I agree that people arent stacking off with TPTK for 100 BB's loke they used to in most places.

Im going to text Garick right now and ask him to respond to this in regards to our game at the Casino here. You know me, I am all about self evaluating myself and now I want a second opinion based off of what Mpethy said about egos. Not that Im taking it the wrong way or anything. I just want to see someone elses opinion.

Here are two factors that my game has that your guy's do not. First its a 2-5 hour round trip drive (Didnt come here to fold) and second the game is only 2.5 years old. Before this they played only 2-5 Limit. Our game isn't necessarily in its infancy, but it probably has not yet passed its toddler stage.

Mpethy and venice- What days and hours are you playing?

Applying this example to the AQ vs. A5 hand is flawed because we’re not talking about pf shoving, we’re talking about a hand that will involve multiple decisions over multiple streets.

Those in the thread who say we should always always always “charge the most we can” pf if worse hands will call oversimplify the problem and make a similar error.

As several have said, SPRs and post flop play dynamics are super important here. A top pair hand like AQ can get in some hairy, hairy SPR spots OOP if you don’t manage pot size well. IMO, there are def cases where betting less pre is preferable even when you’re ahead of the in-position villain or villians range(s).

I really like mpethy's comments, and for the most part agree...but to say the era of stacking off light is over, is wrong.

In the last month, I've had sessions where I've won 3 buy-ins or better a few times, and in all of them, I've gotten tourists to stack off with TPTK or less for 200bbs in every single one of them.

In one hand at Aria 1/3, I was HU against a villain who had AQ against my AK. I had $650 and he had me covered.

The flop was AK6 rainbow. I bet, he raised, I called. Blank turn. I checked. He bombed the turn. Again, I called, knowing i'm shoving a half-pot-sized bet on the river with any card. the river was a J. I pushed, he called.

Insta-stack-off 200+ bb with TPGK.

Last night, I saw two players - both with over 400 bbs - get it all in on a 542 rainbow flop. One player had AA. The other had TT. 400 bbs deep.

One of these players also got it all in with another over 300 bbs deep with QJ on a Jack-high flop.

So while I certainly agree with Mpethey's thoughts on raising, I have to disagree with Venice's claim that Vegas LLHE isn't still quite fishy and quite good.

There is not really anything to be gained by discussion when my only argument is that games IME play differently from what the greens are telling us. I will just say that is my opinion.

Also that the thread has kind of been derailed. The initial argument was actually about rise sizing when we know these conditions exist It was really about big fat value v post flop manouverability (or however you want to express it.)

Few other points. Agree with Mpethy about losing players to a large extent and with Venice about not stacking off with 1 pair for 100BB. IMO all the more reason to exploit these peoples desperation to see a flop and get lots of money in pre with a strong range if that is when they make their biggest mistakes. The only way for good player to exploit us here is by folding hands they otherwise would have called a smaller raise with. How much EV is that losing us? Are we really bummed that good players are folding to us when we are OOP with a high SPR. I'm not saying we are losing nothing but probably not as much as we gain by playing a much bigger pot against the guy who will put in 8bbs with A5.

Same thing goes for dropping the weakest part of your range because we are sizing big. How much EV are we giving up. Not sure it is more than we gain from stacking donks. Also, in tougher games, getting ALL the donks money before he gives it to somebody else should be an even greater priority.

Mpethy, your points seem very reasonable. So much so that my instinct is examine my thinking and to make sure I’m not making the error of ego that you describe.

Would you agree that the Las Vegas market is unique and that table selection is of additional importance here? I find it interesting that my top two rooms aren’t included in the list of rooms where you play. I wonder if you sit in as tourist-heavy games as I do. It’s my contention that if you table select correctly, then you can get away with playing a style that would be extremely exploitable online. I’ve heard Limon advocate such a live strategy at 5/10 and I think maybe even 10/20. I’m surprised that your estimation of 1/2 play is so high.

