Was playing earlier and came upon this situation...

PokerStars 0.25/0.50 Hold'em (9 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is SB with [Js], [Jh]. MP2 posts a blind of $0.35.
UTG calls, 2 folds, UTG calls, MP2 calls, CO calls, Button calls.

Raise is a given. All the limpers call making it five to the flop.

Flop: (11.40 SB) [Ts], [5s], [Ah] (5 players)
Hero checks, UTG checks, MP2 checks, CO checks, Button bets, UTG folds, MP2 folds, CO folds, Button calls.

This is the main concern. With this many limpers and an ace on the flop should I be ready to discard this hand or play it aggressively as above? I checked with the intention of folding, but the button popped it from that position and I did not think it necessarily meant he was holding an ace. Is this the right play? If the CO or MP2 were to bet out, should I pop him back as well or just let go?

Turn: (7.70 BB) [9h] (2 players)
Hero bets, Button calls.

Bet to protect hand against possible flush draw or overs. Right or wrong?

River: (9.70 BB) [6c] (2 players)
Hero checks, Button checks.

Should I throw out another bet here or just hope for a cheap showdown?

Final Pot: 9.70 BB

Anyways, did I completely donk this hand and spew chips at my opponent or were my actions justifiable? Any input is appreciated.

I like the flop bet, I guess if this were a 5/10 hand I would check/call the turn and river and probobly have too fold to a raise on the turn, I'd rather see a showdown than fold thats why I am check/calling.

EDIT* But at .25/.50 I think your bet on the turn was fine

Man, I might be a little out of touch with these micro limit games so correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't like the idea of raising with JJ from the SB in a multi-way pot.

Too often you are going to find yourself with a difficult decision as there aren't a lot of "great" flops out there for JJ. Pre-flop in this situation I'd generally look to slowplay and add some deception to my game, running the risk of allowing the BB to see the flop for free.

The other problem with raising is that you make the pot so big that it's now correct for people to chase long draws after the flop. I say keep the pot small, lose the minimum on bad flops, and surprise them once and a while when you hit a good flop.

As for your flop play, I'm not a fan of that one either. In a small game like that it doesn't look like your check-raise would knock an ace out of the hand.

If I did raise before the flop I probably would have bet the flop trying to represent AK. If I played it how you did, though, I may again look to play a small pot and just call on the flop. I'd then look to see how many players I get behind me, look for a safe turn card, and play accordingly (most likely check/folding to a bet).

On the turn I like your bet considering how you played the hand thus far. The river check seems like an ok play also, but who knows with what I'm hearing about these little online games!

Actually, if you are going to call a river bet with the JJ anyway, you probably should bet if the dude will call with anything!

I'm thinkin' I might need to crush a few micro games so I can be more informed with my advice. It's been a long time since I played $10-$2o!

Having said that, poker is poker, and developing too many "bad" habits when playing small games online could hurt your overall development. Similar to a golf swing. If you practice improperly for too long it could curb your development.

After reading through some of the threads that's the theme I'm finding. Many of you are playing a style that might work in the games you are playing, but are also developing bad habits that you'll have to learn to grow out of eventually if you want to be successful at the higher limits.

Just some food for thought guys, don't take it the wrong way... :wink:

No, Good Advice... We had a 2 threads today talkin' about that.

I guess A pro's advice is appreciated... lol

Figured I might as well defend a couple of the plays with the low limit thought process that went with em...



I agree, there arent that many great flops, but I think it could be safely said that more then 1/5 of them will be favorable, making the raise profitable. Since it is low limit, I can generally count on all my opponents to call since they already have a bet in. This leads to the next point...



This is actually what makes this raise the most profitable in low limit games, at least for me. A lot of players will not give you credit for a hand, and will chase to the ends of the earths just to pair their overcards. When you flop a set, it pays.



Now, this is what I was really asking about. In this case, the checkraise isnt meant to knock out the initial raiser, just ensure that all three of the other limpers get out of the hand. All of them would probably call me with a weak ace, so I am ready to get out of the hand at the sight of cold-callers, but I think a bigger mistake is allowing them to try to hit a miracle card for just one sb, which many of these low limit players are more then willing to do. Maybe this is the wrong thought process, but thats what I posted to find out. Am I right in this reasoning?

