are we calling here

THEROCK573

Hand History #662646139 (23:48 13/06/2013) only history i have with him is that he is a complete fish at nl50 so putting him on a hand is impossible.PlayerActionCardsAmountPotBalancexSmall blind 250.00250.0014057.50RevoTBig blind 500.00750.0020727.50 Your hole cards1010   THEROCK573Raise 1000.001750.0033403.00GanjagadgeCall 1000.002750.0027702.50StinkyBudsCall 1000.003750.0022074.00xCall 750.004500.0013307.50RevoTCall 500.005000.0020227.50Flop  Q22   basty2010Check    RevoTCheck    THEROCK573Check    GanjagadgeCheck    StinkyBudsCheck    Turn  8    Bet 1500.006500.0011807.50RevoTFold    THEROCK573Call 1500.008000.0031903.00GanjagadgeFold    StinkyBudsFold    River  5    All-in 11807.5019807.500.00THEROCK573Fold     Muck     Win 8000.00 8000.00 Return 11807.500.0019807.50

The_Don90

you left him in on one street thus its easy to work out. 

I think folding looks standard, but i probably do it one street earlier. Given its 5 way i'd just assume we're beat by someone. 

The only thing that makes me question this, is that if we call the turn, what changes your opinion on river? 

THEROCK573

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

you left him in on one street thus its easy to work out.  I think folding looks standard, but i probably do it one street earlier. Given its 5 way i'd just assume we're beat by someone.  The only thing that makes me question this, is that if we call the turn, what changes your opinion on river? 
Posted by The_Don90

i know the river card changes nothing and if i think im good on the turn which i did then i should call the river but he went from betting about a 1/3 of the pot on the turn to over betting the river, just confused me and i thought id wait and find a better spot before risking a 1/3 of my stack.

The_Don90

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

In Response to Re: are we calling here : i know the river card changes nothing and if i think im good on the turn which i did then i should call the river but he went from betting about a 1/3 of the pot on the turn to over betting the river, just confused me and i thought id wait and find a better spot before risking a 1/3 of my stack.
Posted by THEROCK573

Yeah i think a fold is good, i was literally trying to force myself to an arguement against  

BorinLoner

What's the thought behind min-raising pre-flop, 50BB+eff and only one player below 40BB? I think I'd still be making it 3x at this point but what were your thoughts?

Post-flop, I probably play it the same as you; calling the turn and folding the river. It's a weird line for your opponent to take and ought to be pretty polarised. The only logical reason for our opponent to bet the turn then bluff the river is with missed spades. They might be betting with air, I suppose, since we think they're not great. Can we really assume that a player like this isn't just overvaluing a Queen and, if not, is his range actually polarised by this bet?

Folding the river seems best.

jdsallstar

I would fold the river here too.

As a side question here. Should we not probe bet the flop to see where we are? 

I know its dangerous as its 5 way but we'd know at that stage if we're behind or not. Only people who would call are people with a q or 2 in their hand or other pp's surely. Hard to see many other hands people would call with. with 2 checks before us on the flop as well surely a bet would uncover either of the blinds slow playing the 2's? 2k out of stack of 33k seems like a good idea to me but is it? Is it a case of a that this bet gets thru so few times it isn't worth it?

THEROCK573

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

What's the thought behind min-raising pre-flop, 50BB+eff and only one player below 40BB? I think I'd still be making it 3x at this point but what were your thoughts? Post-flop, I probably play it the same as you; calling the turn and folding the river. It's a weird line for your opponent to take and ought to be pretty polarised. The only logical reason for our opponent to bet the turn then bluff the river is with missed spades. They might be betting with air, I suppose, since we think they're not great. Can we really assume that a player like this isn't just overvaluing a Queen and, if not, is his range actually polarised by this bet? Folding the river seems best.
Posted by BorinLoner

i stop 3xing after level 4 mate, at this blind level anything between a min raise and 2.5 is totally standard.

THEROCK573

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

I would fold the river here too. As a side question here. Should we not probe bet the flop to see where we are?  I know its dangerous as its 5 way but we'd know at that stage if we're behind or not. Only people who would call are people with a q or 2 in their hand or other pp's surely. Hard to see many other hands people would call with. with 2 checks before us on the flop as well surely a bet would uncover either of the blinds slow playing the 2's? 2k out of stack of 33k seems like a good idea to me but is it? Is it a case of a that this bet gets thru so few times it isn't worth it?
Posted by jdsallstar[/QUOTE

dont think i can bet into 5 players here, you bet for value or you bet as a bluff not to find out where you are, i think betting here is just turning my hand into a bluff.

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

In Response to Re: are we calling here : i stop 3xing after level 4 mate, at this blind level anything between a min raise and 2.5 is totally standard.
Posted by THEROCK573

Our opening raise size should be adjusted in relation to the stack size, not on the basis of the blinds reaching a particular chip number. If we were playing 200BB average at level 4 we wouldn't be min-raising, so at what point do we change? I don't think it is standard to min-raise at 40BB+ average and with 50BB+ the effective stack.

