Im raising or reraising. You build monster pots when you hit. Also, if you flop draws or marginal hands you can control the hand as you have taken the lead and most players will just go with your flow. And if you miss completely you pass. It is a highly exploitable strategy against real players. But we arent playing real players. We are playing casual players, mindless drones, and blue hairs playing with their social security.

I'd say you have this about the opposite of correct. If we're playing against very good players, we're going to want to keep an opaque range and limp in fewer spots than we would against poor players who won't take advantage of the information we present them by significantly narrowing our range. But even against good players, I'm limping here. You say that players make mistakes, so why not build a big pot preflop but the problem with your reasoning is that their most common mistake is calling to the flop/turn/river too often and that's going to be less of a mistake in a big pot than it would be in a small pot. Like, in an extreme example, imagine if you were playing $1/2 and there was $100,000 in the pot pre-flop. Any skill advantage is negligible because the correct play is always going to be to get to showdown. Your theory is like an exponentially lesser, but still effectively similar version. I'm unsure why you think building a bigger pot gives us a bigger advantage versus passive, showdown-bound opponents, but it's simply incorrect. With a hand like 67s and opponents who will play predictably, see a flop cheap, draw with correct odds, and figure out the way to make the most money when you make your hand. In this spot, it's to c/r the field on the flop.I'm sorry if that sounds overly harsh. I hope we can still be friends. I like your sig/av combination; I remember lol'ing when I saw it on TV.

[KingJames]

Good post, DinkI think C/R is the best play on the flop as well... bring on the turn swift_psycho!

[dead money]

DinkDonk, on Saturday, February 26th, 2011, 11:25 AM, said:

I'd say you have this about the opposite of correct. If we're playing against very good players, we're going to want to keep an opaque range and limp in fewer spots than we would against poor players who won't take advantage of the information we present them by significantly narrowing our range. But even against good players, I'm limping here. You say that players make mistakes, so why not build a big pot preflop but the problem with your reasoning is that their most common mistake is calling to the flop/turn/river too often and that's going to be less of a mistake in a big pot than it would be in a small pot. Like, in an extreme example, imagine if you were playing $1/2 and there was $100,000 in the pot pre-flop. Any skill advantage is negligible because the correct play is always going to be to get to showdown. Your theory is like an exponentially lesser, but still effectively similar version. I'm unsure why you think building a bigger pot gives us a bigger advantage versus passive, showdown-bound opponents, but it's simply incorrect. With a hand like 67s and opponents who will play predictably, see a flop cheap, draw with correct odds, and figure out the way to make the most money when you make your hand. In this spot, it's to c/r the field on the flop.I'm sorry if that sounds overly harsh. I hope we can still be friends. I like your sig/av combination; I remember lol'ing when I saw it on TV.

Your post is in no way harsh. I see your point. It makes sense in theory. I would play this way everywhere but in a 2/4 game. The overly aggressive approach accomplishes many things. You are putting 2/4 players in an uncomfortable spot. They are used to a glorified home game. Nobody folds, nobody is cutthroat. Everybody has a good time. You can disrupt that and control the game for your benefit. Players will go with your flow or they will leave the game. Building big pots preflop lets you take control of the game by getting players out of their comfort zone. Also, while you are giving players correct odds to draw more often, you are also giving yourself correct odds to draw more often. Not always will you be flopping trips with 76. Much more often you are flopping draws or one pair hands. You will almost always be correct to continue with your hand because of the big pot you built. Not to mention you will be earning more free cards as players will be afraid of you raising them. Basically, my advice was incorrect based on one hand. But for the session as a whole, it would continue a strategy that you are fulfilling. I should have clarified in my op. I may be wrong, but I have been pretty successful with it.

[DinkDonk]

I definitely agree with the idea of being aggressive in general pre-flop, but I think that there will be plenty of spots where limping behind will be correct as opposed to charging ourselves early on with hands that lack the equity edge to profit from raising. I'm all for going into a game with the game-plan of "This is 2/4 and I'm going to be aggro to put people in uncomfortable spots." I think that's a perfectly fine plan so long as you're willing to deviate from it when called for.

