[Savior17]

Originally Posted by yeltzen

Exactly... hachkc posted that quote from Matt earlier that said he wishes short stacks could be banned. Well, in that case, you pretty much have to buy-in for 100BBs, which puts you in the worst situation possible when you make a standard raise to 3 or 4 BBs. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

The SPR theory is solid and interesting, I just don't think you should be changing your preflop raise strategy based on it.

I can only se it changing PF strategy if you are short stacked, and this really only happens in my home games. We usually see the short stack raise preflop then go all in on the flop if they hit a piece. No one really buys back up to 100BB unless it is early and they are below 30BB (which is a mistake, I think). On line I always rebuy up to 100BB once I fall to about 90BB so I am always faced with the TPTK situation with about 100BB or more. I usually go by the rule that if I bet TPTK and get called, I either slow down and see what the turn brings or bet and obviously fold to aggression. I find that a majority of the time that I am only getting called or raised by big draws or hands that beat TPTK. I definitely don't overplay that hand.

[EasilyFound]

It's highly likely that people are going to misapply the concepts so badly

I glanced at the book for a bit in the book store. Do you mean that people will commit themselves with hands that aren't worthy of committment? Overplaying certain kinds of hands? I can see that happening.

[jmc]

Originally Posted by Savior17

I can only se it changing PF strategy if you are short stacked, and this really only happens in my home games. We usually see the short stack raise preflop then go all in on the flop if they hit a piece. No one really buys back up to 100BB unless it is early and they are below 30BB (which is a mistake, I think). On line I always rebuy up to 100BB once I fall to about 90BB so I am always faced with the TPTK situation with about 100BB or more. I usually go by the rule that if I bet TPTK and get called, I either slow down and see what the turn brings or bet and obviously fold to aggression. I find that a majority of the time that I am only getting called or raised by big draws or hands that beat TPTK. I definitely don't overplay that hand.

I think if you are playing in a game where two pot sized bets = you'll be called by hands that crush TPTK, you probably want your SPR to be a lot lower (2~3). Consider stealing more?

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by jmc

I think if you are playing in a game where two pot sized bets = you'll be called by hands that crush TPTK, you probably want your SPR to be a lot lower (2~3). Consider stealing more?

That's pretty player and stakes dependent IME; some folks won't throw a flush draw away for anything. Though slowing down is the obvious safe choice in these situations.

[jmc]

Originally Posted by EasilyFound

I glanced at the book for a bit in the book store. Do you mean that people will commit themselves with hands that aren't worthy of committment? Overplaying certain kinds of hands? I can see that happening.

SPR is a fairly new concept to those of us that like to read poker literature. I'm sure people who've been playing for awhile have some concept of it (i.e. planning ahead, getting people pot stuck, etc) but this is the first time I've seen it explained in detail.

I can see that applying SPR in a vacumn can be very dangerous. You need to do a lot of the basic/fundamental groundwork in a NL game before you can start applying SPR. You need to have some idea of how your opponents play, their hand ranges, their calling/raising/folding tendencies, etc.

Also, there are lots of exceptions and additional considerations to take before going off and blindly stacking off with top pair just because your SPR is low -- take a look at the section on Making Adjustments.

[Savior17]

Originally Posted by jmc

I think if you are playing in a game where two pot sized bets = you'll be called by hands that crush TPTK, you probably want your SPR to be a lot lower (2~3). Consider stealing more?

I just got to that point in the book and am running some scenarios to better understand it (that's just the way I work). Also, because I have a tight image at my home game it is tough for me to get to a low SPR preflop, unless I am last to act and there has been a raise and reraise. Online it is much easier.
I agree it is player and stakes dependent. I had a hand Wednesday night where I flopped TPTK and a flush draw board. In hindsight, I was only able to get my SPR to about 10. I raised a bet on the flop and villain went all in. This guy is somewhat loose and known for chasing flush draws, but he wasn't playing any hands that night so I was cautious. He knows I am taggy and that my raise meant I had a hand. I ended up putting him on 2 pair 70% and FD 30%. I folded and he flipped over the nut flush draw. I was just about at the commitment threshold and figured this was the time to jump ship. Needless to say, fing dealer ran the cards and he would have missed. But I am not results oriented.

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by EasilyFound

I glanced at the book for a bit in the book store. Do you mean that people will commit themselves with hands that aren't worthy of committment? Overplaying certain kinds of hands? I can see that happening.

If they really follow all of the advice in there word-for-word, they will be playing god-awfully preflop.

[Savior17]

Originally Posted by yeltzen

If they really follow all of the advice in there word-for-word, they will be playing god-awfully preflop.

Agreed. The most important thing to take from this is that you must make adjustments based on a whole host of variables and realize that you may never hit your target SPR.

[Poboy]

Originally Posted by yeltzen

The SPR theory is solid and interesting, I just don't think you should be changing your preflop raise strategy based on it.

I haven't read the book (or posts on 2+2), but SPR is definitely primarily a post flop tool. SPR is generally pot control - and you can't control the pot so much preflop because it(and your hand) has too long to go still. SPR is how to plan your betting with a hand.

[guinness]

Originally Posted by TheMightyJim2k

I personally think what we are seeing here is a bunch of really good players trying to quantify and set in theory how to play NL, when really to most important part of NL is hand reading.

While their advice is certainly good, and the theory is correct, you can't turn yourself into a NL bot and just raise a huge amount everytime you have a big hand because you'll get no action and price out everyone except those players who have you beat. Plus you'll turn all of your hands face up, and players will start punishing your limps and small raises.

So I feel like what they are saying is theoretically correct, but if you try to blindly apply it without also understanding how it is impacting your image (and thus how mixing up your play is necessary to change that image) you'll become much to predictable.

This probably isn't too big of a problem if you play a lot online as you can keep your sessions short enough, and will play with enough different opponents that it won't matter too much. But if sit for a long session and play like this I think you are making yourself exploitable.

DING DING DING...WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER....I agree whole heartedly..