need advice: defeating the 1/2 NL game
voytko
whenever i play a 1/2 NL game live i always have trouble because of my chip
size.
i only buy in 60-100 dollars (alittle more than 30x bb), and despite the fact
that is a substantial amount of money for what the blinds are, my opponents are
usually buying for a good 250. the trouble with this is that the hand selection
for me becomes very strict since every hand is getting PFR 15-20 dollars. after
that betting is usually around 15-20 as well, leaving me only enough chips to
really get myself into 2 solid hands without running the risk of busting out.
advice?
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
GTech1
_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
willre...@yahoo.com
> whenever i play a 1/2 NL game live i always have trouble because of my chip
> size.
> i only buy in 60-100 dollars (alittle more than 30x bb), and despite the fact
> that is a substantial amount of money for what the blinds are, my opponents are
> usually buying for a good 250. the trouble with this is that the hand selection
> for me becomes very strict since every hand is getting PFR 15-20 dollars. after
> that betting is usually around 15-20 as well, leaving me only enough chips to
> really get myself into 2 solid hands without running the risk of busting out.
>
> advice?
Buy in for more. 30*BB is not a substantial buy-in when the raising is
going so high pre-flop. In a quieter 1/2 game, it might be perfect.
There are good players, and bad players, who like to buy in for enough
to cover anyone else at the table. I don't think this is necessary but
you do want to be able to mix it up with the larger stacks, make raises
that can hurt someone and maximize your win when you get a good hand.
Also, your game becomes too predictable if you play your short stack
the way you describe. Or find a $100 max buy-in game and buy in for the
max.
If your bankroll can't handle a bigger buy-in, you should not play in
this game as a regular thing. It might be a good thing to "raid" the
game with a short buy-in once in awhile but you should play lower
otherwise. On your raids, consider that you don't want the whole table
to KNOW what hands you will play and mix it up a little, even though it
will cost more than you would like.
Will in New Haven
DennisP
buy ins in his book.
Basically, you are right, you need to change your hand selection. You
also won't have the implied odds to play a lot of hands you could if
you had a bigger stack because you won't make up enough when you do
hit. But, others won't have implied odds against you.
Playing with a short stack you will end up all in a lot preflop, I'd be
looking to move in or fold to raises of 15-20.
I don't regulraly play this way, but I don't think it is nearly as bad
as many think it is. You just have to adjust your game.
ML
bankroll for the higher frequency of rebuys, either. Buying in short
with a substantial bankroll is a good way to mix up a table due to your
hand selection and aggression. Buying in short with an inadequate
bankroll is just waiting to bust.
Regards,
ML
DennisP
The other option is to look for capped games, as most casino 1/2 games
have a cap around $100.
ragscollector
There is a guy that plays at one of clubs I play at in NYC and he does exactly
what you do. He buys in for 50-60 (max buy in is 250, i buy in for about
150-175). We all take turns pretty much taking his money 5 minutes after he
sits down. He is force to play 1 hand, if he calls a 20 dollar preflop bet
someone with a better hand will make it 100 and he puts in the last of his
roll. I have yet to see him win a hand or a race. He and you don't have the
chips to protect your hands either preflop or post flop. This same guy
complains how the game is all luck and is prertty boisterous in his attitude and
comments. We love to have him in the game, even if he is incredibly annoying bc
he will rebuy 6 times for 50 bux in about 1 hr. So he brings a roll of 300+
with him and buys in for 50-60 at a time.
Might i suggest that you buy in for more so you can defend your hands instead of
dumping off your chips at the table. if you don't want to buy in for the max
250 (i don't like to either) try bringing 200 with you and buy in for 150, if
you get down to 90-100, then add the other 50 to it, so that you can defend your
hands and arent making an all in bet that 7 people can call.
good luck
On Oct 4 2005 8:48 AM, voytko wrote:
_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
fcsmfs
On Oct 4 2005 8:48 AM, voytko wrote:
_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com
Sir Benjamin Nunn
"voytko" <4307...@recpoker.com> wrote in message
news:1128430129$630...@recpoker.com...
>
> whenever i play a 1/2 NL game live i always have trouble because of my
> chip
> size.
> i only buy in 60-100 dollars (alittle more than 30x bb), and despite the
> fact
> that is a substantial amount of money for what the blinds are, my
> opponents are
> usually buying for a good 250. the trouble with this is that the hand
> selection
> for me becomes very strict since every hand is getting PFR 15-20 dollars.
