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.

Call, raise or shove

BoxsterBoxster Member Posts: 4,461
edited September 2012 in The Poker Clinic
Morning £3.30 BH  and tables are very 'bingo'

PlayerActionCardsAmountPotBalance
EGGYSmall blind 75.0075.005315.00
jockrockBig blind 150.00225.005725.00
 Your hole cards
  • A
  • K
   
ALANJ450Call 150.00375.008405.00
alvarez03Call 150.00525.008692.50
BoxsterRaise 450.00975.008795.00
EGGYCall 375.001350.004940.00
jockrockFold    
ALANJ450Call 300.001650.008105.00
alvarez03Call 300.001950.008392.50
Flop
  
  • 6
  • A
  • 5
   
EGGYCheck    
ALANJ450Bet 975.002925.007130.00
alvarez03Call 975.003900.007417.50
Boxster
«1

Comments

  • grantorinograntorino Member Posts: 4,710
    edited August 2012
    Raise more pre

    Shove flop
  • MohicanMohican Member Posts: 1,435
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    Raise more pre Shove flop
    Posted by grantorino
    ^^^^^^this +1
  • Lambert180Lambert180 Member Posts: 12,197
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    Raise more pre Shove flop
    Posted by grantorino
    +2

    Exactly what I was gonna say.
  • HYPETINGHYPETING Member Posts: 253
    edited August 2012
    Why would we shove 50bb eff with TPTK, surely worst folds and better calls?
  • Lambert180Lambert180 Member Posts: 12,197
    edited August 2012
    The pot is plenty big enough to be happy to take it down now. You will have to raise the flop to charge people for FDs and if you raise to say 2.5k and get calls, the pot is gonna be so big that you can't really fold any turn card anyway.
  • liamboi11liamboi11 Member Posts: 2,141
    edited August 2012
    I`d prob raise to 600-750 pre because of the limps and yeah i get it in on the flop if one of them have flopped 2 pair so be it alvarez prob has some kinda draw imo
  • pr1nnyraidpr1nnyraid Member Posts: 495
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    I`d prob raise to 600-750 pre because of the limps and yeah i get it in on the flop if one of them have flopped 2 pair so be it alvarez prob has some kinda draw imo
    Posted by liamboi11
    I disagree with you and torino, don't see why we should be bloating the pot pre when we are deep enough that there is still some play / manouverability left with the effective stacks.

    Also if you want to raise with any kind of frequency then surely you dont want to be raising 4/5x with all your opens?

    raising this much is so transparent even to bums.
  • Lambert180Lambert180 Member Posts: 12,197
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : I disagree with you and torino, don't see why we should be bloating the pot pre when we are deep enough that there is still some play / manouverability left with the effective stacks. Also if you want to raise with any kind of frequency then surely you dont want to be raising 4/5x with all your opens? raising this much is so transparent even to bums.
    Posted by pr1nnyraid
    I see what you're saying but I'm never just 3x'ing when 2 people have limped in front, so I don't think it matters whether it's AK, AA or whatever, if I wanted to play the hand, I wouldn't 3x when 2 people have limped.

    TBF though, there's a possibility I'm confused here lol... I get confused with Sky's HHs sometimes because I think when it says raise 450, it's not showing what they've raised TO, it's the amount they raised on top of the original bet (I think!). If that's the case, so it went 150, 150 and he raised another 450 (to 600) then I'd say it's fine.
  • pr1nnyraidpr1nnyraid Member Posts: 495
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : I see what you're saying but I'm never just 3x'ing when 2 people have limped in front, so I don't think it matters whether it's AK, AA or whatever, if I wanted to play the hand, I wouldn't 3x when 2 people have limped. TBF though, there's a possibility I'm confused here lol... I get confused with Sky's HHs sometimes because I think when it says raise 450, it's not showing what they've raised TO, it's the amount they raised on top of the original bet (I think!). If that's the case, so it went 150, 150 and he raised another 450 (to 600) then I'd say it's fine.
    Posted by Lambert180
    That is kind of my point, by raising so large and playing much bigger pots, you are restricting yourself to a much tighter opening range. Assuming this player has an edge, then this edge would be better utilised in pots where the relative tacks are deeper. By raising too much pre he is effectively making decisions easier down the line to oppos and giving himself less value / fold equity and room to manouvre on later streets.

    There is still plenty of play left in this tourney why restrict that by bloating pots. The only time this would be acceptable is if he would be opening a super tight range and wouldnt want to open light ever and hoping this is not adjusted to by the table by them folding to his opens with 90%.
  • BoxsterBoxster Member Posts: 4,461
    edited August 2012
    Tried to post the full hand history but it kept messing up.

    Point taken re bigger raise pre.