The final portion of your post I would tend to agree with. We can only hope to be lucky enough to find a game anywhere close to as loose passive as these low limit internet games are. Still, I think there is a lesson to be learned from them. The main reason I have been playing is so that I can see some of the more difficult concepts of holdem in action. It really allows you to understand some of the math in a different way. I think all the players understand that optimal play at these limits differ greatly from that at higher limits and adjustments have to be made between them. Anyways, thanks for the response, didnt actually expect to hear from dn himself.

With 5 limpers already in the pot, your equity is much higher than 18%. Sure there are a lot of bad flops for JJ, but at these low limit games people are entering pots with utter trash like 36 and Q4. These players are sooo much worse than the bad players you are used to seing.



You sound a lot like sklanksy here :wink: .

Again, it all comes back to the skill level at these limits. If you play much better postflop than your opponents, I don't think this should be too much of a problem. People will call you down with absolutely nothing, even when their longshot draws don't dictate that they should, and that will more than make up for the times you get outdrawn.



Betting out here cannot protect our hand against weak draws. Check-raising may fail, but if it works, we blast out those weak draws, or make them make a mistake by playing. If it doesn't work, a blank on the turn will increase our equity, and the big bet will protect our hand better then the flop bet could. Also, the bet comes from the button, and doesn't necessarily mean he has an ace. I like the check-raise.

This is the problem with playing low limits. You often find yourself having to protect large pots that you've built with decent hands preflop by raising with marginal hands on later streets.

I also like the turn bet. At these lower limits your opponents could be on all kinds of weird draws. Make em pay.

Another blank on the river. You should bet this for two reasons:
1) Your opponent hasn't shown any strength (making a raise here less likely)
2) He's gonna call with a lot more hands that you have beat then he'd bet with. He'd probably bet here with aces or better (which you'd have a hard time not calling), but he'd check with tens, fives, nines, and other hands he would have called a bet with.)

Heh, looks like I beat screech to it.

I disagree with screech's take on betting the river. There is a range of hands that the button will bet that flop with. He may be trying to extract value from a spade draw, with five in the pot. He may be betting a weak A (or even a strong A). He may have a T with a good kicker, and figure nobody else for an A. If he does have a weak A, he will call a river bet, and you will lose one more BB. If he was on a draw that missed, he will muck and you will not win another BB from him. Betting the river will only gain you an extra BB if this player had a nekkid T, and still thinks that it will win on the river. Will this be the case more than 50% of the time?

The rest of the hand looks OK to me. But I am going to remember Daniel's advice later this week when I move up levels.

when you are playing middle pairs against a bunch of limpers, you are playing for the set. If you don't flop it, get out. If you dont get out, you've turned yourself into one of the chasers, but you're likely to be playing with 2 outs against a couple of 8+ outers, unless the flop is totally unconnected and rainbow.

And DNs point about not building the pot for the draws is correct at these limits. While you may make a lot of money in low limits from players chasing draws, you don't make it when they have the correct odds to chase the draw. When you build a pot by raising with your own drawing hand (which is what JJ is in a family pot) you are giving everyone the correct odds to call with flush and sometimes OE straight draws (with 7.7 BB in the pot flush draws are correct and you're not chasing them away with 1 BB).

I blame Sklansky, Ed Miller, Mason Malmuth, and the horror that is SSHE. Now I will duck as Aseem throws the book at me! :wink:

Seriously though, I would say over 80% of the advice that gets posted in Strat regarding small stakes limit HE games comes directly from the pages of Small Stakes Hold 'Em.

But if I ever got the cajones and bankroll to play at a 10/20 and above game, I'd focus on some more advanced literature first.

This would be really fun for the rest of us to read about, although probably pretty boring for you. In one of your articles, you said to loosen up your old 10/20 game you once offered a prize to anyone who took down a pot with 83o. If you play 1/2 limit online, you'd be giving out a lot of these prizes.



