Your defensiveness doesn't actually address anything useful. I would like you to reconsider your words, and I hope that things are going well for you in other areas of your life.

What you think about whether you can play profitably from HJ is fine with me. But I will strongly disagree with you that it is a useful characterization that any deviation from a fixed hand chart is automatically "bad poker" and I also disagree that "competent" means "plays exactly like Bob148."

Now I agree with Bob.
If a player is that tight from MP or HJ, that person is not a winning player, and is not competent.
That's so tight that he's losing money to the blinds.

If an open raising range looks like [88+, ATs+, AJo+, KJs+, KQo, maybe QJs] from MP/HJ, then one of the following is true:
1. He also has an open limping range for worse hands.
2. He is not positionally aware and he's using the same-ish range for UTG.
3. His UTG is incredibly tight like [JJ+, AQs+, AKo].

None of these behaviors make for a competent player.

Did anyone say that? Please don't put words in my mouth. Disagree all you want, but please don't do that.

Standard soft 8/16 game.
UTG folds, UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 folds, I look down at KJo in MP and fold.

Is this good poker? No, it's awful.

Is it a thing now that MP and HJ are the same thing for a full table? Here's what I understand:

Specific positions:
Button
Cutoff = One off button
Highjack = Two off the button
Lojack/Lowjack = Three off the button

Inspecific positions (for a full 10-person table):
Early Position: UTG, UTG+1, sometimes UTG+2
Mid position: sometimes UTG+2, UTG+3, sometimes LJ
Late Position: sometimes LJ, HJ, CO, Button


In my mind, "competent" and "good" are not the same thing. If I look at a player and say "I think that guy is competent at poker" I mean something much weaker than "I think that guy is good at poker."

Edit: To elaborate slightly, I think a break-even player is competent.

You have made the following statement:

Where, in this case, it seems you are using your range as the standardized range. I believe my reading of your statement of calling someone who deviates from that standardized range (which appears to be your range) a "poor player" is consistent with considering it to be "bad poker" to do things other than you would do.

No, my range is actually wider than the standardized range in soft games. The standardized range from Winning in Tough Holdem Games, which is sometimes said to be too tight, happens to be quite a bit wider than the range you're putting the opener on.

The point is that the further from the ideal we play, the worse we are at poker.

Often times, "nit" is a much more apt term for a "competent" player at live 8/16 (since most competent players don't stay at the 8/16 level for long).

Assuming K7s is going to be in their MP opening range is wayyyy too ambitious. Yes, you should be raising your KJo 3 off from the button when folded to you, but a lot of these players don't. When you compare them to the guys who limp up front w/ 92s, though, they look like wizards.

So then you would agree that there is not really such a thing as a "standardized range" to begin with?

If you are using "ideal" to mean GTO or something close to it, then I disagree. The ability to correctly adjust to table conditions is much more representative of good poker than one's adherence to a specific strategy.

It's in there at frequency >0%.

Also, if they're folding hands that would be profitable for a better player, that's missed value that adds to our ev in the small blind. Taking this concept to an extreme: imagine three very tight players in position in a 5 handed game and you're in the small blind. That's ev that you now get to realize with hands that you would be forced to fold more often in a tougher lineup. The loss of ev gets transferred to the remaining players when you pass on preflop raises that should be profitable.

I think this gain outweighs any loss that I show from 3 betting QJs vs the HJ.

I only used the HJ as my read because the original post was vague regarding position and I wanted to get the ball rolling. Not because I consider HJ = MP.

Remember the "Standard, yes?" thread in the micros? Those guys were better at poker than you are to this day. Put your opening ranges up for inspection and I'll tell you you're much tighter than I would consider standard, which is just one man's subjective opinion.

LOL -- Bob, you're having a rough day. Take a nap or something.

And probably < 1%.

I'm ok with that. I meant ideal as in the preflop range that includes every profitable combination of hands and no hands that will show a long term loss of expectation. This varies from table to table. I've folded the A7o in the HJ in tough games and I've raised 65s in the HJ in soft games. I thought the A7o was unprofitable due to the toughness of the game and that the 65s was profitable due to the softness of the game.

Are you saying that you play tighter in soft games? I think that's a serious error in adjusting your play.

I see, when a player is described as "competent", I interpret that to mean that he knows what he's doing and can at least beat a game as soft as 8/16.

I wouldn't consider a breakeven 8/16 player to be competent.

Possibly "not terrible" or "moderately okay", but not "competent".

Anyway, I think even for a "not terrible" player, we should increase his range to at least
[77+, A9s+, ATo+, KTs+, KJo, QJs] if he has an open limping range here, and [55+, A8s+, A9o+, K9s+, KTo+,QTs+,QJo, JTs, T9s] if he does not.

I don't need a nap. I'm having fun actually.

----

Let's see your opening ranges. Please, show us.

Disagree with this.
In a game where you're likely to get 3-bet, many of these change to folds.
In a game where you're getting coldcalled a bunch, I want to raise every single hand that's even slightly above their cold-calling range.

Nope. But there are games where I'm inclined to take some hands that are normally raises and turn them into open-limps. I know that to a lot of the online players that's like a travesty, but there are plenty of live game situations in which that's a perfectly sensible thing to do.

The value of raising has embedded into it the value of getting other players to fold. In looser games, if you loose that incentive, raising loses value, and so there are hands you shouldn't raise. Specifically, there are hands that you've listed as 3-bets from SB that I think are far better off as calls in order to invite BB into the pot.

Also, in more passive games, when you're out of position, you're better off allowing the game to remain passive rather than trying to always be the aggressor. Your opponents' actions give you much more information when they are allowed to choose between betting and checking than when their choices are calling, folding, or raising.

Could you give an example of a hand that you would open limp from the HJ and describe the game condition that makes that correct?

Position matters. Even if I'm better than my opponents, being out of position against them means that hands lose value. So a straight hot-cold equity consideration isn't good enough.

In games where you're getting cold-called a bunch, limping is often better than raising, especially in earlier positions. Not only do you allow your opponents in with much worse hands (which is to your benefit because they're literally throwing money away playing random suited crap for one that they would otherwise fold for two), you will probably play better postflop poker. This is especially true of players whose inclination to c-bet is much too strong when their range is wide.

I don't know why you're obsessed with the HJ. We're talking about things in middle position (see the positions I've listed). I would have to have two ATCs to my left before I even thought about limping from there.

In early and early-mid position, there are game situations in which limping any pair is profitable for set-mining.

Always relative to the table conditions. There are players that can beat 8/16 but can't beat 50/100. At 50/100, they're not competent, even if they're competent (or better) at 8/16.

That's fine with me. I'm *still* not 3-betting 55 or A8s from SB against this player.

Ok then just one example of a hand besides a small pair you'd open limp from whichever position you choose?

With a coldcaller between, I am also just calling these. Remove the coldcaller and I would 3-bet.

A7s from UTG in a loose passive game. It's too good to throw away and not strong enough to raise out of position against an entire field.