20 and 25 dollar raises are typical for 2/5 anything higher is only going to be a nit raising, people do fold to raises and they don't always play 40% vpip.

That actually sounds like it would be the sort of game you might encounter in a mid-week daytime game with a bunch of nitty regulars who respect raises. It should be within the range of typical games one might encounter.

No, all types of players raise ******ed amounts in 2/5nl for all kinds of reasons. Sometimes, the table opens up and the gambool is contagious or people start tilting or the drinks are flowing or the natural progression of the table is such that $30, $35, and even $40 raises become common. Or thinking players try to isolate the calling station and knows that if they raise $45 everyone else folds and the station calls. Basically, there are a variety of reasons why raise amounts can grow beyond $25

And i'm not saying people always play 40% vpip. I'm saying that there are plenty of rec fish or donks that think absolutely nothing of calling a big raise because they are sitting on $800, you "only" raised $40 and they have 69s and they love to play 69s because its their favorite hand.

I think we lose value when we start thinking in rigid terms about what players will and will not call. We have to be fluid and constantly testing the table limits.

I will often sit in an ABC 2/5nl game and I notice that every preflop raise is $20 - $25. Then I raise $35 and the table gives me the weird "don't you know we only raise $25" look. They all fold, next time, I raise $35 again, they all fold. Next time I raise $35 and THEN 3 players call me. Next thing you know, the table raise level has risen to $30/$35. Then I get a big hand and raise $40 and I get 1-2 callers thinking i'm "stealing" because i've been raising so much or they feel its their duty to "teach me a lesson", etc. etc.

I'm a big fan of giving our villains an opportunity to make mistakes. And if we are too rigid in our thinking (especially in regards to preflop raises) then we lose a ton of value.

Or put another way. If you aren't raising $35+, how do you know your villains won't call $35+. And if they aren't calling $35+, how can you use that to your advantage? And after betting $35+ a few times, what does that do to the table dynamic?

point taken, dgi, and it generally holds in party games (like the amazing foxwoods game I used to play in)
This isn't a drunks game I'm playing in, although there is some looseness obv and I will try a slightly larger raise next time. The question is though, would I rather have 6 people calling with garbage for $12 or 3 people calling with decent hands for $16?

I'm not sure how you can say that whatever raise size gets 1-2 callers is *the* right size. When drunks are in the game, they are my best friends and they can be mercilessly isolated. But usually big multiway pots are my bread and butter.

The disparity between my hand and the others is that either a drunk/straddle was in the lineup or someone else raised and hero got to 3-bet. Obviously then, you can bring the hammer down but opening utg to $20 in my 1/2 game is ridiculous

Just try it. You will be surprised by the outcome, I guarantee it. Have one game where 100% of all your preflop raises are $20 for the entire game. I guarantee you will be surprised by the outcome.

Interesting analysis digi, manipulating the raise size is something I dont do since I'm not always raising for value.

The problem with this logic is that I DON'T want a game where 8 BB raises are typical for the table.

When most players I play with only have 100 BB or less, I don't want to turn the game into a pre-flop game. That goes against where my edge is.

Again, if your game is full of players like this, then sure, nit it up and overbet your monsters. When most of the player pool does not play like this, your simple strategy of "wait for KK and then raise 10BB" doesn't work so well...

Again, I don't WANT to play at a table where a 7-8BB raise is standard, because it would force me to play like a nit and kill my ability to play marginal hands that have implied odds, and get into more pots with players who are terrible post-flop.

My pre-flop raises are intended to strike a balance between gaining initiative, getting value, creating post-flop FE, and disguising my relatively wide range.

Of course, but most players tend to suck worse post-flop even more than pre-flop. They call when they should fold, call when they should raise, raise when they should call, etc... By making large raises pre-flop you kill your own ability to make plays post-flop and turn the game into waiting for big pairs and then shoving the flop. If you play in soft enough games this may work, but it's still not optimal.

Post this in any of the online forums and you'd get laughed out of there.

Agree 100% with sabr.

Here is one of m LEAST fave donk problems: NOT nit adjusting. (Big up to all you nits crushing these games)

Hand: 5-5nl
Hero was uninvolved
Fish 1: dentist, loose gambler type. Bad, but not super-crazy.
Fish 2: 60 y.o nit. We've been at the table for 5hr+ together. Nit has played a bit loose pre in limped pots. And ultra-fit-fold post.

Pre: 7+limpers (hero actually folded for once)

Flop: K7Jhh. Check to fish. Fish bets 35. Nit calls. Rest fold.

Turn: 3h
Fish bets 75. Nit raises to 225.
This was his first raise postflop all day.
Fish calls

River blank
Fish check. Nit ship for about 300. Fish call

Nit shows the stone nuts w A5hh
Fish shows kjo

I'm a fan of increasing raises till you hit the sweet spot.

