You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

NL4 underhouse facing check min-raise

2»

Comments

  • lynx3ffectlynx3ffect Member Posts: 452
    edited May 2012
    saying raising pre-flop is not +EV is just wrong imo....how are you planning on building a pot, assigning a range to opponents or creating an image? aside from that its just ABC poker which will work at all the lower levels 

    we dont just aim to win by hitting a set everytime we raise with 3s either so that shouldnt be your sole aim entering a pot....

    dont know what "discussions" have happened for you to think raising at 4nl is not +ev but i'd suggest if this is what your 4nl play is based on it should be re-visited...
  • The_Don90The_Don90 Member Posts: 9,814
    edited May 2012
    In Response to Re: NL4 underhouse facing check min-raise:
    saying raising pre-flop is not +EV is just wrong imo....how are you planning on building a pot, assigning a range to opponents or creating an image? aside from that its just ABC poker which will work at all the lower levels  we dont just aim to win by hitting a set everytime we raise with 3s either so that shouldnt be your sole aim entering a pot.... dont know what "discussions" have happened for you to think raising at 4nl is not +ev but i'd suggest if this is what your 4nl play is based on it should be re-visited...
    Posted by lynx3ffect
    my wording was probably seriously bad. The issue with me raising 33 i think is that if i dont hit a set im often going to be multiway in what feels like an over-inflated pot. event if the flop comes 26Qr im not 100% sure im happy.

    I do raise at lower levels and often balance this dependant on the table, so please dont take my limping with 33 or comment that i believe raising at NL4 is incorrect. On the BTN or CO i probably raise, in this instance im UTG.

    Maybe im playing small pocket pairs wrong hense why im more than happy to discuss this.
  • rancidrancid Member Posts: 5,945
    edited May 2012
    raise these pairs 3x from early postion, no one will notice if you then change to late postion 4x/5x
    no need to balance, but you don't want everyone seeing a flop with you if you open limp

    don't think at NL4 over limping is bad, but open limping is bad

    as for the hand, limped pot - we have house - i shove - get em in very quickly


  • ameliorateameliorate Member Posts: 33
    edited May 2012
    In Response to Re: NL4 underhouse facing check min-raise:
    In Response to Re: NL4 underhouse facing check min-raise : my wording was probably seriously bad. The issue with me raising 33 i think is that if i dont hit a set im often going to be multiway in what feels like an over-inflated pot. event if the flop comes 26Qr im not 100% sure im happy. I do raise at lower levels and often balance this dependant on the table, so please dont take my limping with 33 or comment that i believe raising at NL4 is incorrect. On the BTN or CO i probably raise, in this instance im UTG. Maybe im playing small pocket pairs wrong hense why im more than happy to discuss this.
    Posted by The_Don90

    Hi,

    If I'm reading the HH right you are 4 handed at this table?

    I would consider myself on the CO in this hand and for me this is a pretty standard raise UNLESS you are likely to pick up 2 callers+ , if this table is full of calling stations then definitely look to hit a cheap set as they will pay you off well.

    As for the hand I would shove.  This is an unraised pot so we should be discounting most of the strong Qx combos as well as KK/QQ/JJ , if the villain has these we sigh make a note and carry on.
Sign In or Register to comment.