> after
> that betting is usually around 15-20 as well, leaving me only enough chips
> to
> really get myself into 2 solid hands without running the risk of busting
> out.
>
> advice?
Large Stack = two ways to win: showdown or pushoff
Small Stack = one way to win: showdown
Never undestimate the power of chips.
BTN
Overseer55
But, large stacks can't pushoff small stacks (as easily).
- Mark
fffurken
No way is it good to be overly short stacked in a NL game. Having a
proper amount of chips in front of you protects your hand and that's
without necessarily having to bet them! The underlying threat is often
enough.
I have no problem playing TPTK type hands fast for my opponents entire
(small) stack. Short stacks are just waiting to be picked off like this
and if I don't do it someone else at the table will.
John Forsberg
1) Get a hand with decent equity against the raising range.
2) Move in.
alternatively.
1) Get a hand with decent equity.
2) Take a flop.
3) Move in on pretty much all flops.
Of course, once you've doubled up you're going to have to play some actual poker
or leave.
I think Ed Miller wrote an article on how to play basic shortstack poker. That
strategy should be sufficient for this game.
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
fffurken
Or lost 5 or 6 shortstacks as someone else talked about in this thread
;)
jarrett40
A lot of 1/2NL games have a $100 max buy in. Try to find one.
Or start buying in for $200-$300 to be able to play properly and
protect your good hands.Small bets after the flop are asking to be
drawn out on.Have enough chips to take advantage of this.You don't want
all your money in on a draw.
If these people are raising $15-$20 preflop and then making post oak
bluffs of $15-20 on the flop or only betting small amounts after the
flop in raised pots with legitimate hands this is a dream game that I
would love to be in.Learn how to play in it.
jarrett40
ragscollector
that was me.
And as far as basic short stack poker described in books- thats for tourneys not
cash games. Why is it that people insist on playing both the same, i mean i am
glad you do bc it makes me money when you move all in preflop with AJs or my
have the A5s because you can make a straight, a straight flush or two pair or a
flush!!!
There is a big difference between cash and tourney play, so lets drop this how
to play from the short stack talk in cash games.
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
Paul L. Schwartz
a bookstore take a look at the section of Getting Started in Hold'Em
where he describes his short stacked NL strategy for cash games. I
think the strategy is sound. The main problem is that once you've
built up a stack, you have to leave the table because it won't work for
larger stacks. On-line this is not a problem because so many games are
available.
If the OP is not winning it is because he is playing badly, not because
of the size of his buy-in. In fact, for a beginner, a smaller stack is
much easier to play than a large stack. If this player cannot win with
a small stack, he will not be able to win with a large stack. He will
just lose much more money.
Paul
John Forsberg
On Oct 4 2005 6:38 PM, ragscollector wrote:
>
> that was me.
>
> And as far as basic short stack poker described in books- thats for tourneys
I'm pretty sure Ed Miller published something specifically for playing a
shortstack in cashgames. It's pretty similiar to how you play a shortstack in a
tournament (obviously not on the bubble though).
> glad you do bc it makes me money when you move all in preflop with AJs
I'm kind of guessing you're not the kind of player that raises 6bb with 10% of
your hands.
> There is a big difference between cash and tourney play, so lets drop this how
> to play from the short stack talk in cash games.
Because that would be on topic?
Michael Sullivan
> that was me.
>
> And as far as basic short stack poker described in books- thats for
> tourneys not cash games. Why is it that people insist on playing both the
> same, i mean i am glad you do bc it makes me money when you move all in
> preflop with AJs or my have the A5s because you can make a straight, a
> straight flush or two pair or a flush!!!
> There is a big difference between cash and tourney play, so lets drop this how
> to play from the short stack talk in cash games.
It's always good to pay attention. John F. wasn't advocating playing
like a shortstacked player in a tourney, which refers to being
shortstacked relative to the blinds. He said to move all-in against the
raise when you have a hand with good equity vs. the raising range of the
table. If AJs (let alone A5s) has good equity vs. the raising range,
and they are raising 7.5-10xBB as a standard raise, you don't need any
kind of special short-stack strategy to do well against that table.