Here I think we're still too deep to be min-raising and I wouldn't be making it any less than 2.5x. Below around 35BB-30BB I'd say min-raising was "standard". We're not going to be blind-stealing at 40BB+ as often as we are going to be raising for value because stealing the blinds isn't worth much. We're mainly looking to build a slightly bigger pot pre-flop to allow us to stack our opponent post-flop as well as creating a bigger pot to take down with a c-bet; Just the same as we would in a cash game against a 50BB stack.

It's a fairly pedantic issue regarding the stage at which we're making it 2.5x, 3x or whatever, but because it's "standard" is not a reason to be doing anything. We want to justify our action on the basis of why it's better than another action.

Jac35

Min raising for me at these stage

THEROCK573

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

In Response to Re: are we calling here : Our opening raise size should be adjusted in relation to the stack size, not on the basis of the blinds reaching a particular chip number. If we were playing 200BB average at level 4 we wouldn't be min-raising, so at what point do we change? I don't think it is standard to min-raise at 40BB+ average and with 50BB+ the effective stack. Here I think we're still too deep to be min-raising and I wouldn't be making it any less than 2.5x. Below around 35BB-30BB I'd say min-raising was "standard". We're not going to be blind-stealing at 40BB+ as often as we are going to be raising for value because stealing the blinds isn't worth much. We're mainly looking to build a slightly bigger pot pre-flop to allow us to stack our opponent post-flop as well as creating a bigger pot to take down with a c-bet; Just the same as we would in a cash game against a 50BB stack. It's a fairly pedantic issue regarding the stage at which we're making it 2.5x, 3x or whatever, but because it's "standard" is not a reason to be doing anything. We want to justify our action on the basis of why it's better than another action.
Posted by BorinLoner

min raising allows us to keep applying pressure but risk less of our stack, why 3x at this level when a min raise does the exact same job? 

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

In Response to Re: are we calling here : min raising allows us to keep applying pressure but risk less of our stack, why 3x at this level when a min raise does the exact same job? 
Posted by THEROCK573

Are we really looking to "apply pressure" when we have over 50BB? We're probably not going to be looking to steal the blinds too often with weakish hands, after all, so surely when we're getting involved it's likely to be with relatively strong value hands.

I'd say a good reason to be min-raising here would be that we've been stealing frequently because we've spotted particularly tight players in the blinds when we've been in late position. In that situation we're balancing when we min-raise with our value hands. However, in an average situation we're probably not going to be raising light too often here since the blinds boost our stack by less than 3% and we won't want to get in tricky spots with marginal hands through the streets, especially UTG.

If we're only raising value hands and we want to be able to easily stack our opponents post-flop or c-bet to take a bigger pot, obviously raising bigger is better. We're not committing ourselves with a 3x raise but we're making it easier to get value.

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

...I guess if this is a call happy table we're not too keen on going 5 ways to the flop with 10 10 As played, I think you played it right. Could fold to turn bet but I'm probably calling as well.

The problem we've got Borin if we raise more pre and they still all want to come along, then the pot is now inflated and to continue we're pretty much playing for stacks.
Posted by xxxx

This is true but we shouldn't assume when we make the raise that we're going to get 5 callers whether we min-raise or make it 3x. We can't assume that we're going to get any callers without specific information on the way our opponents have been playing.

We mustn't allow ourselves to think, after min-raising or 3x'ing and seeing that we've been called by five opponents, that we should have raised bigger because we didn't want so many callers. If we feel it was the right raise-size with the information we had at the time, then it was right regardless of how it has worked out.

In actual fact, if they're all calling with weaker hands, technically we should be happy. It makes things super-high variance but we're getting money in ahead which is sort of what we want. I don't want 5 callers when I've got TT, mind you. lol

Jac35

But Borin, if we have a feel for a table, then we can Make assumptions. We're going off topic with this, apologies to Rock. There can be times in cash games for example when due to our reads (assumptions) we might want to 6x or even more preflop. If we have a read on the table, then adjusting our bet sizing away fom what is considered the norm is absolutely fine.

I'll give you an example of a hand I played recently live. I flopped a broadway straight and was sat with around £180(effective stack). I led out and the villain in hand raised. 9 times out of ten I'm probably flatting here. However, given reads on opponent I shoved and got the call.  He turned over top pair, no kicker.

Back on topic, I do take your point but Rock is right when he says min would be considered standard here in a normal tourney

THEROCK573

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

In Response to Re: are we calling here : Are we really looking to "apply pressure" when we have over 50BB? We're probably not going to be looking to steal the blinds too often with weakish hands, after all, so surely when we're getting involved it's likely to be with relatively strong value hands. I'd say a good reason to be min-raising here would be that we've been stealing frequently because we've spotted particularly tight players in the blinds when we've been in late position. In that situation we're balancing when we min-raise with our value hands. However, in an average situation we're probably not going to be raising light too often here since the blinds boost our stack by less than 3% and we won't want to get in tricky spots with marginal hands through the streets, especially UTG. If we're only raising value hands and we want to be able to easily stack our opponents post-flop or c-bet to take a bigger pot, obviously raising bigger is better. We're not committing ourselves with a 3x raise but we're making it easier to get value.
Posted by BorinLoner

we all play different and neither raise size is correct or in correct, min raising is more common now at this blind level with the more competent player and it is a better way to play in my view, im not going to  3 x raise when a min raise does the exact same job, ok its a smaller pot but small ball poker is very effective poker.

