Posted Thu Mar 02, 2006 8:03 pm GMT by AHBrownell
So I read an article by Negreanu that discussed a hand he played in a 10k tourney recently. He had 8 7 and raised 2.5x BB. Two players next to him and the BB called. Flop came 10  9 5 . BB checks to him, he bets 1/2 the pot. Person to his left called. The button raised to 4x his raise. BB folded. Negreanu raised all-in and is quickly called by the button who showed TT. The button hit a 5 on the turn and the full house held up.
Reading about this hand has completely WOWed me as a player and has vastly altered the way I look at poker.
I have started experimenting with what I term "the big play" - by throwing reraises of large amounts (4x to all-in) against my opponents (very often with a check raise) when I have premium draws such as:
Ax suited flush draws
Flush draws with a pair
Flush draws with an inside straight draw
Flush draws with an open-ended straight draw
Open-ended straight draws with a pair
The secret is to play "big" hands almost identically (better than top pair). So sets, three of a kind, two pair, etc!
What I have learned is:
1) When you are on a draw people tend to put you on supreme hands here and fold some hands including weak kicker top pair, top kicker top pair, and even two pair - which are ahead against you!
2) When you are on a draw people with some of these hands and NUT hands will call the rest of the time, but in these situations you are 30%+ to win the hands and will very often win anyway! (Often putting players on tilt) - in addition the hands that win your hand very rarely effect your opponents' hands).
3) When you have the power hands people will sometimes begin calling you with marginal hands - (top pair for instance), and these players are drawing nearly dead against your made hands and will lose 1/3 of the time against your draws!
I read of this strategy previously, but I didn't understand why it would work until now. Its AGGRESSION! The reason the play works is because of the way good players and bad players play. Good players play tightly - most will fold to reraises and check raises if they are holding only top pair. Bad players are willing to go broke with top pair. If you combine these you screw with the good players - getting them to fold hands that are winning, and you screw the bad players because even they will call you very often have them drawing nearly dead!
I am curious if anyone else has played with a variation of this play - what you found works, doesn't work, or just generally what you think of it as an idea. 
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Thu Mar 02, 2006 8:34 pm GMT by 1988 TR
Keep in mind that he had an open ended, flush draw which is much better than just 9 outs (A flush draw).
Posted Thu Mar 02, 2006 8:48 pm GMT by AHBrownell
Let me clarify something.
The only draws that I do this play with are:
Ax suited flush draws
Flush draws with a pair
Flush draws with an inside straight draw
Flush draws with an open-ended straight draw
Open-ended straight draws with a pair
Bottom line - you don't want to make this play without a PREMIUM draw.
Posted Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:31 pm GMT by tame_deuces
I think you will find that most NL players with some understanding of the game play this way.
Draws are very good hand because of the equity they have versus made hands. Essentially they are not so vulnerable with aggressive playing versus a made hand compared to a weaker made hand. Also weak made hands will often fold right away to this type of play.
This is also why some NL players desperately try to explain to other NL players that the distinction 'drawing hand' is useless. The only thing that matters is the strength of your hand and the perceived/real strength of your opponent's hand + possible implied odds from your hand if you are forced to play on if your opponent continues with his hand.
Posted Sat Mar 04, 2006 4:25 pm GMT by howzit
you've got the general idea down. now go and experiment what situations warrant an aggressive approach with big hands and draws. (not all situations warrant this type of approach)
Posted Sat Mar 04, 2006 4:54 pm GMT by zinn0
I always try and get all of my chips in on the flop with an OESFD. Always.
Posted Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:21 pm GMT by suitedaces84
| zinn0 wrote: | | I always try and get all of my chips in on the flop with an OESFD. Always. |
Why?
Posted Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:28 pm GMT by zinn0
I play SnG's almost exclusively, and I can't think of a better spot to get all-in. In most cases, you are a favorite, (although slight) to win the hand. We all know that SnG's are about chip accumulation. These hands are ideal to do it with.