> On Oct 4 2005 12:23 PM, fffurken wrote:
> > >Of course, once you've doubled up
> > Or lost 5 or 6 shortstacks as someone else talked about in this thread
Why do you folks assume that "good equity against the raising range"
means to move in with anything?
I take it to mean you move in with hands like AKs, JJ+, and otherwise
pretty much sit on your hands unless it's folded or limped to you in
late position, or you can limp or check from the blinds.
That doesn't sound like short-stack tournament strategy, nor does it
sound like you'll lose 5 or 6 buy-ins for every one double-up.
Michael
ragscollector
he is doing wrong is buying in for sto little
_______________________________________________________________
willre...@yahoo.com
> I disagree you need to buy in for more. Greenstein talks about short
> buy ins in his book.
And he doesn't say anything more than you are saying here to suggest
they are a good idea. At least in NL.
>
> Basically, you are right, you need to change your hand selection. You
> also won't have the implied odds to play a lot of hands you could if
> you had a bigger stack because you won't make up enough when you do
> hit. But, others won't have implied odds against you.
True enough but that limits your starting hands enough to stereotype
you and the good players will know what you have when you play. Since
you make money off the bad players, this isn't fatal but it isn't good.
>
> Playing with a short stack you will end up all in a lot preflop, I'd be
> looking to move in or fold to raises of 15-20.
>
> I don't regulraly play this way, but I don't think it is nearly as bad
> as many think it is. You just have to adjust your game.
It's fine for a raid but I think it is a poor long-term policy. It's
tragic to flop the top set and only win $600 from someone with second
set who has black chips stacked to the ceiling. I only had that much on
the table because I had lost a bad beat and didn't take more money out
between hands. This was not enough to have on the table in a $5/5 blind
NL game and sixty bucks isn't enough, as a regular policy, to have on
the table in a $1/2 NL game such as the one he describes.
Will in New Haven
--
ackbleh
1) You should not be playing in this game unless you bring enough cash for
several (more than 5) buyins with you. This is ESPECIALLY true of this game
because of the large typical preflop raise. If people are really routinely
putting in 7.5-10BB preflop, this has a rather large impact on your optimal
play. You're going to be seeing showdowns, so you're going to need to be able
to rebuy when you lose races.
2) What is optimal play here? WARNING: This answer is based on a very
specific detail you provided in your post about most hands having 15-20 raises
preflop and then postflop bets, meaning that people are calling those raises.
Because of this, you need to play tight preflop, playing allin poker preflop.
You should rarely if ever see a flop with chips left. You simply cannot put in
1/3 to 1/5 of your stack preflop in a multiway pot with a speculative hand.
The exact hand ranges and actions you should take depends greatly on hand ranges
of your opponents. You need to examine the following:
a) What range of hands are your opponents raising with? (this will be different
for different opponents).
b) What range of hands are your opponents calling raises with? (it sounds like
your game is so weak that players probably have a similar ranges for B and A)
c) What range of hands are your opponents willing to call reraises allin with?
(This will differ by opponent and SHOULD differ by how much dead money is in the
pot and how much your reraise allin is... but some of your opponents won't think
that way. Try to figure out what each person is basing their decision on).
You need to evaluate the above answers to determine which hands to reraise all
in with based upon weaknesses in your opponents' games. Here are some examples
of situations you might exploit:
-Player A raises to 15 and Player B calls 15. Both have you covered and both
are loose players who might have any two face cards, any pair, or even suited
connectors or a ragged Ace. Both are reluctant to gamble all-in preflop without
premium hands. You are in the big blind and there is no one else left to act.
You have $80 in front of you. You look down and see... well, lets do some math
and see which hands you'd want to push with. Let's say that if you push you'll
get called by one player 25% of the time and by two players 10% of the time,
winning the pot 65% of the time. You profit $31 when they fold. You risk $80
to profit $96 when you face one caller. You risk $80 to profit $161 when you
face two callers. Let's look at your EV:
(.65 * 31) + .25 * ((A * 96) +((1-A) * -80)) + .1 * ((B * 161) + ((1-B) *
-80))'
Where A is your % chance of winning when called by one player and
B is your % chance of winning when called by two players. Let's assume that
your chance of beating one of them is roughly double your chance of beating both
of them (Not the best assumption, but not horrid and it makes the math simple)
and substitute, meaning that B =.5 * A. If you set your EV to 0 (make the
equation = 0) and solve for A after substituting, you discover...