[dead money]

DinkDonk, on Sunday, February 27th, 2011, 8:51 AM, said:

I definitely agree with the idea of being aggressive in general pre-flop, but I think that there will be plenty of spots where limping behind will be correct as opposed to charging ourselves early on with hands that lack the equity edge to profit from raising. I'm all for going into a game with the game-plan of "This is 2/4 and I'm going to be aggro to put people in uncomfortable spots." I think that's a perfectly fine plan so long as you're willing to deviate from it when called for.

Oh I def agree that there are situations that require straying. And its all feel as to when those situations occur. The flow of the game should help you dictate when to deviate. So basically, like in 99% of situations, there really isnt a definite answer. Thats why I love poker.

[frazwood]

Swift_Psycho, on Saturday, February 26th, 2011, 12:21 AM, said:

At a casino in a $2/$4 LHE game. Game is what you would expect for live low limit hold'em, all players are pretty weak and pretty loose.Hand in question involves Villain OTB, who has been playing a decent number of hands, but almost never raised pre-flop. The only times I can remember Villain raising pre-flop so far was when he had Aces and another time Kings. He's a decent player compared to the others, but that's not saying much since mostly the table was filled with terrible calling station-type players.I'm dealt Three callers to me in HiJack position, I call, Villain (OTB) raises, BB calls, Three previous callers all call, I call.FLOP: Action checks around to me. Assuming I'm putting Villain on a big pair who will likely bet this flop if checked to (but I don't know how he'll react if I bet), how do I best proceed from here? Bet/raise flop? Check/raise flop? Check/call flop, look to check/raise turn?

It seems that most people are commenting on your pre-flop play and few people are commenting on your post-flop play, which is your actual question. The idea here is to get as many bets in as possible, especially on the turn and river (where the bets double). I recommend betting into the pre-flop raiser, hoping that he will likely raise. I would then call his raise (don't put in a third bet). If you bet, the villain raises, and then someone re-raises... you are possibly in trouble. Assuming that the turn is something other than a nine or ten, I would then check-raise the turn... and lead out on the river.(I would also be concerned about other people slow-playing their own trips... because they almost certainly will have you out-kicked... that's read-dependent though).

[DinkDonk]

frazwood, on Sunday, February 27th, 2011, 8:29 PM, said:

It seems that most people are commenting on your pre-flop play and few people are commenting on your post-flop play, which is your actual question. The idea here is to get as many bets in as possible, especially on the turn and river (where the bets double). I recommend betting into the pre-flop raiser, hoping that he will likely raise. I would then call his raise (don't put in a third bet). If you bet, the villain raises, and then someone re-raises... you are possibly in trouble. Assuming that the turn is something other than a nine or ten, I would then check-raise the turn... and lead out on the river.(I would also be concerned about other people slow-playing their own trips... because they almost certainly will have you out-kicked... that's read-dependent though).

I commented on post-flop, but I said just about the opposite of what you said. Why would you not be check/raising a 9 or a T? Why is betting out on the flop better than c/raising the field? And being concerned about a better trips is many bets away from being viable.

[frazwood]

DinkDonk, on Sunday, February 27th, 2011, 6:21 PM, said:

I commented on post-flop, but I said just about the opposite of what you said. Why would you not be check/raising a 9 or a T? Why is betting out on the flop better than c/raising the field? And being concerned about a better trips is many bets away from being viable.

