25 replies to this topic

[Randy Reed]

You're in the BB with AKo, 2 limpers and the SB completes, you...?Call or raise?

[Suited_Up]

You mean check or raise right?But raise. Value.

[econ_tim]

Randy Reed said:

You're in the BB with AKo, 2 limpers and the SB completes, you...?Call or raise?

Ooh ... I've got a harder one. Your CO with AA. 3 limpers, you ...When did strat become the "obvious preflop plays forum?"On a sidenote, my posts are growing more sardonic. Maybe because I haven't played in a while ...

[stonecrow]

Randy Reed said:

You're in the BB with AKo, 2 limpers and the SB completes, you...?

easy fold.

[Randy Reed]

Ok, I diagree with the obvious raise here, which is why I posted it. This is still the strategy section and not the smartass section, right?Ok, my reasoning is this, given you raise for value, what kind of hand do you think the rest for figure you for? Say the flop comes Aces or kings, you are first to act and bet and win a small pot, given the raise you won't get much action. Let's say it comes med and little cards, you've just opened the door for the weeker hands to play at you since you've defined your hand for them. You're more than 2 to 1 not to have a big pair. Let alone, by not raising and disguising your hand you should be able to make up for not raising by getting tons of action when you do hit.Thoughts?

[Briguy]

At what level are you playing? Trickery isn't required for micro-limits, because half the players aren't able to define your hand based on your bets, but your disguise attempt may have merit at the higher levels. I have no idea when the disguise value outweighs the inherent preflop +EV of AK, though. Online 3-6? 10-20? Quite obviously, limp with AK only as a way of changing up your game (like, maybe, once per sitting), not as a regular move.If you are playing micro, and feel the need to be devious when you find AK in the BB, you should probably try to find a fishier table, IMO.

[JaysonWeber]

Here's an easy way too look at it.What hands are they limping with? If they are limping w/ worse than AKo You want to raise, they are calling with hands of lesser value than yours.Verste?

[stonecrow]

Randy Reed said:

Say the flop comes Aces or kings, you are first to act and bet and win a small pot, given the raise you won't get much action.  Let's say it comes med and little cards, you've just opened the door for the weeker hands to play at you since you've defined your hand for them.  You're more than 2 to 1 not to have a big pair.  Let alone, by not raising and disguising your hand you should be able to make up for not raising by getting tons of action when you do hit.Thoughts?

winning a small pot is better than winning no pot. "If it comes Med and little cards, opponents will play at me because I've defined my hand."- think about what you're saying? the complete opposite is true. If you limp in or take your option *THEN* you've defined your hand to your opponents and *THEN* expect them to play back at you with their weaker hands.I can't count the number of times I've raised with AK in this position and easily taken down the pots. Sure the some limpers come in and call my raise. The flop comes all rags. I bet a large amount, and all my opponents fold. If I've played right, they'll think I have something like JJ, QQ, KK, or AA even and they dont want to go up against that. I win small pots like this numerous times at the NL tables in Stars. Sure it's like a 6$-7$ pot but it's better than 0!This whole idea that you're presenting here just goes back to the notion of being afraid and scared to play your cards in my opinion. Not meaning to be harsh, as it's strictly my opinion.In a position such as this, it's not what you're holding but what you're representing.

[krup24]

Honestly I can't see you checking in this spot. Make a decent sized raise. I mean this is obvious or am I missing something. Unless u feel someone is limping w/ a better hand I guess.

[Randy Reed]

Ok, so at the smaller limits it's probably better to bet for value since the fish will swim along anyway, but at say 3/6 and up, I can see real value in limping. I think the value of disguising the hand when you do hit out weighs the 3 (possible) sb's you collect from raise. I also think this is the case if there is a raise and the blinds complete as well. Maybe not every time, but against better competition I think it's a very viable move. When you do hit, you can drag along all the weak aces and kings for alot bigger pot. It's a regular move I make and was just throwing it out for discussion. Any one else?

[Smasharoo]

Ok, I diagree with the obvious raise here, which is why I posted it. This is still the strategy section and not the smartass section, right?Ok, my reasoning is this, given you raise for value, what kind of hand do you think the rest for figure you for? Say the flop comes Aces or kings, you are first to act and bet and win a small pot, given the raise you won't get much action. Let's say it comes med and little cards, you've just opened the door for the weeker hands to play at you since you've defined your hand for them. You're more than 2 to 1 not to have a big pair. Let alone, by not raising and disguising your hand you should be able to make up for not raising by getting tons of action when you do hit.Thoughts?You'r wrong, it's not close.At all.Let's say you happen to playing people who aren't drooling idiots just pounding their mice randomly with their scrotums, which frankly will be a very rare exception, this is the situation where you might not want to raise to get more money in postflop, right?Here's the problem. If you're not raising AKo here, you're raising nearly nothing and will get paid off so much less with AA/KK/QQ on ragged flops because everyone will know you have a big pair because you raised in the BB. If you're limping there with AA and KK as well you need to find a new hobby. I hear people enjoy painting happy trees with the "magic brush" so you could give that a shot.

[justblaze]

Randy Reed said:

Ok, so at the smaller limits it's probably better to bet for value since the fish will swim along anyway, but at say 3/6 and up, I can see real value in limping.  I think the value of disguising the hand when you do hit out weighs the 3 (possible) sb's you collect from raise.  I also think this is the case if there is a raise and the blinds complete as well.  Maybe not every time, but against better competition I think it's a very viable move.  When you do hit, you can drag along all the weak aces and kings for alot bigger pot.  It's a regular move I make and was just throwing it out for discussion.  Any one else?

the logic is superficially plausible, the math is not. your equity edge far outweighs any 'deception' you will gain. Deception is not about checking/calling with your best hands. its about betting/raising with your other hands. Think about it. would you rather seem like a passive player, or a wild one? passive players get no action from anyone whos paying attention, and wild players get extra action.