Your hand need only have 14% chance to win on average when called by one person
in order to make the play profitable. Hmmm... unless they're only calling big
pairs and not AK, pushing with any two cards here is profitable.
-Another situation... let's say that the last scenario just played out, you
pushed allin with 8h 6h, they both folded, and you showed. You now have $111...
and a very modified table image. You're dealt pocket sevens in the small
blind. The pot is raised to 20 with two calls when the action gets to you. One
of the players who has entered the pot is very tight for all his chips, one of
the players is a bit of a gambler, and the other is in-between. What's your
action? Clearly you push allin. If they fold, you profit $62. Against one
caller, you are risking $111 to profit $153. Let's ignore the spots where you
get called by two or three players here for now... and say that you get called
75% of the time. What % chance of winning do you have to have on average when
called for the push to be break even?
25 * 62 + .75 * (A * 153 + ((1-A) * -111)) = 0
Only 34.2%. Given that you are a slight favorite against unpaired overcards,
and are beating as many pocket pairs as are beating you, and you're getting
called 3/4 of the time which means people are making loose calls as you just
showed eight high on your allin... I'd say your % chance of winning when called
is probably more like 45%. That makes this jam clearly +EV.
Looking at the above two examples, what have we learned?
We have learned that fold equity is key, and if multiple players are willing to
put in chips amounting to 1/4 to 1/5 of our stack preflop and then fold, we can
take advantage of this by pushing our stack around. We have also learned that
we are going to be in a lot of showdowns, so getting +EV is going to involve
variance... we need to have the cash to buy back in if we lose a few races in a
row.
You might have also noticed that I was making a lot of estimations of %
likelihoods of people calling reraises, also in the second example estimating
our % chance of winning when called. These are estimations you MUST be able to
make at the poker table. They are linked numbers... the wider the range of
hands your opponent can call with, the higher (usually) your chance of winning
will be. These numbers change by opponent, and they can change rapidly over
time based upon your opponent's tilt factor and your table image.
Guessing your opponents' hand ranges and their likelihood of calling, and paying
attention to factors like your table image that might change those numbers, is
not necessarily easy. Doing the math we had to do, or at least estimating it,
is also not easy for very many people. Guess what? Being a good poker player
is not easy. Being a winning poker player is not easy. But you asked what it
takes to win in this game given these paramaters, and this is the answer you
need. Once you work out several of these situations in detail, you'll start to
get a feel for for the numbers and be able to estimate them quite quickly.
You'll recall similar situations and the appropriate hands to push with there,
note the small differences in this situation, and adjust slightly as
appropriate.
This answer is not a simple formula for what hands to play, because that type of
response is not accurate. Proper play depends on the play of your opponents.
That's poker! That the play of your opponents changes over time, sometimes
quite rapidly, is what makes it so fun and challenging.
A quick note -- You will eventually get a big stack using this method, and at
that point you will be able to see some flops. However, the distinguishing
characteristic of your game -- frequent large preflop-raises and calls -- means
that the proper way to play is to be very tight preflop and very aggressive with
a hand. Calling to catch a flop is generally not the way to play.
And again... if you don't have the cash to buy short several times, you need to
get out of this game. You're just asking to lose your cash.
-ack
GrouchySmurf1002
This is about as good as it gets on RGP. Great post ack.
______________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
ackbleh
The prior post was to answer our original poster. Here's what I have to say to
some of the other answers that have been posted in this thread:
1) It's not true that deep stack play is playing 'proper poker'. Playing poker
properly is extracting the maximum possible expected value while properly
managing your bankroll. Sometimes your bankroll requires that you buy short so
that you can have multple buyins. Sometimes your opponents' play and stack
sizes justify a lot of all-in preflop play, but sometimes it's smarter to wait
for a hand. Anyone who elminates a possible strategy, tendency, or action from
their repertoire on the grounds that it's 'stuipd' or 'not proper poker' without
regard for the surrounding situation is simply incorrect. There's a lot of bad
advice floating around out there, but none of it is incorrect for every
situation. Poker is situational.
2) If someone comes to your game and short-buys frequently and pushes all-in a
lot, but you've never seen them win a hand or a race, perhaps the fact that they
lose every race has more to do with their results than the fact that they are
buying in short. I can't tell you that this is a good player because there are
no details provided, but surely their AK is not losing to TT every time because
they didn't bring enough money. In fact, their AJ is not losing to AK every
time because they didn't bring enough money.