So, I don't know if I count as a "respected member of the forum," but I was already preparing my response when I read APD's post above indicating he was texting me IRT this thread, so I def gotta respond now.

I think most of you arguing against the big raise are arguing "don't do it, it sticks out like a sore thumb." A few, most notably mpethy, are arguing against it because it limits your ability to open medium strength hands, because you either have to bomb them too, in which case you are OOP AND up against a range that is better than your hand, or vary the open sizing wildly and then will find yourself playing with your hand exposed. Fair assessment?

The other side seems to be "raise whatever gets you the number of callers you're looking for and is still getting called by worse." This argument is all about FAT VALUE. Fair assessment?

If I have the arguments down correctly, I am firmly in the camp of "it depends." Given the standard table dynamics at the Midnight Rose in Cripple Creek Colorado, I raise big for fat value all day. Even the regs there probably put you on TT+, AQ+ when you do that, but they still can't resist seeing a flop with any pair, AXs, or any 2 broadway. Then, depending on the player, many will stack off with TPNK+ (even if they put most of your range on hands tha can beat that) and fold to a c-bet with anything below. In these game conditions, there is *SOOO* much value that setting up SPRs for the hand you hold becomes more important than unexploitable sizing and position.

Also, when standard OR sizes (other than pot sweeteners) range from 5xBB-9xBB, with 10-15xBB not being very rare, 8xBB doesn't really stand out. There are still LOTS of regs who make really big raises with small-medium PPs to "protect 'em."


OTOH, every table I've played at a large casino or a California poker room in the last two years has had at least one, and usually two players who will read you like a book if you do that. You pretty much need to have position on them or have a strong read that they're folding PF no matter what you do to get away with that sheet. Since in EP that rarely applies, 8x open in EP is not something I'd do much on those tables, no matter what hand I hold.

In the hand from the original argument, if 8xBB is not an unusual size and is getting flatted by A5s, then I like the sizing very much as long as we're not too deep.

This is my system when I play 1-2. I stick to it with my entire raising range.

I see a bunch of comments directed at me since my last post. Unfortunately, I have to go to work. I'll get to replying when I get back.

They mention commitment decisions and maximizing expectation when you get AI. I would add maximized expectation when V folds to a c-bet on a wiffed flop.

They continue:

Quick statement here as I'm on my iPhone. I think it is a huge mistake to think that fish make the most mistakes preflop. In fact I think it is by far the street they play best (it's still bad). I'm just saying this because it has been stated or implied a few time in thIs thread. Also, betting large just because someone will call with worse is not enough information. For example, if you know someone will always call if they have A5o then would you always raise large with A6o? Just because "calling with worse" is in someone's calling range does not make it a valid reason for a large preflop raise oop with AQ. I strongly feel that one of the largest leaks in these games is bloating pots preflop and making it harder for fish to make post flop mistakes. Post flop is where money is made.

I will take more time later, good thread.

Too late for me to edit, so I guess will have to be a mod. Sorry, just cracking, didn't realize it would tilt you.

Wait listed at the MGM, so inane a few moments.

My estimation of Vegas 1/2 is that the games are soft and beatable. That's not a high opinion. But saying they are soft is not the same as saying that they are populated by players who aren't thinking or will call $16 with the same range they will call $8.

I have never played live cash anywhere other than vegas, so I don't have an opinion of other markets. In Vegas, I am of the opinion that it ought to be the softest games available in US casinos, because we have a steady supply of tourists that local casinos elsewhere don't have. But I could be completely off base there; I have zero basis for comparison.

For the people who claim that it's easy to profit against people who vary their raises, maybe you can explain how?

Someone raises UTG in a 1/2 game to 10 dollars and shows pocket QQs.

Later they raise to 8 dollars in middle position and take the pot down after a T84 rainbow flop with a continuation bet.

Later there are two limpers and Hero is on the button and raises to 17.

How do you profit from Hero's play?

I'm pretty sure IP relative to that player I'd be 3 betting his smaller raises.