Many of us are playing a couple hours a day, trying to slowly build our bankrolls and move up in limits. I'm sure we'll have to change our play, preflop and postflop, to succeed at higher levels. It's cool to read your advice on our baby stakes hands, because we'd all love to play in the big games, which certainly require more sophisticated play. Maybe some of the "bad habits" you're reading about here could be the subject of a good Cardplayer article or a one-a-day.

10/20 is micro limits, that'll be the day =D

You are welcome to come and crush our Party Poker FCP strat table anytime, Mr. Negreanu. Maybe we'll even bump up the stakes to $1/2 for ya!

10/20... LOL... Before the advent of internet poker maybe that was considered Small Stakes.

Do you plan to check/fold the river? I don't like this play at all. If our opponent bets we have to call because of the pot size and our indication of weakness on the end.

Check/call is a good play if our opponent tends to bluff at an indication of weakness.

I like bet/fold though. I think that because our opponent bet the flop in last position, there's a good chance he has a pair lower than ours.
I think most opponents at this level will call here with a low pair that they would not bet. I think most of these opponents would also bet a pair of tens if checked to, so we cannot check/fold here.

True, it is very likely he is on a flush draw or has a weak ace, and we will lose a bet in this situation. If he raises us on the end, we can safely throw our hand away. Either way, we still lose one bet if he has one of these hands.

I guess the situation is mostly read dependent. But with no reads, I think bet/fold earns a bit more.

Check/call, obviously. Bet/fold may be ok, but I'd rather see the showdown if I'm going to commit another bet. Especially with no information on the bettor.

Raising out of the small blind with JJ is probably a bad idea in just about every game, unless your up against 1 limper, then raising and knocking out the big blind to protect your hand is a good idea. The main thing here is your out of position and your going to see an overcard flop most of the time. Jacks in a loose game should be played like a middle pair, your trying to hit a set with them.

I dont raise JJ from the SB in this situation. While low-limit players are bad and people are right in that they tend play real crap hands, people also forget that these players love to play Ax regardless of position (which is the reason I'm always careful when Ace flops at these limits). And if they hit their Ace they arent folding (even if you do check/raise them). You are also way out of position in the SB. These people will limp in with AK for crying out loud and never bet it the whole way. This could put you in the tough situation where you keep hammering away and getting called down by the better hand.

And I dont like check/raising the flop there either. Mainly because I dont think this gets checked around most of the time. If one of the MP players bet and there is a caller, what do you do? While it seemed to work out ok because the button appeared to make a position play, I'm still a little suprised the other three guys folded. I will say that after the other 3 guys folded your initial reads were probably correct and no one had an Ace and you're way ahead here.

What I would do is take the cheap flop and then make a play depending on the flop and the players in the hand.

I think the best way to explain the discrepancies between Daniel's concepts in poker and ours is that low limits are all about a) betting for value, and b) having a firm grasp of odds, equity, and when to draw and not to draw.

At stakes in Negreanu territory, the game is so tight/aggressive/creative, with the occassional super-fish, your creativity and tight/aggressiveness matters more than recognizing mundane value bet situations.

I personally think it's wonderfully refreshing to have Daniel's point of view on these hands, and it's insightful to see HIS thought process when he plays poker.

To the OP: with AA, KK, and QQ, your EV (AND your variance) increase as other players enter the hand with you. In practical terms, this means that premium hands gain a STRONGER advantage over the field as weaker hands enter, but variance increases too. There is a significant dropoff from QQ to JJ, but the same holds true with jacks, just to a lesser extent.

This is a preflop raise all day long, for value and equity if no other reason.

On the flop, I think check/folding isn't a terrible idea. It's highly likely an opponent could have an ace, and making that read and laying it down isn't a terrible thing.

You should decide on the flop if you're going to see the river or not, and I think check/raising the button is the best way to do that, if you intend to. Everyone behind you has to call a double bet, and then all that matters is if you read the button for an ace or not.

I think if you're going to see the river, the best line is:

Raise preflop

Checkraise the button

Bet/call the turn

Lead the river if just called on the turn, check/call the river if raised on the turn

I agree with DN and think that a preflop raise is no good here. In a multi way pot you are usually going to lay your JJ down so it saves that extra bet. If you hit your set or see a ragged flop you have good deception value to win more than you would have when your opponents can put you on a big hand with the raise from the SB.