[KDawgCometh]

Smasharoo said:

Let's say you happen to playing people who aren't drooling idiots just pounding their mice randomly with their scrotums, which frankly will be a very rare exception

okay, I'm not gonna add anything but to highlight this line. THis has to be one of the funniest lines I've ever seen written

[justblaze]

KDawgCometh said:

Smasharoo said:

Let's say you happen to playing people who aren't drooling idiots just pounding their mice randomly with their scrotums, which frankly will be a very rare exception

okay, I'm not gonna add anything but to highlight this line. THis has to be one of the funniest lines I've ever seen written

i agree, 'frankly' is a hilarious word. wait, did i miss the point?

[Randy Reed]

OK, Dawg, aside from funny prose, let's do look at the math. Of course I'm raising with AA, KK here for value, but you're only going to hit your A or K 1 out of 3 times on the flop here. I want to be able to drag along all the weaker kickers when that happens and save a bet when I completely miss the flop, let alone playing out of position. I will raise many other hands from the BB in that spot other than AK, again for deceptive reasons, you can drive it like the AK or if the flop comes small and hits the cheese you raised with you can gain +EV. It seems to me that everyone gets in the super agg mode to often and sometimes checking is a viable option is certain spots.

[justblaze]

Randy Reed said:

OK, Dawg, aside from funny prose, let's do look at the math.  Of course I'm raising with AA, KK here for value, but you're only going to hit your A or K  1 out of 3 times on the flop here.  I want to be able to drag along all the weaker kickers when that happens and save a bet when I completely miss the flop, let alone playing out of position. I will raise many other hands from the BB in that spot other than AK, again for deceptive reasons, you can drive it like the AK or if the flop comes small and hits the cheese you raised with you can gain +EV.  It seems to me that everyone gets in the super agg mode to often and sometimes checking is a viable option is certain spots.

you arent looking at the math, though. the math would be to assess your equity edge over the range of hands your opponents will limp with here (which is wide), and then extract from that the bb value of your raise. you then need to compare that value to some hypothetical number you derive about how much you stand to gain from your 'deception' and determine which one is higher. but lets look at it from a more pragmatic point of view: you've got 3 extra small bets coming in from your raise. therefore, your check will need to make up for 3 small bets later in the hand. The only way this is going to happen is if someone has a weaker ace or king, and due to your check you get an extra 2 big bets out of them. keep in mind its unlikely more than one opponent will hit the same pair as you with a weaker kicker on any given flop, so you'll need to extract that extra 3 small bets from 1 guy, instead of getting 1 small bet from 3 guys.

[Smasharoo]

It seems to me that everyone gets in the super agg mode to often and sometimes checking is a viable option is certain spots.Nope, it's not, you're completely wrong.It's as bad as folding a flopped Royal Flush.Actually it's much worse.See if you can puzzle out why.

[Randy Reed]

Ok I think it's possible to extract alot more than 3 small bets here given your position and ability to check raise, and you're saving a bet when the flop completely misses you. Again I'm not trying to play wussie weak here, I think given the position it's good play. Let's say you raise with A K and the flop comes 8 7 5 , are you leading again? But there will be many flops you can check raise for value, or smooth call and extract BB's on the turn to make up for the 3 sb's preflop. Again, you can raise, and be content with the small pot when the flop comes AK5 and it's checked to you, or you can drive home a big pot when it hits. Sidenote, I thought it would be a change of pace to discuss some strategy vs. alot of the same hand histories that are repeated. And I kinda thought this would be good for discussion. Oh yeah, I am right here, lol.

[justblaze]

Randy Reed said:

Ok I think it's possible to extract alot more than 3 small bets here given  your position and ability to check raise, and you're saving a bet when the flop completely misses you.  Again I'm not trying to play wussie weak here, I think given the position it's good play.   Let's say you raise with A K  and the flop comes 8 7 5 , are you leading again?  But there will be many flops you can check raise for value, or smooth call and extract BB's on the turn to make up for the 3 sb's preflop.  you're getting carried away. just because you raised PF you dont need to bet on the flop. You have an equity edge, plain and simple. you make money every time you raise. if you cant understand this concept then this debate is useless. Again, you can raise, and be content with the small pot when the flop comes AK5 and it's checked to you, or you can drive home a big pot when it hits.    Imagine if, for the last hour, you had made a few unorthodox raises, which gave people the impression that you were a maniac. they wouldnt be so quick to put you on AK here. Thats an important point i tried to make earlier: deception is NOT about checking hands you should raise with, its about raising hands you could check with.Sidenote, I thought it would be a change of pace to discuss some strategy vs. alot of the same hand histories that are repeated.  And I kinda thought this would be good for discussion.  Oh yeah, I am right here, lol.shrug, debating postflop lines on specific hands is far more usefull than arguing about raising AK preflop from the big blind, which is an obvious decision from both a mathematical and theoretical viewpoint, and has been beaten to death like a rented mule on every forum, ever.

[Smasharoo]

Ok I think it's possible to extract alot more than 3 small bets here given your position and ability to check raise, and you're saving a bet when the flop completely misses you. Ok, you know what, you're right. Not raising preflop then attempting a C/R and letting it get checked around when you flop something and missing like 3 BB is fantastic.Not giving yourself odds to draw overcards when you miss the flop and getting money in when you have no equity or folding the winner are great too. Play it that way for the 1 time in 50 that an Ace flops and someone has AT.Good luck.