How many 3bets to your EP raise does it take to make you cry and ragequit the table?

I've actually seen this, complete with obligatory cursing and verbal backlash. Guy took it as a personal affront.

This reminds me of a passage from the poker section of an older book called "Rules of Card Games" or something like that. I'd heard about it before but it was funny to actually read in print: in "most circles" check-raising is considered unethical.... wahhhh

Moral fiber, eh?

Yeah, I've noticed that it's the old guys that tend to get pissed off at things like that. As if there's some unwritten rule that you can't make certain moves at the table. Or suckout.

So word on the street is

open all PPs@6max

not at FR

(online ofc)

I heard there were actually rooms that did not allow CR as a rule.

lol. That's impossible!

Do you abuse the button from EP? Otherwise, how does our strategy EP have anything to do with how we play the button?

What is not to understand? How many times does it take at a table getting 3-bet for you to stop raising your 22+ pre in ep?

What's with all the poker strategy in this thread? Lame.

Oh well. Regarding small pocket pairs in EP in my typical 1/3 NL game, I'm open limping them every single time and don't think any other play is close. Folding is horrible in a weak game, we're simply passing up on far too much potential value. And I don't think raising is much less horrible, as now all we've done is most likely created a bloated pot, OOP, multiway, where we hate 88% of flops, plus have cut down hugely on our implied odds.

Really, playing small pocket pairs in a typicalish 100 BB live small stakes game is simply the easiest hand in the world to play. Limp. If raised, call the raise if raise size is okish regarding stacks, and especially if it looks like it's going to go multiway; otherwise, fold. If hit a set, bet/bet/bet. If don't hit a set, fold. I mean, this is pretty obvious ABC stuff; I don't get why we've had like 5 pages of discussions regarding it.

Obviously being OOP sucks in that we won't be able to get paid off as easily / for as much as if we were in position. But this doesn't mean we won't get paid off as much as we need to. My last session, I flopped one set in 10.75 hours. I believe I was in the BB after like 4 limpers, but no different from being UTG. Basically, one of the more meh cases happened, in that I bet $10 into $10, only got called in one spot, then bet $25 into $30, got called, and then villain didn't pay off a river bet. So in this meh situation, I made $43 (i.e. a 21x return on my investment). Sure, there are going to be the handful of times where a bet into 4 villains gets 4 folds (rare, right?). And there's also going to be the rare time we get set-over-setted and lose our 100 BB stack (I don't know if I'm running good on this situation or what, but in 650 hours I believe I've only been set-over-setted three times, getting stacked once, winning one of them lol, and losing a medium amount on the other). Being OOP, I doubt we're going to spew much without hitting a set (unlike in LP where where we might begin to take stabs at pots). But all of this is super dwarfed by the times a villain pays off a bet/bet/bet; in the example hand from my last session, if Villain paid off my PSB of $80 on the river (he tank/folded), my return on investment would have been an insane 61.5x.

I actually disagree with the comment that in order for small pocket pairs to be profitable in EP that we need hugenormous stacks as opposed to the typical 100 BB stacks. When hugenormous stacks start going into the middle versus typical passive players, we seriously have to start considering whether our small set is good. Typical players won't think much about stacking off lightly to bet/bet/bet with 50 BBs, and maybe upwards of 100 BBs over multiple street betting; but once a typical player is willing to get 200 BBs involved in a pot, all of a sudden our set of twos ain't lookin so hot. I would actually argue that small pocket pairs play better at smaller stacked tables than larger stacked tables.

Cliffs: Folding small pocket pairs in EP at a typical small stakes table is beyond ******ed. Quit poker if you are doing this. Limp. No set, no bet. Make monies. EZ game.

ETA: The only exception to this is whether your game isn't the typical limpfest / goes 5 ways with a raise anyways game. If 75% of the hands are raised / HU to the flop, then sure, don't play small pocket pairs in EP. But you also shouldn't be at this table to begin with.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Holy cow, it was 9 pages long?

Sure, if you have your settings on "Show 15 posts per page"

Go 100 posts per page, much better.

Regarding all of this...

