We should note too sometimes villain is a girl. I didn't mean to make this specific about r/f uber short.

Vs. player that don't respond well, to such a different style, we can open up their game and create more mistakes.

This also allows us to make deeper more dynamic adjustments to multiple opponents. when players aren't clear on why we might do this, their response might be any one of: flatting wide, 3bet shoving wide, flatting nut hands, shoving capped ranges, check folding flops, stop and going unblalanced ranges etc. Since many players are unfamiliar with these dynamics (since no one min raises like this), we open up an area of taboo vs many regs that are not capable of handling such adjustments on mass tables.

Firstly the general field does not play well, and has no experience dealing with these dynamics. 2nd it is not the only correct adjust and we have to remember there are often other players in the hand that changes the dynamics.


Do you mean to point out that all the regs that play good std. shove/minraise poker are all equally as good as adjusting to dynamic spots?
No there are plenty more than two and I'm not sure the amount is even finite.

I don't agree here, I think that when a player calls me oop they are almost always over their head especially in short stack poker, there is not much literature on it, and most people do nothing but spew when doing so.

Do you mean to say that players that we expect to have better early game postflop skills against, suddenly make up for that loss of edge in short stack poker?

Again when pointing out that its correct for them to flat and play correct post, we should see that we are giving them more opportunity to make more of a mistakes.
Why are we assuming they are competent? Why are we not addressing each players post flop tendencies? How did a competent player end up flatting a competent player oop?

You are saying uber nit but I am pointing out that you need to give a 3bet%, rather than a tag 'uber nit', should I post a hand history? Spots are all the same you take villains total 3bet%'s and decide if a min raise is profitable. I dont' need to give a spot, bvb bu vs bb, big antes tight players, bubble spots, etc. When the spot is there we take it.

Whats more important is too understand we can now min raise 8bbs with AA and not feel terrible exploitable. This can change the dynamics greatly.

Yes every regs mantra is they play differently from every other reg, and that every other reg plays like every other reg. So if that is at all true then everyone but the reg that states that is breaking even and quite robotic.

But with so many stables and skype contacts, every reg must realize every reg is being taught by every reg.

Well of course the villain can be a girl, I am not at all sexist. I am just using he to mean he/she (as even statutes pretty much everywhere do).

On competent players, I am not saying most of the field is competent. "Bad" isn't particularly useful as a tag unless u know in what way the villain is bad. In my experience, most fields aren't bad in a way that makes r/f a lot with micro-stacks a good idea.

Secondly, I am still not sure how you decide what to do before you know my stats. Additionally, a 3 bet % isn't a static figure it it takes a while to get an accurate idea. Also my 3 bet % in general won't necessarily correlate to how often I 3-bet when faced with a min-raise from a micro-stack.

Also, and this genuinely confuses me, why is your starting point "is a min-raise profitable"? I think with short-stacks we need to start asking when it would be more profitable then a shove.

I don't really think every reg thinks he is unique. Most regs I know just want to know they are playing like other regs whom they respect. And this includes incredibly strong players with huge ROI's and winnings in the millions. Also I don't want to be unique for the sake of it. It's just an empirical fact that I routinely end up in bizzare spots which few people find themselves in.

On position, it becomes less important as stack sizes decrease. As stack sizes reduce position matters less and pot odds matter more. Also I want to point out that when you say

"Why are we assuming they are competent? Why are we not addressing each players post flop tendencies? How did a competent player end up flatting a competent player oop?"

You are the one assuming that defending one's blind is a sign of incompetence. This is certainly not true as a blanket principle. Also, while we are debating the merit of these raises, it kind of begs the question to assume that the player making these raises is competent.

You also argue that it "gives them an opportunity to make a mistake". This is true of any play other than a fold, but I am not sure why this matters so much given that it also gives you the same opportunity. Should we be assuming that we will always play perfectly and our opponents will make mistakes?

No I wouldn't judge you as sexist for something like that, its just fun to point out and maybe there are ladies reading this that find it fun too.

I think you should reevaluate that thought, but regardless, there will be some non zero % of players we should make such considerations vs, and I think its big enough to keep in our game. Sorry if i pulled this part out of context.

With no read we use a general strategy we develop from experience, and on stars if we don't know the player we might assume they are a rec player.
Yes you are pointing out the considerations of poker.
Maybe, but maybe that is not fundamental. i think though I added that adjustment in my op. We cannot compare the two if we do not have each min raise and shove range first.

Maybe most importantly if we start with all the profitable min raise hands, and look at all the hands we are forced to raise/call we might be able to develop shove ranges based on min raise fundamentals, this might be more direct and simpler than conventional methods.

I hear many regs claiming to be lag and creative esp late game but I don't really have any (or very few) marked as that.
What will be really bizzare is 2 bizzare regs classhing in the same bizzare spot.


Yes this allows villain to make a big mistake which often happens because they lack experience in such spots. Position matters less, but that is not to say villain will therefore play correctly

Competent players will tend toward eq response and so our indifference will often tend us the same way. Perhaps forcing us to shove all hands. More often than not, because of poor shortstack/postflop/minraise knowledge, we expect to have the edge ip.

Its a catch22 isn't it that if I am correct about such adjustments, then many players who don't use such tools are not able to properly respond to them?

If our opponents are not using the same tools then we can begin to assume they cannot counter such tools. In that we expect to make less mistakes. And as we have more experience playing post flop with < 10bbs we begin to gain more edge in these spots. It is true to we can make a mistake, but we can make a mistake taking any line.

As we get strong at these adjustments I think we can learn how to flat ip with short stacks vs players with weak min raise/post flop short stack games as well.

Most of what you are saying makes sense and I figure our disagreement is mainly empirical. That said, I do want to point out: "but we can make a mistake taking any line"- This is not true. If we make a + EV shove there is no scope for us to make a mistake later in the hand.

This is true especially in a vacuum, but I am we know that sometimes a +ev shove is itself a mistake and more importantly sometimes the most +ev play is not the most optimal. (thx for the discussion)