Comments:1. I didn't say that no one had commented on the post-flop play -- I said most were commenting on pre-flop (I prefer the limp myself) rather than post-flop (you were an exception to my generalization).2. There is usually more than one correct way to play a hand. There is nothing "wrong" with check-raising the flop.3. By check-raising the flop, you are likely to collect more small bets, which are half-as-valuable as big bets. Also, this essentially announces that you have at least trips. By betting into the raiser, you likely get the same number of bets placed in the middle while disguising your hand a bit more (for some reason, people will expect you to slow-play trips here, so if you bet out... they assume that you don't have trips!).4. If a 9 or T comes on the turn, then you have to worry about various straights beating your trips.5. You should always be thinking about which hands the other players have (especially those that are better than yours), whether or not your opponent is likely to hold them in that particular situation, and how your opponents would play those hands. (for example, the button could hold 88 here, in which case you're SOL).

[DinkDonk]

frazwood, on Monday, February 28th, 2011, 7:06 AM, said:

2. There is usually more than one correct way to play a hand.

Well that would be true if you said profitable instead of correct. But, I assure you, there is almost always exactly one correct way to play any hand.

[Swift_Psycho]

Wow, I'm delighted to have gotten so much discussion out of this. I used to play a ton of LHE online but stopped almost entirely a couple years ago. This was my first time playing since then, as well as actually my first time ever playing live in a casino. So, I was just feeling rusty overall. After personal deliberation, I think I agree that the C/R on the flop is the best play, and if I wasn't so rusty I'm sure I would have taken that line.The raise pre-flop play discussion was interesting, but I think calling pre-flop in this game is pretty clearly better (didn't even give it a second thought). If you're playing with competition that tends to fold too much, bloating pots like this pre-flop may be correct (or at least easily defensible) because that's how you exploit their weakness (when they possibly fold to bets incorrectly on later streets). If you're playing with competition that tends to call too much, bloating pots pre-flop kind of plays right into their hands.Okay, so in a little while I'm going to reveal what I did and ask for advice for the turn, but since there were a bunch of guys in this thread, I figure I'm going to take advantage of this opportunity to ask about the level of competition live at casinos. I know there's some variance in level of play at different casinos, so I really only want just some general thoughts from you guys assuming you've played a bunch LIVE. I didn't know play was this awful at casinos (like I said it was my first time playing live). The level of play is just awful at $2/$4, and I figure $3/$6 is probably close to the same. So when does the competence level in live play in casinos tend to hit "kinda sorta decent"? $5/$10? $10/$20? I'd just like to know what the highest stakes I can play are where players are still generally terrible, since I plan to start playing live more often and I'd like to win as much money as possible.

[DinkDonk]

Swift_Psycho, on Monday, February 28th, 2011, 5:21 PM, said:

Wow, I'm delighted to have gotten so much discussion out of this. I used to play a ton of LHE online but stopped almost entirely a couple years ago. This was my first time playing since then, as well as actually my first time ever playing live in a casino. So, I was just feeling rusty overall. After personal deliberation, I think I agree that the C/R on the flop is the best play, and if I wasn't so rusty I'm sure I would have taken that line.The raise pre-flop play discussion was interesting, but I think calling pre-flop in this game is pretty clearly better (didn't even give it a second thought). If you're playing with competition that tends to fold too much, bloating pots like this pre-flop may be correct (or at least easily defensible) because that's how you exploit their weakness (when they possibly fold to bets incorrectly on later streets). If you're playing with competition that tends to call too much, bloating pots pre-flop kind of plays right into their hands.Okay, so in a little while I'm going to reveal what I did and ask for advice for the turn, but since there were a bunch of guys in this thread, I figure I'm going to take advantage of this opportunity to ask about the level of competition live at casinos. I know there's some variance in level of play at different casinos, so I really only want just some general thoughts from you guys assuming you've played a bunch LIVE. I didn't know play was this awful at casinos (like I said it was my first time playing live). The level of play is just awful at $2/$4, and I figure $3/$6 is probably close to the same. So when does the competence level in live play in casinos tend to hit "kinda sorta decent"? $5/$10? $10/$20? I'd just like to know what the highest stakes I can play are where players are still generally terrible, since I plan to start playing live more often and I'd like to win as much money as possible.

Really good post. The second paragraph is especially pertinent. Sorry, I haven't played nearly enough live LHE to have anything substantial to add, but the WSOP LHE events are pretty awesomely soft.