This morning at $1/$2 when the table opened I started off at $12 and worked up to $18 6 hours later. Meanwhile the $7 raisers stayed at $7 the whole time. IME over time your raise size becomes "your raise size" so by the end of my session even my $18 UTG opens would sometimes get called by 4 players. A few months ago I got up to $24 - I make it $24 from SB after 4 limpers and meet up with CO's J9o at showdown. Limp call $24 with J9o at $200 effective stacks - donkalicious.

This is a very typical hand for me.

I limp in EP with AJo in a 1/3 game. Villain in MP raises to 15 with a range that includes almost any two broadway, most pocket pairs, and some other hands. BB calls. I call.

Flop is JT2 with two spades. I check, villain bets 25. BB folds. I call.

Turn is a red four. I check, villain bets 50. I call.

River is a non-spade king. I check, allowing villain a chance to bluff. He bets 75. I call. Villain says "good call" and turns over 88, lamenting that he thought he could represent AK.

Against a less aggressive victim I would play the hand differently. On a low river card, I might bet to represent a bluff with a hand like KQ, with a bet size that I think would be called by a hand like QT.

I would characterize this sort of player as a likely tournament donk who probably does okay in tournaments but over-values aggression in cash games. It is one of my favorite type of fish to victimize.

Its a Shame, you are missing tons of value.

We should be happy to play ANY SPOT where we have an edge and one of the absolute BIGGEST leaks LLSNL rec fish have is in their preflop game. So your discomfort with pushing your preflop edge is costing you incredible value post flop. Because when our villains make a preflop mistake (i.e. calling a raise with an RIO hand) the magnitude of their mistakes are GEOMETRIC!!!

Talk about missing out on opportunity and value. You don't have to "nit it up" and wait for KK, all you have to do is ensure your range is ahead of your villains. If my villain's calling range is SCs, suited gapers, Axs, Kxs, 22+, then I can profitably raise 10bb pre with JT+, 88+. This isn't opinion, this is mathematical fact.

You have the wrong mindset about all this. Being able to raise 8bb gives you enormous power and flexibility in manipulating your opponents. You can adjust your raise sizing vs position from 2bb - 8bb giving you a more dynamic range and ability to manipulate situations based on image, position, villain tendencies, etc. You can still play SCs, Suited gapers, Axs and use implied odds, position, etc. Its just that being "able" to raise up to 8bb (or more) allows you to BETTER exploit your villains.

Have no idea why you can't see this. You seem to be so rigid and inflexible in your thinking on how poker should be played.

You can do the same by having a more dynamic raising range from 3bb - 8bb. Again, its not like an 8bb raise is compulsory, but having the ability to raise 8bb vs villains that will call your 8bb raise just as soon as they'd call a 3bb raise is an enormous point of value you are missing out on.

This is not always true. There are some players who suck worse post flop than preflop. But there are some players who suck preflop more than post. And again, mistakes in poker are geometric so by pushing your preflop edge you end up with more value post flop and that increased value is geometric. A 4bb increase in the preflop raise can result in a 20bb+ increase in the value you extract from villain by the river. And i'm not talking about stack offs, simply betting each street.


This is straight from the 1980s school of poker and is just wrong. 100bb is plenty enough for us to maneuver post flop. If our raising range is greater than V's calling range and we have position on V then we can raise ANY amount preflop and it will be profitable. And this goes DOUBLE for if we have a post-flop edge vs our villains.

I mean, I just don't get how you don't see how flawed your argument is? How in the world is it not profitable to get our villains to call for more than their hand is worth preflop when our range crushes theirs and when our postflop edge is greater than theirs?

Its not about whether the game is soft or not. Its whether you are the better player or not and better able to exploit and adjust to the table dynamics.

ANd this is why many online players don't do as well in the live game because they are too rigid in their thinking about how poker should be played and they don't properly adjust to live villains. They lose value because they cannot properly comprehend just how terribad some of our live villains are.

All i'm advocating is exploiting our villains leaks. And one of our villains' biggest leaks is preflop. But you don't want to exploit that leak, you just want to focus on the post flop leaks??? And this is a leak on your part because preflop mistakes will result in a geometric increase in value post flop. And if we have the postflop edge (as you claim) then that is even better news for us.

ya, lol at 'i wish they would play more optimally so i could play 'real poker', instead of just sitting here and collecting money'.
or ;'I wish they would play more optimally so i could play less optimally? (PF)'<<< that one just hurts my brain.
I guess it comes down to what you feel the object of the game is?
If it's to get your opponents chips, then obv you want them to call as much as possible when they are a dog, and the stacks sizes can never justify it.
if it's something else, then 'move up to where they...'

Playing 1-2 nl at 2am, 1 limper who is a very passive calling station, other player in small blind has been inactive. I check in BB with K6. Both players have leas than $90 behind.
Flop ($6) 9h 6h 6x checks to me I bet out $20 and both call, turn Kh and I shove, both call, one with pair of 9s other hit the flush. I've never bet trips like that otf but thought the results were interesting.