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

But Borin, if we have a feel for a table, then we can Make assumptions. We're going off topic with this, apologies to Rock. There can be times in cash games for example when due to our reads (assumptions) we might want to 6x or even more preflop. If we have a read on the table, then adjusting our bet sizing away fom what is considered the norm is absolutely fine. I'll give you an example of a hand I played recently live. I flopped a broadway straight and was sat with around £180(effective stack). I led out and the villain in hand raised. 9 times out of ten I'm probably flatting here. However, given reads on opponent I shoved and got the call.  He turned over top pair, no kicker. Back on topic, I do take your point but Rock is right when he says min would be standard here. 
Posted by Jac35

We don't have any of those reads here, though. I agree there are times that we adjust our raise size based on the play we've seen, as I said above regarding min-raising because of tight blinds. Without those reads, we're just playing stack-sizes, position, hand-strength, etc...


I don't agree that it is standard to min-raise with 40BB+ average and 50BB+eff. Even if it were considered "standard", that's not a good reason to do anything if we don't justify to ourselves the rationale for it being the best thing to do in this situation.

If we're only raising value hands and 3x is going to be called roughly as often as a min-raise, then 3x is better. When we're this deep I think we will be raising for value far more often than we're blind-stealing, so I think it's a little too early to be min-raising and 3x or 2.5x is better.

Jac35

I am agreeing with you rock and I'm also drunk.

However, out of interest, are you ever changing your bet sizing due to players in the blinds?

Lets say we're playing a small buy in online comp and you know the big blind is never folding to the min raise.

Are we still min raising and thinking we can outplay them, or raising more to just take the blinds. This is assuming we're not only raising premium hands.

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

In Response to Re: are we calling here : we all play different and neither raise size is correct or in correct, min raising is more common now at this blind level with the more competent player and it is a better way to play in my view, im not going to  3 x raise when a min raise does the exact same job, ok its a smaller pot but small ball poker is very effective poker.
Posted by THEROCK573

I'll try not to take that too personally, lol.

This small ball concept only applies when we're going to be playing lots of weaker or marginal pre-flop hands, looking to make big post-flop hands and stack our opponents, preferably in multi-way pots or when we know that our opponent must be strong. If we're doing that, then that is the reason for us making the min-raise, not that it's "standard".

If we're not doing that and are only playing decent value hands (not necessarily a very narrow range but reasonable broadway hands and pairs) from this position and we think that 3x and min-raises do the same job, then 3x just is better. It gets us more value.

THEROCK573

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

In Response to Re: are we calling here : I'll try not to take that too personally, lol. This small ball concept only applies when we're going to be playing lots of weaker or marginal pre-flop hands, looking to make big post-flop hands and stack our opponents, preferably in multi-way pots or when we know that our opponent must be strong. If we're doing that, then that is the reason for us making the min-raise, not that it's "standard". If we're not doing that and are only playing decent value hands (not necessarily a very narrow range but reasonable broadway hands and pairs) from this position and we think that 3x and min-raises do the same job, then 3x just is better. It gets us more value.
Posted by BorinLoner

it wasnt about you, i was just generalising that most competant players min raise at this level and it is standard , i play about 10 mtts per day across various sites so no it to be a fact that min raising is standard at this blind level.

im not a nit either and im playing lots of hands with a 50bb stack so a min raise is a better option. it has gone slightly off topic this now anyway and we are not going to agree so we will leave it at that, thanks for your reply though and you do talk sence.

BorinLoner

In Response to Re: are we calling here:

In Response to Re: are we calling here : it wasnt about you, i was just generalising that most competant players min raise at this level and it is standard , i play about 10 mtts per day across various sites so no it to be a fact that min raising is standard at this blind level. im not a nit either and im playing lots of hands with a 50bb stack so a min raise is a better option. it has gone slightly off topic this now anyway and we are not going to agree so we will leave it at that, thanks for your reply though and you do talk sence.
Posted by THEROCK573

We're not going to agree that small ball poker is standard. If it were, then small ball wouldn't be called "small ball", it would be called "standard poker" and other types of play would be called big ball poker... although they might be given a less funny name.

We are going to agree that it's fine to min-raise if we're playing lots of hands.

I have to say it again, though, that we shouldn't be thinking "min-raising is standard at this blind level" but rather that min-raising is our "standard" with these stack sizes. I'm assuming that's what you mean but other people read these threads, so I want it to be clear. A lot of players just min-raise because the blinds hit 25/50... even if they're playing 10k stacks in the super roller.

The_Don90

reading quickly. A min raise at these levels is standard imo. 

Basically that allows us to lose the min when bluffing - but also not show when we are. 750 chips pre are worth picking up, even if we are mega deep at this point. Thats an extra 750 chips when we double later, then 1500 etc etc. 

i agree betting flop is bad, but once i check im probably done with the hand