IME, the game conditions have to be right to play a lot of the smaller pp's up front. Game conditions meaning it is limped around a lot or the raises are small and getting called in multiple spots. I'm speaking on behalf of a 1/2 game. I think there are times though when playing them up front can bite you in the butt. But of course this is coming from a guy who hasn't flopped a set in 3 years.

Default is for the cool kids.

If I were you, I would open fold AK as well, considering how bad you have been running with those =).

Seriously though, in a lot of games I open 22+ 67s+ 68s+ 7Ts+ KQo+, maaaybe KJo, but in tough games I fold AJo. I theory I might fold AQo but I don't play in games where I have to do that much.

Only in games with too many 3bets or short stacks do I not open 67s+ though. I might limp instead in some.

Opening suited connectors cannot be compared to calling with T6o which is obv terrible or even opening with QJo or QTo type hands UTG, which is a slightly losing play, or sometimes, a significantly losing play. Opening SCs EP when your range is overall tight is good on a lot of games, if you know how to play postflop.

Great, great post.

It's hard to flop sets when you fold pocket pairs preflop.

also, turning a set when you c-bet the flop and get called, or c-bet flop, and turn checks through and you bink the river. You probably improve like 5-6% of the time, accounting for not seeing 100% of rivers. 6% doesn't sound like much, but it's one out of sixteen or so, and in practice, that winds up being every couple days. If you see the turn 17 times, you can expect to improve once. So that's two flopped sets and one turned or rivered set. That's a big deal, actually.

I played an amusing hand recently:

I raised UTG with 55, got maybe 325 callers (ok, 5). Flop is A23 flush draw. Turn is a jack, checks through. River is a 5. I lead smallish, like 1/2 pot, sort of blocking since I plan to fold to a raise, and I want a call from 88 or KJ or whatever. Folds to the button, who is a German kid. He says "you hit the 5? You didn't hit the 5. I raise." I call, and I flip, and he mucks and says, "oh, you did hit the 5. You raise 55 in early position? I thought you were good."

Why does it say reader beware?

Maybe I'm just an uber poker nerd but I think this is an interesting debate.

In most llsnl tables, I need reasons to play tight, not the other way around.

^I think it's in reference to only brief flashes of brilliance amidst a sea of ghey flames?

Trust me I have no problem raising 55/66 UTG with a winning image and after I have built my stack. But raising 22-66 as a default play is terrible. Like I said I'm already raising 88+, AK, AQ, AJ, KQ and KJ. The fact that sabr said he would rather raise 33 then KJo/KQo I can't listen to him despite him being in the top 1%.

On top of that he still thinks image gets him paid off. Which is laughable.

In sabr's games image probably does get him paid off. I think my image works for and against me. In fact I know it does. If I could only use it for me more than against me.

One hour ago I called a 6x raise from the S/B in a 4 way pot.

My hand: 66

Flop comes 357, I check, PFR c-bets.

I fold.

Net loss $30.

Feel sleazy because I didn't hit my set.

C/r would have been fancy.

Yeah, this is also why I usually raise over limpers rather than limp behind with small pairs.

Most players check to the raiser, so I can often get another chance to hit a set if the flop is bad for c-betting. If you aren't the aggressor pre-flop you usually don't get that chance.

And to those who feel I use absolutes when playing poker or talking poker your wrong. Like ivey said "You know what hands you're not suppose to play upfront". Its not rocket science.

Don't you play in a 60BB cap game?

If so, why are you even arguing? I wouldn't open 33 UTG in a shortstack game either, but that is beside the point. We don't play in the same crappy structure as you.

Again, in a short capped game big cards play better than tiny pairs. Nobody is arguing that point, but the rest of us don't play in your structure. And LOL ego once again. That's your biggest obstacle to becoming a better player.

Every time a mediocre live reg shoves 80BB into me with top pair drawing dead to my set/straight because he's seen me make hero-calls in other spots and can't tell the difference, it is proof that my image makes a difference. But, I'm sure you know about my games and my image better than I do. More LOL ego.

I'm not talking about button, cutoff or high jack positions. A tag and a lag will raise about the same amount. I'm talking about goofy default utg ranges. Like I said nothing I say is completely absolute. Their are certain conditions I would raise light oop. But to argue as a default play is just wrong.