    I did shove on the flop, ALVAREZ folded but ALANJ called with pocket 5's

    Afterwards I thought I should never of shoved but you guys seem to think I did the right thing so thanks for your thoughts
  • BorinLonerBorinLoner Member Posts: 3,863
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : That is kind of my point, by raising so large and playing much bigger pots, you are restricting yourself to a much tighter opening range. Assuming this player has an edge, then this edge would be better utilised in pots where the relative tacks are deeper. By raising too much pre he is effectively making decisions easier down the line to oppos and giving himself less value / fold equity and room to manouvre on later streets. There is still plenty of play left in this tourney why restrict that by bloating pots. The only time this would be acceptable is if he would be opening a super tight range and wouldnt want to open light ever and hoping this is not adjusted to by the table by them folding to his opens with 90%.
    Posted by pr1nnyraid
    The issue for me is simple: When you raise to 3x with two limpers, you're virtually guaranteeing that you'll go at least three ways to a flop, as limpers never really fold for 2BB more after limping. This means that it's almost impossible to define their range, which makes it much harder to play through the streets. So by making a small raise, which you know will be called regardless of the limpers' hands, you don't open up more room for maneouvre, you in fact limit it and muddy your own options through the streets.

    The only reason to not raise to 4x or 5x here would be that you think they're never, ever going to fold for even that sizing. The options then would seem to be to either limp behind- disguising your strength - or to raise even bigger. A bigger raise would of course be higher variance but you have to say that facing two limpers our AK is very likely to be best and any raise would be a value bet.

    I would certainly raise more in this spot, at least to 600.
  • pr1nnyraidpr1nnyraid Member Posts: 495
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : The issue for me is simple: When you raise to 3x with two limpers, you're virtually guaranteeing that you'll go at least three ways to a flop, as limpers never really fold for 2BB more after limping. This means that it's almost impossible to define their range, which makes it much harder to play through the streets. So by making a small raise, which you know will be called regardless of the limpers' hands, you don't open up more room for maneouvre, you in fact limit it and muddy your own options through the streets. The only reason to not raise to 4x or 5x here would be that you think they're never, ever going to fold for even that sizing. The options then would seem to be to either limp behind- disguising your strength - or to raise even bigger. A bigger raise would of course be higher variance but you have to say that facing two limpers our AK is very likely to be best and any raise would be a value bet. I would certainly raise more in this spot, at least to 600.
    Posted by BorinLoner
    I guess it is down to preference, but this I why I think his 3x raise is acceptable..  I think ppl who limp call in tourneys, on the whole have a pretty similar limp calling range regardless of 3x / 5x raises (very wide). In essence you are saying you want to tighten their pre flop range to make it easier to play against?? I’m saying I feel comfortable IP v any player who limp calls and I certainly don’t want to be folding out their weaker holdings with a larger raise.. I’d far rather play more smaller / unbloated pots IP v them and win chips that way. Being that their range is about 70% of hands. You are better off just working out when their line is for value and when their line is a bluff / weak. Essentially what I’m saying is, when I’m playing 50+ bb’s deep Vs fish, playing more pots is going to be profitable and will also reduce variance. Playing fewer larger pots will still be profitable, but we are sacrificing some of our edge and we increase variance.  It’s also harder to keep a larger raise consistent as you move through levels.
  • BorinLonerBorinLoner Member Posts: 3,863
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : I guess it is down to preference, but this I why I think his 3x raise is acceptable..   I think ppl who limp call in tourneys, on the whole have a pretty similar limp calling range regardless of 3x / 5x raises (very wide). In essence you are saying you want to tighten their pre flop range to make it easier to play against?? I’m saying I feel comfortable IP v any player who limp calls and I certainly don’t want to be folding out their weaker holdings with a larger raise.. I’d far rather play more smaller / unbloated pots IP v them and win chips that way. Being that their range is about 70% of hands. You are better off just working out when their line is for value and when their line is a bluff / weak.   Essentially what I’m saying is, when I’m playing 50+ bb’s deep Vs fish, playing more pots is going to be profitable and will also reduce variance. Playing fewer larger pots will still be profitable, but we are sacrificing some of our edge and we increase variance.   It’s also harder to keep a larger raise consistent as you move through levels.
    Posted by pr1nnyraid
    It's not really harder to keep your larger raise sizes consistent through the levels as when you hit 15BB or so, it'll be pretty legitimate to simply shove over a couple of limpers. Above that, you'll simply be making raises with the intention of not folding on almost any flop, meaning you need to play a tighter range. That's not a problem because, at that blind level and facing loose-passive players, it's only appropriate for you to be playing a tight range anyway.

