|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 8/28/2008 5:28:30 PM PACIFIC |
 Ciaffones Book, iceman5, 3. Dec 2003 15:05 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Im reading "Middle Limit Holdem" and it has me confused. He has has hundreds of actual hands listed in the book and I disagree with a lot of what he says to do. Since he is an expert an Im not, Id like some feedback on a couple. Other hands to follow 1) Youre in EP with 77 and limp after another limper. MP raises, Both blinds call the raise as do everyone else. 5 players. Flop is Q63 with 2 spades. It gets checked around. The turn is another Q (not the third of the suit). SB checks, BB bets, EP limper calls. He says you should raise to protect your 2nd pair because it may be good and you want to may anyone on a draw pay. It seems to me that the BB wanted to check raise but missed the chance when it got checked around. Its hard to believe nobody has a Q. Plus, the BB who bet and the EP who already called will call your raise and the river will probably pair one of their cards that is higher than a 7. I wold fold. Anyone else agree? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ciaffones Book, noiseboy, 3. Dec 2003 15:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| His premise is that the 2nd Q combined with the fact that nobody bet the flop makes it likely that nobody has a Q. However, there is of course the possibility that someone was attempting a check raise, but usually the preflop raiser won't do that because he can't necessarily expect someone to bet. Anyway, seeing the 2nd Q out there and nobody having bet, people will then try to take down the pot with a 6 or a flush draw, I know that I would consider betting an A6s, as a semibluff, so your sevens might actually be good. Also, someone with a pocket pair 88-JJ might get cold feet with you raising and two QQ's on board and lay down the better hand. In low limit, I don't think you should raise because you can't knock enough people out to make the raise worth it, but at 15/30 some good things can happen when you raise. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ciaffones Book, Smokey27, 3. Dec 2003 16:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree completely. How does an opponet make a call with 88 thru jj? They can't. This is an agressive play that works only when there is no queen in anyones hand and at a game where players are capable of folding. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ciaffones Book, Smokey27, 3. Dec 2003 15:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I love his book, it is one of my top five favorite poker books. It seems like this hand you don't have enough information about it. Does the preflop raiser like to change gears and will check a flop that he has hit? Does the bb have a tendency to check raise with top pair? The appearance of the queen makes it much less likely that anyone has a queen as there are now only two possible. I could see a raise here if i knew the preflop agressor had AK, and the bb never check raises. you limped in early you could have KQ. I would raise here if I felt reaosnably certain no one else had a queen and that everyone would fold a raise without one. This is a very agressive play, I am not sure I like it much either becuase you are just barely ahead or very far behind and you need a river seven to win, (unless the preflop agressor had qq and decided to switch gears) That is what I like about the book I don't agree with all his plays but they make you think... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ciaffones Book, Barry T, 4. Dec 2003 01:05 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi. This is a classical steal situation and, if the BB knows this, he may easily be trying to win with nothing (or indeed he might have a Q). The caller is unlikely to beat 77. Clearly you cannot call, so, if you think there is a reasonable chance that the BB is the sort who would make a play, you must raise. In general, I find this book too conservative for optimum middle-limit play, but very good for a player trying to make the transition from low to middle limits. However, this is not one of the hands he is too conservative with :-) . They were nice enough to put my name in the book, but that does not mean I think every play is correct. This one I like under the conditions I stated. BarryT | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ciaffones Book, noiseboy, 4. Dec 2003 10:26 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Some of his plays do seem to lean towards the conservative side, but I was thinking some of this might be because they are tayloring many of the plays to the "average" opponent, whom you don't really have any particular read on. If you modify some of the problems by putting in things like "a tight player" or "a tricky aggressive player" to describe your opponent, it can totally change the answer to something completely the opposite. Most of the plays seem correct in my local 15/30 because it still plays a little bit like the lower limits, where you still have to show down the best hand most of the time because a lot of pots are multi-way. In a tighter game, it's probably correct to more aggressively go after more pots and do more representing of hands. I'm still adjusting to the mid limits, so these are just my initial impressions. The insane number of practical examples make this the best work on this type of game in my opinion. Even if you don't agree with all the recommendations, the fact that it provokes so much thought as to why you agree or disagree makes the book very worthwhile. BTW, I'd be interested in knowing some of the places where you think Caffione errs too much on the side of caution, if you ever have time to post about it. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ciaffones Book, shorn, 4. Dec 2003 05:34 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Assuming that you are playing against normal players, I agree with him. Reason being, with two spades on the flop, it is very unlikely that anyone with a Queen (with the exception maybe of AQs) is going to allow a free card against that many opponents. So, if it is checked around, it is likely that no one has a Queen, especially when a second queen comes. Additionally, by raising the turn, you are representing a queen and making it very difficult for anyone with two overcards to your 7's to call. If you are going to stay in this hand, you must raise here. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ciaffones Book, Formless, 4. Dec 2003 15:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'd fold on the turn too. Raising might be even better EV-wise, but is so high variance I'd need some good reads or tells to bother with it. Maybe you can raise here more often in B & M poker but I'd tend to fold it online. It's still pound for pound the best poker book out there, I think. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Ciaffones Book, Phish, 5. Dec 2003 01:28 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 3. Dec 2003 15:05 iceman5 wrote: > Im reading "Middle Limit Holdem" and it has me confused. He has has hundreds of > actual hands listed in the book and I disagree with a lot of what he says to do. > Since he is an expert an Im not, Id like some feedback on a couple. Other > hands to follow > 1) Youre in EP with 77 and limp after another limper. MP raises, Both blinds > call the raise as do everyone else. 5 players. Flop is Q63 with 2 spades. It > gets checked around. The turn is another Q (not the third of the suit). SB > checks, BB bets, EP limper calls. He says you should raise to protect your 2nd > pair because it may be good and you want to may anyone on a draw pay. It seems > to me that the BB wanted to check raise but missed the chance when it got > checked around. Its hard to believe nobody has a Q. Plus, the BB who bet and > the EP who already called will call your raise and the river will probably pair > one of their cards that is higher than a 7. I wold fold. Anyone else agree? > I generally think that he tends to lean on the conservative side. I actually agree with his play in this example. Yeah, the bettor may have you beat, but many players would also bet with a 6 here. The pot is big enough that you ought to try to win it if you can rather than just meekly surrender. A raise may even win you the pot against someone holding 99. | ||
| 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 |
|