I normally play Wednesday through Sunday, and start any time between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., and try to go 8 hours. So, peak time, afaik.

I kept sort of half-assed track tonight watching people's raise sizes. From what I saw tonight, open raises from $8-12 got called by at least one player the vast majority of the time--like 80%--and open raises to $15 or more got called 3 out of 8.

Obviously I am guesstimating on the smaller raises, as there were just too many to keep an accurate count. Tomorrow, if I remember, I'll keep a count of $12 and $15 or more.

My table tonight was ridiculously tight, anyway.

I'm not really interested in the rest of this debate, but I strongly agree with everything I quoted, especially the bold. And I play outside of Vegas.

I'm not playing pro, so I'm weekends only. I'll do one session mid/late morning to mid/late afternoon and then a night session.

The times I've played during the week are usually populated by regulars, mainly "old man coffee" during the day and an assortment of loose passives at night.

I find is so interesting that mpethy and venice disagree with everyone, including myself, when I usually agree with almost 100% of everything they say. What's going on here?

Do you realize how hard it is to realize that someone is raising based off of hand strength? If I'm never showing my cards other than at showdown then you aren't going to have that much of a sample size to work with. Also, there is a sort of pseudo-"inherent randomization" involved when you do this after limpers (especially if someone straddled!). Let's say you raise 7xBB with a premum pair and only 4xBB with a lesser hand. Two different raise sizes, but when you open raise $14 with a premium and raise $14 with a lesser hand after three limpers it looks the same.

Your absolute raise size should be "randomly" all over the map during the course of the game. This makes it super hard for the average player to figure out what you are doing.

Disclaimer: I'm sure mpethy, venice, and all the really good posters on here can deduce that someone is doing this relatively easily. But I bet even the average 2p2er wouldn't be able to do so which makes it unlikely that the average 1/2 player can ever make this observation.

I think what is happening is that we are all playing the same game, but not the same table dynamics. Put me in Vegas and Mpethy in CO and both of our thoughts may change.

FWIW... I am completely on the it depends/table dynamics/not at all games bandwagon. Just because where I am at I would make large raises doesn't me where you are at I would do the same thing. I think I have stated that throughout the thread though.

I asked this question to a handful of notable pros once and was told that my thought is incorrect, because whether you think you are or not, you're raising based on the quality of your hand. I tried to argue it based off of using RNG's or situations to vary PF raise sizes, and could never get them to sway.

Since then I have stuck with a specific multiplier (3-5x) and added an extra bet for every limper. Seems to be working for me, but it's still early.

If you do randomize your PF raises, what are you using to create the randomness?

I am raising based of the quality of my hand. My argument is that the bet sizes end up looking so random that even though I am following a "formula," it looks so random that it is almost impossible for the average non-pro onlooker to realize it.

Mpethy and venice argue for standardized bet sizing to hide the strength of your hand. I argue for the other extreme, perceived random (that isn't, in reality, random) bet sizing that hides the strength of your hand.

And your "notable pros" aren't going to be relating the argument to low stakes poker. In their games, standardized bet sizing is superior since their opponents are skillfully looking for ways to exploit them.

Good point here. I don't think Raymer, Nejad, or Furst are going to be slumming it at the 1/2 very often. Still though, it doesn't take much to narrow down the PF range of a player who varies his bets based on the quality of his hand. He either raises large with weak hands or vice versa, and that becomes a pattern. Right?

Definitely agree with Tao here. It's the same reason balance isn't necessary in 99% of LLSNL games. There just aren't enough hands being played, and going to show down that anyone will ever catch on. There aren't enough regs, there's enough droolers, and enough people who just don't care that you can absolutely get away with altering your raise size depending on the strength of your hand.


Also your range in a lot of spots for raising preflop is going to be necessarily tight anyways so you might as well make it as big as possible.

The only time I'll not alter my raise size is in an unopened pot from mp or lp as that is the only time that needs any type of balance.