    By making a bigger raise we're narrowing their post-flop range and generally we'll only be facing one player on that flop, rather than two or three. Most of the time the flop plays out simply as "check-c-bet-fold" and when we hit our Ace or King we know we're likely to be best. Of course, we should be happy if we take the pot down pre-flop as well.

    The issue I have is with your suggestion of not bloating the pot by making a big pre-flop raise: The point I think I'm making is that with a 3x raise, we almost guarantee that we will bloat the pot and see a flop multi-way, without giving ourselves a chance to take it down pre-flop and with little idea of our opponents' holdings. If we make a bigger raise we may take it down pre-flop and we bloat the pot only a little more as we're unlikely to be called by multiple players.

    I think the difference in thinking is purely down to (as you say) whether players will limp-call nearly as often for 5x as they will for 3x. In my experience that's not been the case. Of course it does happen and it can be annoying, but I think in the long-run you get far fewer callers when making the 5x raise.

    I think playing straightforward ABC poker is usually best against passive players. So when facing limpers, the old chestnut of "3x + 1x for every limper" is still the way to go, regardless of how big we think our skill edge is.
  • BorinLonerBorinLoner Member Posts: 3,863
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    why u going on about preflop 450 or 600   pocket 5s are calling makes no different end of day u want callers with ace king if u hit ace or king ya pretty strong favourite just unlucky to be up against a set 
    Posted by IDONKCALLU
    Yeah, the 55 might call either way. In the long-term though the question is whether the 3x is a good raise size or not. The result of this particular hand is irrelevant. However, if we play this pre-flop scenario out time and time again, the long-term results of the various tactics would tell us which is better.

    If we take this specific hand as an example: When making it only 300 more our opponent is actually getting pretty decent implied odds to set-mine against us even if nobody else calls our raise. If we make it 600 more, they're not getting good odds. They'd be making a mistake by calling for 600 but would be making a mistake by not calling for 300. We want our opponents to be making mistakes and if we think they're going to call either way, then a bigger raise is better.

    So, if this situation was played out many times, I think the bigger raise is alot better. This particular board would likely see us coolered either way but that's not going to happen very often as it requires us to hit an Ace or King and our opponent to hit a set. Even then there'll be some boards that allow us to get away without going broke with just one-pair, as we won't need to raise the flop against just one opponent... though admittedly we probably would go broke most of the time.

    Poker strategy is all about long-term decision making, not short-term results: How does our strategy fair against weaker Aces, weaker Kings, etc... The bad result of this hand isn't important if our decisions were good.

    I know you know this, IDONKCALLU.
  • Lambert180Lambert180 Member Posts: 12,197
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    why u going on about preflop 450 or 600   pocket 5s are calling makes no different end of day u want callers with ace king if u hit ace or king ya pretty strong favourite just unlucky to be up against a set 
    Posted by IDONKCALLU
    Yeah but the fact they have 55 and make a set this time is irrelevant, they could just as easy have A6 or a million other hands. You can't say, well he was gonna flop a set anyway so it doesn't matter how I played it.
  • Lambert180Lambert180 Member Posts: 12,197
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    generally if blinds are 75/150 and 1 limper im making this 600   if no limper would be 400 
    Posted by IDONKCALLU
    Yeah that sounds about right, that's why if there's TWO limpers, you definitely can't 3x
  • pr1nnyraidpr1nnyraid Member Posts: 495
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : It's not really harder to keep your larger raise sizes consistent through the levels as when you hit 15BB or so, it'll be pretty legitimate to simply shove over a couple of limpers. Above that, you'll simply be making raises with the intention of not folding on almost any flop, meaning you need to play a tighter range. That's not a problem because, at that blind level and facing loose-passive players, it's only appropriate for you to be playing a tight range anyway. By making a bigger raise we're narrowing their post-flop range and generally we'll only be facing one player on that flop, rather than two or three. Most of the time the flop plays out simply as "check-c-bet-fold" and when we hit our Ace or King we know we're likely to be best. Of course, we should be happy if we take the pot down pre-flop as well. The issue I have is with your suggestion of not bloating the pot by making a big pre-flop raise: The point I think I'm making is that with a 3x raise, we almost guarantee that we will bloat the pot and see a flop multi-way, without giving ourselves a chance to take it down pre-flop and with little idea of our opponents' holdings. If we make a bigger raise we may take it down pre-flop and we bloat the pot only a little more as we're unlikely to be called by multiple players. I think the difference in thinking is purely down to (as you say) whether players will limp-call nearly as often for 5x as they will for 3x. In my experience that's not been the case. Of course it does happen and it can be annoying, but I think in the long-run you get far fewer callers when making the 5x raise. I think playing straightforward ABC poker is usually best against passive players. So when facing limpers, the old chestnut of "3x + 1x for every limper" is still the way to go, regardless of how big we think our skill edge is.
    Posted by BorinLoner
    I understand what you are saying, and it is fairly logical. Not sure we are totally disagreeing but certainly i dont think we will ever see eye to eye on this for as long as we argue it.