3) This idea that deep stacks have two ways to win because they can bluff, but
short stacks can only win at showdown, is... it's just faulty. Yes, deep
stacks can bluff other deep stacks off hands, but they can also be bluffed off
hands by other deep stacks. Short stacks cannot bluff, but they SHOULD not be
able to be bluffed as easily. If your short stack is playing scared, it's
probably because their bankroll is short and they can't buy in again, not
because their buyin to that game was short. There are proper ways to play a
deep stack for +EV and proper ways to play a short stack for +EV. Even average
stacks can work well!
4) Finding a game with people who buy in for less isn't really going to make
that much of a difference. In fact, you're probably better off in this game.
When people buy in for $20,000 or $200 vs your $100, it doesn't matter, your
pots are going to be the same size. At least this way if you push allin in
multiway pots, the other players might fold because they fear each other more
than you. The first person to act after you might fold because they don't want
to call and then get involved in a large sidepot vs others. The component of
this game that leads to the excessive gamble is the frequent large preflop
raises and calls, not the stack size. While you could argue that deeper stacks
contribute to these large raises, I don't think you should complain as they're
creating all kinds of EV for you.
There's just so much wicked misinformation out there... it's just brutal. As a
general rule, strongly question any poker advice that involves hard rules that
aren't for very specific situations. Poker is a game of creativity, of thought,
of strategy. Unless you adapt your game to your surroundings, you're not going
to be a good player.
Best of luck,
ack
> .25 * 62 + .75 * (A * 153 + ((1-A) * -111)) = 0
_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
DennisP
FellKnight
ack,
You rock. Please keep up the excellent posts and analysis.
Fell
--
Visit http://www.fellknight.com for strategy, blog, reviews and more!
(STILL IN BETA MODE)
_____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
arilajr
JUST BET A LITTLE AN THEY RUN FOR THE HILLS.
On Oct 4 2005 5:48 AM, voytko wrote:
_______________________________________________________________
David Nicoson
> 3) This idea that deep stacks have two ways to win because they can bluff,
> but short stacks can only win at showdown, is... it's just faulty. Yes,
> deep stacks can bluff other deep stacks off hands, but they can also be
> bluffed off hands by other deep stacks. Short stacks cannot bluff, but they
> SHOULD not be able to be bluffed as easily.
A) A goal is to maximize profits.
B) We make money by making better decisions than our opponents.
C) We've therefore selected a game in which we believe our decisions
will be superior to our opponents.
D) We have to pay overhead in the form of rake, gas, hotel cost, and
time for the opportunity to extract money from our opponents
E) After we are all-in, we can't make any more decisions; therefore,
can't make better ones. And therefore, we don't make more money.
Now, I concede it's possible to play preflop better than our opponents
but worse after the flop. But I believe if we expect our opposition to
outplay us after the flop, we should pick a different game.
ackbleh
1) This player is clearly short on cash and cannot afford multiple buys for a
full stack
2) How much you can outplay your opponents preflop and postflop depends partly
on our abilities preflop and postflop, but also on their abilities preflop and
postflop. This guy's opponents are playing BRUTALLY preflop so he should take
advantage of it. If all parties, including us, were sitting with $500 or $1000
apiece then perhaps their postflop play could be bad enough that you could make
more profit there, but in this case, I think that it's highly unlikely that
we'll run into holes as big and as often on our opponents' game as what they are
showing preflop.
You can't be a snob about WHEN you get it in with the best. Take their money
however they care to give it away.
-ack
_______________________________________________________________
David Nicoson
> 1) This player is clearly short on cash and cannot afford multiple buys for
> a full stack
You're making an inference there, I think. OP doesn't say that
explicitly.
> 2) How much you can outplay your opponents preflop and postflop depends
> partly on our abilities preflop and postflop, but also on their abilities
> preflop and postflop. This guy's opponents are playing BRUTALLY preflop so
> he should take advantage of it.
With you so far.
> If all parties, including us, were sitting with $500 or $1000
> apiece then perhaps their postflop play could be bad enough that you could
> make more profit there, but in this case, I think that it's highly unlikely
> that we'll run into holes as big and as often on our opponents' game as what
> they are showing preflop.
It's not a question of choosing to play preflop or postflop. It's a
question of playing only preflop or both preflop and postflop. Our
opponents still make preflop errors when we have a deep stack.