I'm with dgi on the PF raise sizing. Bigger raises = bigger profits when you're ahead of their range.

Today 3/5, I have V covered:

One limper, I make it $45 w/QQ. BB (stack $300) calls, limper folds. Flop is JT9 rainbow. BB checks, I bet $75, BB shoves, I call. Board runs out K8, no flush. BB turns over Q8s for flopped straight. We chop.

I see this type call all day, everyday for 6x - 10x PF raise. They refuse to let go of the trashy hands they love to play. Just keep increasing the size until you can isolate one or two players.

I found myself getting bored and careless toward the end of sessions where I had slowly drained off nearly a buy-in. I wouldn't top off the last 30 min or hour and would drift into a short stack mentality, finally getting in my short stack in less than optimal situations.

Now, I always top off, or leave.

A good quarter of my profits this year have come in the last 5 minutes of ay where people are far too willing to gamble after struggling all night with whatever they have left. It's appalling what they're willing to call their entire stack with.

Once I changed my mentality, from having a winning session/chase my losses and wanting to break even, to always keeping a full stack waiting for the good spots...my game changed alot.
I don't care if I book a win/loss anymore, just have a full stack and wait for the prey...
Trying to run ur last 50$ to the initial buy in is so dumb, makes me sad how I used to be that guy

Sigh, you just don't get it.

I wasn't only talking about Hero raising. You were arguing that you try to make 8BB opens feel standard for the entire table. I disagree, because you have to play nitter when it costs a lot more to see a flop. When the entire table is opening to 8BB, you can no longer play hands like 55 or 87s because it gets too expensive to see a flop. Hands like these are very profitable vs weak players because they typically play their hands face-up so you have good implied odds. But not when it costs 8-10% of your stack just to see a flop.

Again, I play in way nitter games than you. A big portion of my player pool consists of nitfish whose biggest leaks are being passive with medium hands, bet-sizing, and playing their hands face-up. You don't crush my game by playing like a nit and overbetting. You have to beat them slowly by being more aggressive than they are, and occasionally hitting weird hands that they can't put you on.

You're trying to exploit HUGE edges preflop, and that's fine, but when these edges simply don't exist ($40 opens in my game simply don't get called often), you have to try to exploit smaller edges, but do it more often.

Anytime I see someone raise 8BB with KK and 3BB with 55 I immediately start 3-betting them light when they raise 3 BB. If I can exploit something this easily, then in theory everyone can. Of course most players suck at poker and won't exploit you this way, but when you play in a nitty game with the same players all the time, and don't have the option of switching tables, balance is important.

There are some nits in my game who play in the way you advocate, at least pre-flop. None of them is a winner (or at best is a very small winner). I've had one guy tell me "man I don't know how you do it, these games are terrible because there aren't enough fish." But I've found a way to beat this game, because all the regfish are fish to me.

I don't need to to say any more because it would be redundant. You're trying to say that I'm incapable of adjusting, when you couldn't be further from the truth and a lot of your post is a giant strawman. I've recognized that the proper adjustment in my game is to play my style, which includes a lot of game theory and "balance." When ABC poker doesn't work you have to get more creative.

Not all games are like Vegas. I think I play in a very similar game to SABR and play a close style to him. There is a difference between seeing different people everytime you sit down who are willing to gamble and regulars who you play with often. They all have leaks, though. You just have to exploit them differently.

Seems pretty clear that their regular games are so different from each other that they are both correct.

No they're not, the difference is sabr strategy exploits the regs as well as the fish

lol come on

The worst you can say about an online winner is that he tries to "balance too much" and maybe doesn't exploit some edges hard enough.

Meanwhile, most live $2/5 and $5/10 players can't beat $1/2 online because they have too many fundamental leaks that are disguised by playing against huge numbers of live fish that don't exist online.

So yeah, maybe live players exploit huge fish a bit more in certain specific spots (like, making a massive squeeze with AA that the fish will call anyway). Put them in a tougher game and who wins?

Every casino has regs and if you play long hours which you guys should, at the end of the night you should at least have 3 regs at your table.

Yeah, I can buy that conclusion.

If SABR's games are as nitty as he claims, then I can agree with most of what he says.

Perhaps the source of our disagreement is the disparity between the type of games we play in? Apparently SABRs games are made up of primarily nitty thinking players. Whereas my games are primarily comprised of aggro donks and clueless players playing for fun...

SABRs strategy may be +EV vs the fish, but it loses "some" value against the fish. SABRs strategy seems more specialized against competent players.

The fundamental difference between our approaches in my opinion is the root base assumption. To me, SABR's strategy is based on exploiting competent players and giving himself the most room to maneuver post flop. My strategy is based on exploiting rec fish and aggro spew monkeys and aggressively pushing all edges (preflop and post flop).

In any event, we've both outlined enough of our philosophies that you can make up your own mind. ILCD believes SABR is right, fair enough.