[Swift_Psycho]

Swift_Psycho, on Monday, February 28th, 2011, 5:21 PM, said:

I figure I'm going to take advantage of this opportunity to ask about the level of competition live at casinos. I know there's some variance in level of play at different casinos, so I really only want just some general thoughts from you guys assuming you've played a bunch LIVE. I didn't know play was this awful at casinos (like I said it was my first time playing live). The level of play is just awful at $2/$4, and I figure $3/$6 is probably close to the same. So when does the competence level in live play in casinos tend to hit "kinda sorta decent"? $5/$10? $10/$20? I'd just like to know what the highest stakes I can play are where players are still generally terrible, since I plan to start playing live more often and I'd like to win as much money as possible.

Still hoping for others to comment on this if they can, or else I guess I'll just have to make a new post in General Strat or maybe even GenPop.Anyway, I guess I'll move on to the turn. To recap:I'm dealt Three callers to me in HiJack position, I call, Villain (OTB) raises, BB calls, Three previous callers all call, I call.FLOP: Action checks to me, I check, Villain bets. Three calls, one fold, action is to me. I now believe that this is an obvious raise, but like I said, first time playing LHE in two years and I was clearly rusty. I call.TURN: Three checks to me. Again, I know I'm now faced with this stupid decision because I didn't raise earlier, but I still have to continue the hand even if I misplayed this on the flop. Villain, like most at the table, is not that aggressive, so what's my play here? He could easily be spooked by getting so many callers on a paired board on the flop. And with a straight card now hitting on the turn, I'm worried that he might check through if I check. But if I check and he bets, I can get in two bets with a c/r here, possibly trapping others along for the ride. Is there too much risk involved with a check that I have to bet here?So what's the best play? Bet/call, reevaluate river? Try for the c/r? Some third option?

[Swift_Psycho]

Swift_Psycho, on Wednesday, March 2nd, 2011, 4:54 PM, said:

Anyway, I guess I'll move on to the turn. To recap:I'm dealt Three callers to me in HiJack position, I call, Villain (OTB) raises, BB calls, Three previous callers all call, I call.FLOP: Action checks to me, I check, Villain bets. Three calls, one fold, action is to me. I now believe that this is an obvious raise, but like I said, first time playing LHE in two years and I was clearly rusty. I call.TURN: Three checks to me. Again, I know I'm now faced with this stupid decision because I didn't raise earlier, but I still have to continue the hand even if I misplayed this on the flop. Villain, like most at the table, is not that aggressive, so what's my play here? He could easily be spooked by getting so many callers on a paired board on the flop. And with a straight card now hitting on the turn, I'm worried that he might check through if I check. But if I check and he bets, I can get in two bets with a c/r here, possibly trapping others along for the ride. Is there too much risk involved with a check that I have to bet here?So what's the best play? Bet/call, reevaluate river? Try for the c/r? Some third option?

Still hoping to get some people to chime in on the turn here, though admittedly responses will be of limited value since I know I misplayed the flop.

[DinkDonk]

Swift_Psycho, on Monday, March 7th, 2011, 2:30 AM, said:

Still hoping to get some people to chime in on the turn here, though admittedly responses will be of limited value since I know I misplayed the flop.

I think it's suuuuper close between betting out and check-raising. I'm pretty unsure, so I was hoping to get other view points as well. Personally, I probably check-raise because people in my games two barrel too often, but I'm not confident in that at this level.

[KingJames]

DinkDonk, on Monday, March 7th, 2011, 1:25 AM, said:

I think it's suuuuper close between betting out and check-raising. I'm pretty unsure, so I was hoping to get other view points as well. Personally, I probably check-raise because people in my games two barrel too often, but I'm not confident in that at this level.

I'd lead the turn bc we're unlikely to get two barreled lightly in a live low limit game, imoIs it a bet/call or bet/3bet? Obv villain dependent but vs a typical loose/passive bet/call > bet/3bet?