So assuming you don't raise preflop...

-check/fold a dangerous flop
-check/raise a good flop

I complete the SB w/ JJ in multi-way pots, rather than raising, on many occasions, and the reasons for it described by DN and speedz are dead on.

Limping is not a bad play here, but on the other hand, I don't think a raise is bad either. While there's the argument that you should be raising to push an edge you have over your opponents, I definitely don't think you're missing out on any equity by just completing the BB in this spot, since you'll make up for it by getting more bets from people who are behind on subsequent streets that will stay in with worse hands because you've played your hand deceptively.

There's value in mixing up your game, even at the micro-limits.

Like Daniel said, succeeding at higher limits is going to be a struggle if you don't find ways to mix up your game while maintaining equal or better profitability.

Just a take on something previously posted that low limit hold 'em is somehow remarkably different than higher limit hold 'em because low limit hold 'em is about value betting and pot odds, and that higher limit hold 'em is more about creativity . . .

I think too much is made by many posters about the differences between low limit and higher limit play. The skills applicable in low limit games are equally applicable in higher limit games. A solid foundation in understanding pot odds and value betting is critical to success at all levels of poker.

Now as to the hand posted, approximately 50% of the time at least one overcard to the JJs will come on the flop. With a good but not great hand, why not just limp and see the flop and take minimum damage if your JJ is no good? On the other hand if the flop comes all unders, or you hit a set, you can ram and jam. Also consider, at lower limits if people have already limped in many also call one raise. So on the flop, someone can have almost any kind of draw and be justified in calling. I just see the JJ Sb raise as a high risk/low upside play.

Daniel is definetly right about the bet with JJ from the SB being a bad play. That's the first thing that stood out about the first post, the guy was like raise with JJ, that's a given. No, no it's not. JJ is not often going to hold up, especially in a low limit game, so the raise is not profitable at all. The only thing the raise does is gives away your hand's strength. I always wondered what those SB BB raisers are thinking.

Anyway as for the rest of the hand, its either a check fold. (not my choice), or a bet on the flop, bet on the turn and maybe a bet on the river if you're feeling it. (provided he's just calling). At worst your going to get called down with a weak ace, or you get value from a lower pair.

I definately agree with DN on this one (surprise surprise), the problem with micro limits is that you can make tons of mistakes and still be profitable as long as you make less mistakes than the other players at the table. You could say that that's not a problem, but that's only true if you plan on playing there forever. If you do plan on moving up in limits it's best to play the best poker you can at all times.

I am very surprised to see the majority of you saying not to raise jj in a 5-way pot at micro-limits. Very, very surprised. Almost as surprising as almost everyone seeing my checkraise as some sort of bluff instead of hand protection.

:?

JJ is going to hold up around 40% of the time against four random hands (according to PokerStove). I'd consider that to be fairly "often". Granted, your opponents hands might be slightly better than "random", but no one's raised...so they're not likely to be all that good. Giving them some random but specific marginal hands, you're still at around 25% (so you have equity).

And "giving away your hand's strength"? Do you just complete with aces, kings, or queens? I mean, you might give away your hand strength with a raise.

I think arguments can be made for just completing and for raising. I think I'm raising JJ a majority of the time out of the small blind. A hand that I'm much more fuzzy on from the SB is AQos.

My own experience with the Poker Stars .25/.50 is this:

A ton of people limp with Ax, especially when it's suited.
A ton of people limp in with suited connectors (or non-suited connectors for that matter.
A ton of people limp in with any kind of low to medium pocket pair.
Some people limp in with absolute crap.

The one thing that you'll notice is not on that list is that there are fewer people who limp with Kx unless it is two broadway cards, and almost nobody limps with Qx unles it's QJ or QT.

Now maybe it's a bad habit, but given the kinds of preflop hands that I've noticed people generally limping with, I tend to raise with JJ out of the SB.

If an Ace pops out on the flop, and it's bet into me, I'm out of there. If it's checked to me, I'll put out a feeler, but I'm gone to a raise.