    There are plenty of ppl who will advocate a tight opening range and large raises and cbets etc etc and im sure its a winning strategy on here BUT i would say not optimum.

    As you come up against tougher fields this will be less and less profitable.

    I don't think this has a place in optimum mtt strategy tbh.
  • BorinLonerBorinLoner Member Posts: 3,863
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : I understand what you are saying, and it is fairly logical. Not sure we are totally disagreeing but certainly i dont think we will ever see eye to eye on this for as long as we argue it. There are plenty of ppl who will advocate a tight opening range and large raises and cbets etc etc and im sure its a winning strategy on here BUT i would say not optimum. As you come up against tougher fields this will be less and less profitable. I don't think this has a place in optimum mtt strategy tbh.
    Posted by pr1nnyraid
    Against tougher fields you won't see very much limping. Whether this is an optimal strategy for dealing with limpers isn't relevant if there are no limpers. Optimal MTT strategy has to include tactics for dealing with weak, passive players.

    I don't advocate a general strategy of being tight and making large bets regardless of your opponents. I'm just saying that a tight, ABC strategy is the best way to overcome players limp-calling. It's no good trying to be clever and making ellaborate bluffs against players who only see the strength of their own hand. Just exploit them with strong hands and simple plays that they are not good enough to exploit.

    No good player should ever be able to define themselves as either "tight" or "loose". We need to adapt to our circumstances.
  • pr1nnyraidpr1nnyraid Member Posts: 495
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : Against tougher fields you won't see very much limping. Whether this is an optimal strategy for dealing with limpers isn't relevant if there are no limpers. Optimal MTT strategy has to include tactics for dealing with weak, passive players. I don't advocate a general strategy of being tight and making large bets regardless of your opponents. I'm just saying that a tight, ABC strategy is the best way to overcome players limp-calling. It's no good trying to be clever and making ellaborate bluffs against players who only see the strength of their own hand. Just exploit them with strong hands and simple plays that they are not good enough to exploit. No good player should ever be able to define themselves as either "tight" or "loose". We need to adapt to our circumstances.
    Posted by BorinLoner
    Bold 1: I have never mentioned bluffs.. Im saying we may have a wider opening range that we can profitably play V limp calling range.. eg KJ Q10 paint paint etc etc with a standard open of 4x or more these hands are no longer as profitable and will be massively high variance. So are you now folding these hands?

    Bold 2: What would you define a 'strong hand'


    Bold 3: never defined anything as simply tight / loose, just referred to tight or loose opening ranges in this spot.


  • BorinLonerBorinLoner Member Posts: 3,863
    edited August 2012
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove:
    In Response to Re: Call, raise or shove : Bold 1: I have never mentioned bluffs.. Im saying we may have a wider opening range that we can profitably play V limp calling range.. eg KJ Q10 paint paint etc etc with a standard open of 4x or more these hands are no longer as profitable and will be massively high variance. So are you now folding these hands?

    Bold 2: What would you define a 'strong hand'

    Bold 3: never defined anything as simply tight / loose, just referred to tight or loose opening ranges in this spot.
    Posted by pr1nnyraid
    1) It's not that we can't play these QT, KJ type hands, it's just that playing them with a raise that we know will be called by multiple opponents means that we now need to hit the flop. If we get a flop of 48J and we have QT, we can c-bet against one opponent but against two or three we'll struggle to. If you want to play these hands, that's fine as long as you believe that if your opponents miss they will simply check-fold the flop. The more opponents, the less likely it is that they all miss. So we need to be up against as few opponents as possible and that means making a bigger pre-flop raise. So yeah, if you want to make any raise in this situation I think you need to be making it bigger than 3x. I know you don't need to be told how to balance your range but if you're doing it with AA, you need to be doing it with all of the hands you raise.

    I wouldn't want to limp behind very often but I'd rather do that than raise 3x, bloat the pot and still play multi-way. The only thing we gain from that is the betting lead but the main benefit of having the betting lead is that our c-bets make sense. That's not much use multi-way as, when you miss the flop, how happy are you going to be about c-betting into three players with random holdings?

    2) Obviously hand strength depends on position. On the button I might raise any two cards that work together, just to isolate the weaker players knowing that this simple raise, combined with my c-betting opportunities will be hugely profitable. In the Small Blind I need a truly premium hand to raise: TT+ and AK...

    3) I was just saying as a more general point that players shouldn't try to define themselves in that way and you seemed to be suggesting that I was advocating a particular style as being one-size fits all for any MTT.
Sign In or Register to comment.