Mark Rafn
>whenever i play a 1/2 NL game live i always have trouble because of my chip
>size. i only buy in 60-100 dollars (alittle more than 30x bb), and despite
>the fact that is a substantial amount of money for what the blinds are, my
>opponents are usually buying for a good 250.
If your buyin is your bankroll, pick a smaller game. Buying in for $60 in a
1/2 NL game is fine if you want some short-stack practice, or if you think you
have an edge this way, but you cannot be an effective player if you're playing
scared. It's VERY hard not to play scared if you have to leave after losing a
hand.
If you have $600 in your pocket, it's reasonable to buy in for $60 with
the intent to rebuy if you bust a few times. It's very reasonable to buy in
for $200 with the intent to rebuy up to twice. It's also very reasonable to
buy in for $600. It depends on preference.
It is NOT reasonable (for most) to sit down at a table if losing 30 big blinds
is significant to your poker bankroll. It's not enough for limit, and not
even close for no-limit.
>the trouble with this is that the hand selection
>for me becomes very strict since every hand is getting PFR 15-20 dollars.
If normal preflop raise is 10xBB, hand selection is going to be important no
matter what. Having only 30BB in your stack just means you're committed to
the pot, so you'll end up all-in for a lot of hands you play.
Which means that you may rebuy a few times, but you'll have $250 in front of
you after winning two races.
>after that betting is usually around 15-20 as well, leaving me only
>enough chips to really get myself into 2 solid hands without running the
>risk of busting out.
If losing one buyin is busting out, don't play. If you have $100 to
play with, $1/2 limit or $0.25/$0.50 no-limit is about right. Alternately,
play less often and take more money.
--
Mark Rafn da...@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/>
A Man Beaten by Jacks
This is a great series of posts.
>3) This idea that deep stacks have two ways to win because they can bluff, but
>short stacks can only win at showdown, is... it's just faulty. Yes, deep
>stacks can bluff other deep stacks off hands, but they can also be bluffed off
>hands by other deep stacks. Short stacks cannot bluff, but they SHOULD not be
>able to be bluffed as easily. If your short stack is playing scared, it's
>probably because their bankroll is short and they can't buy in again, not
>because their buyin to that game was short. There are proper ways to play a
>deep stack for +EV and proper ways to play a short stack for +EV. Even average
>stacks can work well!
I'd disagree on the bluff aspect in one situation. The opponent has a draw and
is a reasonably good player, and you push on the flop for a roughly pot sized
bet. Perhaps you have a draw too, perhaps you have nothing. A reasonably good
player will realize he doesn't have pot odds to draw, and that there are no
implied odds involved, and will fold. This comes into play in the short stack
strategy of getting pot committed preflop and then pushing on any flop.
Good players might not let you do that, but the game he is describing sounds
perfect for it, if he absolutely must buy in short stacked for whatever reason.
Anyway, I'm sure you know this. I am bouncing it off your post, rather than
thinking I'm telling you anything.
David Nicoson
> I'd disagree on the bluff aspect in one situation. The opponent has a draw and
> is a reasonably good player, and you push on the flop for a roughly pot sized
> bet. Perhaps you have a draw too, perhaps you have nothing. A reasonably good
On the contrary, a 9 out draw hits better than 2:1, which is the odds a
pot-sized all-in offers. If the caller thinks there's any chance that
the short stack is bluffing or if he has other outs (e.g., overs), he
makes gravy money on the call.
willre...@yahoo.com
ackbleh wrote:
> 1) You should not be playing in this game unless you bring enough cash for
> several (more than 5) buyins with you. This is ESPECIALLY true of this game
> because of the large typical preflop raise. If people are really routinely
> putting in 7.5-10BB preflop, this has a rather large impact on your optimal
> play. You're going to be seeing showdowns, so you're going to need to be able
> to rebuy when you lose races.
I got the impression, not proven by re-reading his post, that he didn't
have the bankroll to make multiple rebuys.
> 2) What is optimal play here? WARNING: This answer is based on a very
> specific detail you provided in your post about most hands having 15-20 raises
> preflop and then postflop bets, meaning that people are calling those raises.
> Because of this, you need to play tight preflop, playing allin poker preflop.