On the other hand, if a King or a Queen pops out, there's a much, much stronger possibility that the jacks are still good. I'd raise the flop (just once), call a single re-raise, and fold the turn unimproved.

The other flops are those so-called good flops for jacks (for the most part) and should be straightforward.

I'm not necessarily saying that this is the "textbook" and "correct" play, but it seems to match up pretty well with the kinds of hands that you'll see most of the .25/.50 opposition playing.

I just want to reiterate what Cobalt is saying here because I think it's important. SSHE, which is essentially the bible for these low-limit loose/passive games advocates raising JJ from the SB against any number of limpers, presumably even in a family pot. From my understanding, the reason for this is simple. In a small-stakes game, you're not trying to play tricky or creative. Your opponents aren't paying enough attention and will call down with weak hands too often for tricky play to work. The idea is to play straightforward and push edges.

If there are 5 people in the pot, JJ simply needs to win more than it's share of 20% to be a profitable hand. As you mentioned, it's going to win significantly more often than that against 4 random limpers. Therefore, you raise not to push people out of the hand, but for value. Those limpers are priced into calling your raise with weaker hands than yours. Therefore, your hand will win more than it's share of a pot with 10 small bets as opposed to winning more than it's share of a pot with 5 small bets if you just complete.

The only reason that I can see for limping here is if you expect to be able to extract more bets on later streets than you can on the flop, and without attempting to work thru scenarios as I sit here, I don't see that as working out a significant enough percentage of the time to justify not pushing your edge before the flop. Keeping in mind that Small Stakes Hold'em is a different from higher stakes games, this is the correct play. In a higher stakes game more emphasis may be put on being creative, and those who have only played small stakes will probably have to significantly adjust their game in order to beat a higher stakes game, but until you get to that point you need to keep pushing every edge you have at those low-limit tables.

I don't like the pre-flop raise with your jacks there. You are making a big pot with a fairly good hand, but not one that plays well against multiple opponents. If you have jack ten suited, great raise, but no with the jacks IMO.

That being said though, the check-raise on the flop was great, as you are now making it 2 bets cold for anyone who wants to continue, which make sit a little tougher for anyone on a draw to continue. 8)

Alright I didn't read the thread and am probably talking to nobody since this is sort of an old topic.

I think you played the hand just dandy. The button is probably raising any good A here preflop, and he might be playing some sort of suited connector or something with all the money in. These factors make it highly likely that he doesn't have the A, but instead has a flush draw or midpair. As well, you might have knocked someone off a crappy A with the check-raise (not really likely, but it could have happened).

You bet the turn. This could be debatable that you would want to check-call the turn to try to induce a bluff, but since you followed the check-raise the flop line, you have to bet the turn. He's either calling with a weak A (bad for you), or calling with the flush draw or midpair. If he has a strong A, he will likely raise the turn, so you can reasonably fold it. If you had a bigger PP, or if there wasn't a flush draw, or especially both, you could get away without betting. Your hand has almost no outs if it is behind an A though, so I think a bet is your line.

The river check is correct, I think. You're calling anything, of course. Any A is calling a bet, any flush draw is folding. You might get a midpair to call you, but it would have to be extremely weak of the midpair (which is possible at this limit). As well, a flush draw might bluff the river, and a donkish midpair might value-bet his second best hand.

If you lost this hand, you didn't lose as much as you could have. If you won, then I don't see how you could have won much more playing it differently.

I wanted to chime in and say how I would play it.


I would raise preflop as you did, and on the flop I would have to bet, and depending on how many callers 3 bet a raise. I think it's nice that the button bet this time, but thats too much of a risk when you have a vulnerable hand. Id be sick to see it get checked and have a K or Q on the turn.

If opponent is on a weak ace you most likely wont be raised, but if hes on a flush draw he may raise. Thus my thoughts on flop 3 bet if youre raised.

Turn and River, both the turn and river are actually dependant on what kind of player button is. If he is passive you should be betting both the turn and the river. You are much more likely to win the hand if a passive is calling you, than if you are calling him. If he is aggressive, you can think about inducing a bluff, but still on the turn you risk giving a free card. So I bet. The river i check versus a tight aggressive opponent hoping to induce a bluff.