Posted Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:50 am GMT by AHBrownell
| howzit wrote: | | you've got the general idea down. now go and experiment what situations warrant an aggressive approach with big hands and draws. (not all situations warrant this type of approach) |
Indeed. I think the biggest thing is to avoid making this play with a pair on the board. Or with sort of bad draws (for example the sucker end of a straight draw, or small flush draws)
Other than those situations - it seems like playing these hands aggressively every time works great! In addition, a nice bonus is a re-raise on the flop in position often means a free card on the turn!
Posted Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:46 am GMT by snoogins47
Though it obviously doesn't always apply, because well, nothing always applies... I remember a line somewhere that merits discussion in here I think.
Somebody was talking about shoving on the flop with OESFDs, and somebody responded with something along the lines of "Those big bluffs get most of their value from when your opponents fold. Sometimes you want to save them for the draws that you don't actually expect to hit"
Posted Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:48 am GMT by tame_deuces
| snoogins47 wrote: | Though it obviously doesn't always apply, because well, nothing always applies... I remember a line somewhere that merits discussion in here I think.
Somebody was talking about shoving on the flop with OESFDs, and somebody responded with something along the lines of "Those big bluffs get most of their value from when your opponents fold. Sometimes you want to save them for the draws that you don't actually expect to hit" |
It becomes a matter of opponent, potsize and stacksize (as always).
So now you have to compare the pot with your and your opponent's stacksize. How much can he pay you off if you actually hit your draw, can you gain a higher fold equity be check/raising turn if you miss, can you fold turn with current stack sizes if you only call, how does the board look, does it look like your opponent has missed the flop and will be less inclined to pay you off? Well...and 3000 other variables...poker is not for the faint of heart.
A big analysis of the shove or play move is beyond what I want to write, actually I fear it is beyond my knowledge of poker to write a detal analysis of a call situations taking into account possible turn/river outcomes.
But we can simplify our choice into ideal and unsuitable situations:
Let us assume that when we play, the optimal way to play a hand is the one that pays us the most (duh), let us also disregard rake. Our opponent has bet and we have to call, push or fold.
If we assume an equity of 50% with a OESFD shoving and getting called is break/even and pushing will quite simply have a gain of (%chance of folding*pot).
Ideally the play is best when the pot is big, the stacks are short and the opponent is timid. In this scenario our gain is huge.
It is unsuitable if the pot is small, the stacks are deep and the opponent does not fold easily. In this scenario our gain is small. We could stay behind and make our opponent pay us off instead.
Now..all these variables are ofcourse interrelated (we will have lower fold equity in a big pot with short stacks nomatter the opponent), still...I would say a short analysis of these factors must be the deciding factor in the 'big play', as opposed to general principles or statements.
Posted Tue Mar 07, 2006 7:55 pm GMT by AHBrownell
| Quote: | | It becomes a matter of opponent, potsize and stacksize (as always). |
Its interesting that you bring this up because I was thinking about this today. Stack size is very important. At a local casino the blinds run $2-$3 with a $100 buy-in. Typical opening raises are usually around 16-20! I was thinking about hands like 55 or Axs and how in this situation these hands are majorly devalued. You only hit your set or flush occassionally. Clearly you do not hit more than 1 time in 5; making this a relatively non-profitable call - when you hit you can only win about $100, but you will have to put in say $180 (9x the raise) for every $100 you win. Online these are my most profitable hands, but this is largely because the blinds are $1-$2, the buy-in is for $200, and typical opening raises are $6-$8. Call a raiser + caller (or 2) in late position with one of these and when you hit your hand you will often make 20x your preflop call (or even a full doubleup) - making this very profitable.
Clearly you are right. Early in a tournament (or with deep stacks in a cash game) the "big play" is much stronger than when blinds are big in relation to stack size or when short stacked...
|
|
