[bolgenmod]

This thread is to discuss NLHETAP pages 98-130 starting July 24, "ending" July 25. (Discussion obviously may continue beyond the end date, but we will be moving on to a new part.)

Maybe this section will raise some discussion (c'mon guys!!) because it is about preflop strategies. In discussions of limit HE, people love to argue about pf play!

I found a number of points in this section to be very interesting because they are very different from what I always thought as a limit player. Perhaps the biggest difference is the idea of raising a fairly large amount with small pocket pairs like 44 (113-15) and deep stacks.

In a loose limit game (which is what I mostly play), in most situations, raising with a pocket pair below nines is not a great idea because the limpers who have already called will most often call the raise, not to mention players behind who cold-call raises more than they should. (Of course, there are exceptions when almost the whole table plays: you are then getting more than the almost 8-1 you need to have proper odds for flopping a set.) So raising with a small pocket pair is rarely a good idea.

I have carried this idea over to NL ring games: I will rarely raise a small pocket pair. (Of course I will do so in tournaments which are different.) But S&M's arguments make sense: the implied odds are so much larger in NL that you need to find a way to build that big pot if you do hit your hand. If you don't raise or only make a small raise, the pot stays small. And if you hit your hand, you cannot bet big into that small pot on the flop without arousing suspicion in your opponent. So either the pot stay small, or you lose your opponent: either way your big hand has netted only a small pot. A larger pf raise obviously makes a bigger pot for the flop bet, so you can build that big pot with your big hands more easily.

But my question is this -- over the long run, you are not going to flop that set any more often no matter what you raise. So is raising those pocket pairs really +EV in the long run?

[jojobinks]

is this officially the end? listen, doods, sklansky recommends you raise more with 44 than AKo (when deepstacked). that's not enough to start discussion? sigh...

yeah, bolg, i think it's counterintuitive, but i'm diggin it!

[mcc235]

In a $1/2 NL game where the max buy in is $300, but the typical opening raise is $12 (which is more like $2/4) what value should you use to calculate the depth of the stacks? $2 makes it 150 BB, where $4 makes it only 75 BB.

I would assume 75 is the answer based on table play, but I thought I would ask as I often get confused trying to apply his theory to low limit NL where the typical betting and max buy ins don't match very well.

[snuix114]

I think the main part of this concept is to raise often enough with small pp that people will not be able to identify when you have small pp vs big pp or 2 big cards. By raising often enough with a wide enough range of hands it will make it difficult on your opponents to identify a useful range of hands that you are playing when you raise. That way when you continuation bet you will have a higher success rate when you've missed the flop, and you have the added bonus of stacking someone (or close to it) who slow-plays AA or flops TP/TK and overplays it.

This tactic will also instill fear in your opponents; they will be hard pressed to play back at you when the flop comes Q-7-4 and they have AQ or KQ because you stacked their neighbor an hour ago on a similar flop with 44

The pot size makes their decision difficult, and painful. Your pf raise created a $25-30 pot and your flop bet is $20-25. With starting stacks of $200 they are down to $185ish on the flop, their raise will put them down to around $100 and all of a sudden they are pot committed (or will at least feel that way).

If you had NOT raised, the pot may have been around $10 with a couple limpers, and everyone still has $190+. You bet $7-12, and NOW a raise only commits 1/6th -1/5th of their stack and they will easily get away if you reraise. You may still be able to extract good money with a call, check the turn, bet the river play, but you will not stack a good player this way.

DISCLAIMER: I've had almost no sleep so this post could seem a bit disjointed...sorry.

[yeltzen]

Wow, I really need to get caught up. I'm a bad student.

[bolgenmod]

Originally Posted by yeltzen

Wow, I really need to get caught up. I'm a bad student.

You and everyone else -- these discussions seem to be dying. Is it because everyone needs to catch up? Or now that people are reading the book, it doesn't seem so hard? Or something else?

Today is another new thread day, but I hesitate to post a new thread. So how about a poll...

[yeltzen]

I just haven't had time, really. I haven't lost interest, but I can't really post when I haven't read the section.

[bolgenmod]

Put up a new thread with a poll: http://www.chiptalk.net/forum/poker-...ying-poll.html

And yeltzen: why can't you discuss something you haven't read -- my students do it ALL THE TIME!!

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by bolgenmod

Put up a new thread with a poll: http://www.chiptalk.net/forum/poker-...ying-poll.html

And yeltzen: why can't you discuss something you haven't read -- my students do it ALL THE TIME!!

Hahahah good call, I did quite a bit of BSing without reading the book in college. I'm sure I could do it with this book!