|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/30/2008 2:12:41 AM PACIFIC |
 Small Blind Play, Roy Cooke, 2. Aug 2003 11:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| A tight player called in middle position......An aggressive player raised him from the cutoff position.....I was in the small blind holding AQ.....Often, I will flat call in that spot as I do not like having to act first and it sets me up to check-raise if I hit my hand (Or if I don't)....But in this case I thought I might be able to fold the limper and go heads-up against an inferior hand with two small bets of dead money in the pot.......Thoughts??? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, Schuster, 2. Aug 2003 11:40 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| If the cutoff was a tricky player, I would be less inclined to make the reraise because if I do make the reraise and the open limper folds, then I'm going to bet the flop no matter what it is. If the cutoff is an ABC player who will play his hand in a straightforward manner, then I'll know where I stand on the flop by his action. If the player is very good I might opt to check the flop if I missed and then bet the turn, if there is a card in the playing zone somewhere, and rather uncoordinated. Here I'd be representing a set and was allowing him a card to catch up, and there are some players who will read you as such. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, Roy Cooke, 2. Aug 2003 14:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I like your thought process as far as the situational analysis and thinking about what your opponent is thinking.....I would tend to be very careful making the check play with a vulnerable hand...You don't want to give a free card that beats you to a hand that would have folded to a bet! That is a bad error! Roy Cooke on 2. Aug 2003 11:40 Schuster wrote: > If the cutoff was a tricky player, I would be less inclined to make the reraise > because if I do make the reraise and the open limper folds, then I'm going to bet the > flop no matter what it is. If the cutoff is an ABC player who will play his hand in > a straightforward manner, then I'll know where I stand on the flop by his action. If > the player is very good I might opt to check the flop if I missed and then bet the > turn, if there is a card in the playing zone somewhere, and rather uncoordinated. > Here I'd be representing a set and was allowing him a card to catch up, and there are > some players who will read you as such. > > Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, 4 POKER, 2. Aug 2003 12:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think it really depends if the aggresive player is a tough(solid), and deceptive type or if he is just aggresive with hands like A-10 and is trying to take the hands heads up with a tight limper. What hand/s could you put the tight limper on given his position? If he holds a medium pocket pair would he call 2 more bets, and if he held something like KJ suited would he call with that as well? I really think it depends on both of the players involved, and if you thought you could fold off the original limper, than I would probably 3 bet the hand, costing myself two extra small bets as opposed to one more bet, as AQ will probably play better heads up, and if the cuttoff has a hand like A-10, you would be getting the best of it there as well. If you're a strong enough player to make the 3 bets, than you will be strong enough to play the flop accordingly, even if you miss completely. (meaning, you'll know when not to go overboard as well). If you're a rather passive and tight type, than 3 betting the hand will not be as affective if you don't handle the flop correctly and I would say that you would be better off just calling and wait to see if the flop improves your hand. 3 betting a hand like AQ out of the SB works for many players even when they don't flop good because they're able to push weaker opponents off their own holdings and/or draws. So rather than thinking of this hand and situation as just, "I've got AQ".....I'd take both of the players styles and abilities into consideration, and then I would chose to either just call or to 3 bet it. And whatever decision I made prior to the flop, I may handle it a few different ways once the flop came up, by knowing and having the ability to read my opponent/s correctly,ie, knowing when to press it and realizing when to back off. It's another... "It depends" thing! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, Roy Cooke, 2. Aug 2003 14:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Good thinking and analysis......I felt the tight player would fold a lot of hands (and he did).......4poker...You got game :-) Roy Cooke on 2. Aug 2003 12:54 4 POKER wrote: > I think it really depends if the aggresive player is a tough(solid), and deceptive > type or if he is just aggresive with hands like A-10 and is trying to take the hands > heads up with a tight limper. What hand/s could you put the tight limper on given his > position? If he holds a medium pocket pair would he call 2 more bets, and if he held > something like KJ suited would he call with that as well? > > I really think it depends on both of the players involved, and if you thought you > could fold off the original limper, than I would probably 3 bet the hand, costing > myself two extra small bets as opposed to one more bet, as AQ will probably play > better heads up, and if the cuttoff has a hand like A-10, you would be getting the > best of it there as well. > > If you're a strong enough player to make the 3 bets, than you will be strong enough > to play the flop accordingly, even if you miss completely. (meaning, you'll know when > not to go overboard as well). > > If you're a rather passive and tight type, than 3 betting the hand will not be as > affective if you don't handle the flop correctly and I would say that you would be > better off just calling and wait to see if the flop improves your hand. > > 3 betting a hand like AQ out of the SB works for many players even when they don't > flop good because they're able to push weaker opponents off their own holdings and/or > draws. > > So rather than thinking of this hand and situation as just, "I've got AQ".....I'd > take both of the players styles and abilities into consideration, and then I would > chose to either just call or to 3 bet it. And whatever decision I made prior to the > flop, I may handle it a few different ways once the flop came up, by knowing and > having the ability to read my opponent/s correctly,ie, knowing when to press it and > realizing when to back off. It's another... "It depends" thing! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, DJpoker, 3. Aug 2003 01:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| 4 poker came up with a great decision making process as usual. I guess my comment concerns the level of play. I assume you are talking about 30-60 since that is usually what you play. For me, I am currently trying to master the 3-6 level and although most of that thought process still works, I find that in this situation if I 3 bet, it will be capped with the limper, raiser and myself. The BB will be around if he has decent cards as well. I'm not suggesting that this is appropriate, just the norm. Considering the lower level, I would then ask if you guys would limp and simply cold call the raise? I realize this is allowing the BB in cheaper, but in a 4 way pot, I would still feel good about my AQ as I wouldn't be dominated by too many hands. Also, would it matter if AQ were suited? I know there is not a major difference, but just curious. Thanks, DJpoker | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, Andrew Wells, 3. Aug 2003 05:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Yes, in low limit it is much preferable to simply call and actually hit the flop. Playing to isolate someone is much more difficult (if not highly improbable) when there's already been at least one limper ahead of the raise. Part of the value of AQ is you can sometimes resteal (which might be a checkraise with just overcards), but that's because at higher limits you won't see most players chasing with just a small piece of the flop. At 3-6 you probably need to catch at least top pair on the flop with AQ, or some kind of decent draw to continue. Having the AQ suited just gives you more possibilities. Suitedness in and of itself is not enough is not enough to turn a cold call into a reraise. If you make it three bets out of the small blind with AQ or AQs in a 3-6 game it is because you believe the raiser is stealing. When someone has already called, it's less likely to be a steal attempt. Of course this highly depends on the type of player doing the raising. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, Brian462, 2. Aug 2003 13:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I like to single out aggressive players and take them on with strong hands. I think you make money over the long run and if the "Jackyl" wins it just feeds into his bad play for later exploitation. I would definently raise because it forces the tight player to give you an idea about his strength. You raise and either folds which is what you want or calls. If he reraises you fold or perhaps see the flop. If he calls you bet as if you still have the dominate hand. At this point you know whether or not you have him beat and can proceed to get out or take on the aggressive player. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, 4 POKER, 2. Aug 2003 13:34 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 2. Aug 2003 13:25 Brian462 wrote: > I like to single out aggressive players and take them on with strong hands. I think > you make money over the long run and if the "Jackyl" wins it just feeds into his bad > play for later exploitation. > > I would definently raise because it forces the tight player to give you an idea > about his strength. You raise and either folds which is what you want or calls. If he > reraises you fold or perhaps see the flop. If he calls you bet as if you still have > the dominate hand. At this point you know whether or not you have him beat and can > proceed to get out or take on the aggressive player. *************************************************************** I think that once you decide to 3 bet the hand, *even* if he now reraises you, you will be giving up way too much if you decided to fold for one more small bet without taking a look at the flop first. You should call the extra bet if reraised, but you must be "aware" of a dangerous board and have the ability to throw it away when you sense danger. If you can do that, than you definitely should be calling the re-raise. Making it 3 bets and then folding for one more bet pre-flop would be a mistake IMO. 4P- | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, Andrew Wells, 2. Aug 2003 18:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Given those player characteristics, this would be one of the few times I might make it three bets out of position. Although the hand can certainly play well with either decision, I like your idea of trying to get the tight middle position player to release. There is also the player in the big blind to consider. Not reraising allows the big blind to come in with quite a few more hands, but that can work both ways. Where you start to get in trouble is when the aggressive player was trying to isolate with a pocket pair, and the flop comes middle to small. Since your move before the flop tends to define your hand, he can afford to continue to be aggressive from last position now. It looks like it comes down to how well you know these players, and if you can outplay the aggressive one after the flop. I'm also thinking that this move might be right on the borderline with hands like KQ and AJ, but your AQ seems about strong enough. Just because you make it three bets preflop doesn't mean you can't play for a checkraise if you do get heads up. Some non-threatening flops where you catch top pair with the ace could still be handled this way. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, Kid, 2. Aug 2003 23:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hey guys, Like 4Poker said, you have to take the two players habits into consideration. I'm generally more inclined to make this isolation play when I have good control over the raiser, meaning I don't have to hit to win. Otherwise, if he is going to a river with weak hands, then I need to hit and I don't mind another player. Also, even though he's aggressive, he could easily have us in a tight spot with a hand like AK, AA, KK, QQ, and any other pair is in his favor too. However, eliminating that last player for one extra bet greatly increases your chances of winning. I think the play is close either way. I suppose I would base this play mostly on just how loose this original raiser is. If he is the kind of guy who likes to open with face cards, then I would gladly isolate. Generally, I think isolation plays should be left to advanced, experienced players, who play very well post flop. Otherwise, I think the EV is small with big opportunities for mistakes from less experienced players. KID | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, Barry T, 3. Aug 2003 15:08 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi. I like 4poker's analysis as well, but the thing you fo not tell us about the raiser is he tough or just aggressive. It is very difficult to play a good hand out of position against a tough player for value. However, if he is just aggressive, but easy or predictable, then the raise by you would be a better play. Also relevant are the characteristics of the big blind, and the folding frequency of the limper. I wouls say in most cases, a raise is not the best long term play, but we could clearly define player qualities against whch it would be fine. Anyway, we all know Roy likes to raise, so all of this analysis might just be cover. :-) BarryT | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Small Blind Play, stdioh, 5. Aug 2003 15:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I like it in theory, but I think that it has problems in practice. You say that the raiser is agressive which means that if he hits his hand he's going to hammer it. So how do your know if your AQ is good when you hit it and he starts jamming. If you can't agress it, you can't make any money with it, but if you do agress it and get crushed it'll cost you a lot of money. The only way I could see the reraise here is if you think you can fold him when you hit nothing. If the flop comes junk and you bet your AQ and he comes right back at you - if you think he's the kind of player that will come back at you - then I would just call there and look to hit honestly cheaply and then play him. There are just too many ways to get slapped around there. But yeah - against the right players I would definitley 3-bet. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|