Let's play a blogger cash game Wednesday during the Mookie!
Sorry for the short notice, but I only recently learned I would be available Wednesday. I hope at least a few people are able to make it out.
I've changed the format from last time. The game will now be $2.5/5 NL deep stacks, which allows a lot of room for play while offering stakes that many bloggers might be used to playing at a casino. That means a $500 minimum buy-in and $1,000 maximum buy-in. I encourage everyone to turn out.
In the first Blogger Hard Money Game, Weak Player was the big winner as he accumulated a gigantic $4,000 stack. Waffles, Fuel55, Bone_Daddy84, Rake Feeder, Cmitch, RecessRampage and Poker Grind also played. I think everyone enjoyed the competition and the big pots. And a few people (myself included) liked the profits!
To join, either contact me through Yahoo! chat (smizmiatch) or search for my Full Tilt screenname (smizmiatch) and jump in.
I've wanted to make this a monthly event, but it's been tough because of my schedule. So if there's enough interest, maybe someone else can share organizing duties with me in the future.
In last night's cash game play, I had AK on a Kd5c7c flop cracked by presto after I had reraised to $100 preflop in a 5/10 game with 100 BB stacks.
When calling my raise to $100, pocket fives will have a very difficult time making money in the long run. My opponent will only hit his set about one in eight times, so he would need to get paid off eight times more than the amount he has to call to justify it. In this case, he had initially raised to $30 and had to call $70 more. He needed to earn about $560 on average.
I don't believe my opponent will get paid off enough to make that call worthwhile. With my AK, I would have to both hit one of my cards, he would have to hit his set and I would have to stay in. I could write out a lot of math about various outcomes, but I'll leave that to you if you don't believe me:
Calling 3-bets preflop with low pocket pairs is not profitable if you have to count on hitting a set to win the pot.
I knew that when my opponent called my reraise. The question was, did my opponent know he was making a poor play?
If he knew what he was doing, he probably wouldn't have made the call with a low pocket pair and I could have confidently bet my hand, knowing my opponent didn't have a set. If he didn't know what he was doing, it's much more likely he was trying to hit hard and stack me.
I could have gotten away from the hand against either type of player. But even when I pay off my opponent, he'll probably lose money in the long run calling 3-bets with low pocket pairs in hopes that he'll hit.
6 comments:
Regards to the cash game, what I said on email.
As for the post, great post. I have been thinking about that a lot more recently (obv) and I feel that I am on to something... not quite sure what but I feel myself changing (in a good way)... I just have to capture what that "thing" is. Great post. Gives me even more to think about. Good luck tomorrow!
Really great post. I would love to see a follow-up post (or two, or three) expanding on this very important implied odds issue.
I think implied odds are also a function of your general image. LAGs can make RR calls with small pairs and get paid much than TAGs and NITs.
I don't advocate calling 3-bets with mid-pairs, but sometimes (for me about 20%) you have to call there because
1. at 5/10, you get 3-bet light constantly,
2. overs are in your range to 3-bet;
3. There has to be fold equity in raggy flops. Anyway to estimate this additional equity, i.e. raggy or well coordinated flop where he might force you to fold?
So many good posts going on about AK (I know this point was really about low pocket pairs) which is a hand that I really struggle with as I am getting back to NL play.
Even the Stox guys have an have an article on 2+2 Mag this month about 3 betting and the like which I'm sure AK will be discussed. I haven't read it yet.
My question regarding this post is regarding table size? Was this HU or 6 max or FR? Obviously AK is in your range and 55 doesn't have to hit a set to win; albeit it probably does to get paid off.
Great Post
I agree with a point BoneDaddy makes: that there is fold equity to be gained when the flop comes ragged, and also when the flop is scary.
I'm a big fan of capitalising on weakness and taking advantage of uncertainty. In position, calling or raising the c-bet on the right board (particularly ragged, connected or paired boards), can prove very profitable. Sometimes this can even be done out of position, but more care is needed in choosing the situation.
While this obviously cannot be done too often, a well-timed smooth call with subsequent aggression can often cause thinking players to lay down TPTK/overpairs with hardly any hesitation...
Post a Comment