> You should rarely if ever see a flop with chips left. You simply cannot put in
> 1/3 to 1/5 of your stack preflop in a multiway pot with a speculative hand.
This is good advice but it means that he is going to be missing out on
several good sources of profit.
>
> The exact hand ranges and actions you should take depends greatly on hand ranges
> of your opponents. You need to examine the following:
>
> a) What range of hands are your opponents raising with? (this will be different
> for different opponents).
>
> b) What range of hands are your opponents calling raises with? (it sounds like
> your game is so weak that players probably have a similar ranges for B and A)
>
> c) What range of hands are your opponents willing to call reraises allin with?
> (This will differ by opponent and SHOULD differ by how much dead money is in the
> pot and how much your reraise allin is... but some of your opponents won't think
> that way. Try to figure out what each person is basing their decision on).
If he doesn't have enough cash to rebuy into the game, how is he
supposed to follow this good advice? He won't see the same guys again,
or not all of them, when he comes back weeks later after he reloads.
Again, I don't KNOW that he can't rebuy as you suggest but that is the
impression I got.
I don't think a sixty buck stack will generate many folds from these
gambooling opponents. On the other hand, many of the hands with which
they call will be underdogs to whatever he is playing.
I found it hard to adjust to playing with a deep stack when I had won
one when I broke into the $5 blind PL game at Foxwoods. There are a
great many more plays possible and people have a great many more plays
available AGAINST you. What do you advise the OP do if he acquires a
great many chips? All I can say that quitting at that point isn't the
way to learn to play with more chips. I had to stay and ignore the cash
value of the chips and just play. So will he.
However, I still think, based on the tone of his original post, that
his bankroll problems make it very likely that he should stay out of
this game.
Will in New Haven
--
The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong in the broken
places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good
and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of
these you can be sure it will kill you too but there will be no special
hurry."
-- Ernest Hemingway, author and broken man who committed suicide in
1961.
John Forsberg
On Oct 4 2005 11:52 PM, David Nicoson wrote:
> It's not a question of choosing to play preflop or postflop. It's a
> question of playing only preflop or both preflop and postflop. Our
> opponents still make preflop errors when we have a deep stack.
Those particular mistakes are both smaller and harder to exploit when you have a
big stack than when you have small. For instance, say you hold 88 or something
similiar out of position against one of these guys. With a short stack you just
jam and there's no way they can recoup their preflop loss if they call with a
worse hand.
With a bg stack you either play a huge pot with a weak hand out of position or
if you hope to hit a set you lose all that nice fold equity you were going for.
If the other guy holds AQ, T9s or 77 he's still going to be in a far better spot
against you than if you simply hade moved in with a short stack.
_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
David Nicoson
things on some pretty minimal information.
OP writes:
> the trouble with this is that the hand selection
> for me becomes very strict since every hand is getting PFR 15-20 dollars.
> after that betting is usually around 15-20 as well, leaving me only enough
> chips to really get myself into 2 solid hands without running the risk of
> busting out.
15-20 preflop is a little big for that blind size. But is everybody
limping with crap, and then one good hand raises the pot? Or is one
player raising to 7, and then a second re-raising with AK? Does this
post really say the game is seeing a lot of flops? Does it generally
get heads-up? If not, then 15-20 on the flop is too small. (And then
perhaps it is the post-flop play that's particularly subject to
exploitation.)
John Forsberg wrote:
> On Oct 4 2005 11:52 PM, David Nicoson wrote:
>
> > It's not a question of choosing to play preflop or postflop. It's a
> > question of playing only preflop or both preflop and postflop. Our
> > opponents still make preflop errors when we have a deep stack.
>
> Those particular mistakes are both smaller and harder to exploit when you
> have a big stack than when you have small.
Are "those particular mistakes" calling too big a raise with weak or
speculative hands? As a generalization, I think mistakes on later
streets are more expensive than preflop mistakes. More difficult to
exploit? Yeah, post-flop play is more complicated than preflop play.
> For instance, say you hold 88 or
> something similiar out of position against one of these guys. With a short
> stack you just jam and there's no way they can recoup their preflop loss if
> they call with a worse hand.
> With a bg stack you either play a huge pot with a weak hand out of position
> or if you hope to hit a set you lose all that nice fold equity you were going
> for.
There's only fold equity if you can get your too-loose opposition to
fold say AJ or JTs there. Almost anything that that could raise to 15
should call for the 80.