General Short-Handed Micro-no-limit Holdem |
|
Posted Sun Oct 15, 2006 7:28 pm GMT by ComedyBee
I am on a real bad run of late and dropped about 20% of my bankroll playing $0.05/$0.1 NLH and after initially starting so well i am now questioning my general approach to the game.
I will now outline my general understanding of the game and how i will approach a table.
My bankroll was about $190 when i decided to try 6 handed holdem. I don't really like the full 9-handed ring games because it is very much a sit-and-wait game, i like action. In tournament play i'm strongest when the blinds are bigger and alot of chips move around. I have proven this with nearly all my final table finishes being in the top 3.
I was hoping i could emulate this in the short handed cash games and so i thought i should take the full buy-in of $10. I had been reading up in Super System to and a couple of other online resources about how to play and the general impression i got was that it was very aggressive. It was stated that the majority of pots went with the initial raiser.
The first two tables i played i absolutely dominated, i really did play like Doyle describes in SS2. I was leaning and leaning on people and they were just giving up nearly all the pots. Eventually one got tired of it, tried to beat me and i broke him.
I immediately thought, right, this works. I'm not naive enough to believe i am going to dominate other tables, i was right.
Every table since then i have struggled on.
So:
a) If there is nearly always a raiser, i stand to take the average of 1 out of 6 pots as an average player.
b) It feels like there are alot of callers in micro-limits. I can raise something like AQs and get 3 or 4 callers with a raise to $0.40 (4BB). This leaves me needing to hit because if i don't it is more than likely someone else will.
c) I feel like i am rarely getting any pot odds to draw to a hand. Should i be drawing more?
d) It feels like all hands without a face card, barring pairs and connectors are unplayable to a raise and since there nearly always is one i seem to folding nearly always. If i get something i get little action.
The solution seems to be that you need to play with any two cards and appear to be a maniac to get action.
Where might i be going wrong?
Have i completely missunderstood how to play SSSH?
Thanks
CrustyFace
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 Sun Oct 15, 2006 8:05 pm GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
Ok, here's the answers I have in mind for your questions:
a) True, but Poker is not about winning pots. It's about winning money. Winning one $20 pot is better than winning five $2 pots. You shouldn't be judging yourself off how many pots you're winning per round. Many bad players win far more pots than good players, mostly because they get involved in too many hands and thus lose more pots than good players. Try to make the best decision when you're in a pot rather than try to just win it.
b) All this means is that you should adjust your game by doing continuation bets less often, bluffing less in general, and betting for value more.
c) Don't just consider raw pot odds; think about implied odds. I might call a pot-sized bet on the flop with a straight draw if I think I have a decent shot at the guy's stack if I hit my card (in general, implied odds are higher on straight draws than flush draws because they are easier to conceal... a lot of weak players will freeze up when 3 of a suit comes on board, but you can exploit that as well). Just remember that for the theory of implied odds to work, both you and your opponent have to have a pretty decent amount of money behind in your stacks.
d) Remember what you said in point (b), and make a small induction: most flops miss most hands. In short-handed play, the "big hands" are out there less often, and hands like moderate connectors and one-gappers (even unsuited) gain a little value in the presence of deep stacks and players who overvalue high cards and one high pair. Playing hands like T8, 97, and 86 against a small raise, especially if you have position, can vastly improve your post-flop skills. The secret to good loose-aggressive players (who usually are the winners at short-handed NL) is that they play rather loosely for the small pre-flop and flop bets, but only give actions on the later "big bet" streets when they have the best of it--and because the perception is that they "never have a hand," they often get paid off. And as a bonus, when players observe that you're playing a little more liberally, they're more likely to pay you off with big hands like AA or KK when they might not have otherwise.
I wouldn't say you need to be an "any two card" maniac--you simply need to loosen up and improve your post flop play. Mix it up sometimes by raising with some "worse" hands like T9 or 87, betting your draws, smooth calling with top pair on the flop sometimes, etc.
Posted Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:38 am GMT by ComedyBee
I would like to stress that i havn't been trying to immitate my early success by playing aggressively at each new table. I have been coming to tables no knowing what to do with all but the premium hands.
Is it a case of seeing many more flops and being prepared to fold on the flop, only carrying on if you hit a nice hand? Except for hands like AA, KK, QQ, AK that often dont need to improve much or at all to win.
With hands like T8 and 86 etc, i must be looking to hit at least 2 pair on the flop to have a chance at winning, right?
Posted Mon Oct 16, 2006 11:01 am GMT by Jefecaminador
| ComedyBee wrote: | | I would like to stress that i havn't been trying to immitate my early success by playing aggressively at each new table. |
Why not? Aggression is the key to winning short handed.
And no, you don't need to hit 2 pair with hands like 10 8 to win. Getting a read on your oponent is huge in short handed play. Waiting around for big hands isn't gonna cut it. Don't get involved in big pots without big hands, but certainly you shouldnt be folding on the flop if you dont have 2 pair.
Posted Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:19 pm GMT by ComedyBee
In that case, i'm not sure that that really applies to micro stakes poker. From what i have experienced, only when you find a tight table can people be pushed around.
Posted Mon Oct 16, 2006 11:45 pm GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
6-handed, especially in pots that are contested heads-up, second or even third pair can often be good, considering a few general facts:
1. Most hands are contests of unpaired cards.
2. Unpaired cards will hit a pair a little less than 1/3 of the time on the flop.
3. Many players develop reasonably reliable betting patterns based on their holdings, especially at low stakes.
4. A raise usually indicates two high cards--there are many more high card hands than pair hands, and most players misplay the small and medium pairs when they do not hit a set or an overpair (which is the vast majority of the time).
A specific example.
I'm on the button with 97. The player in second position (let's say he is an average low stakes player) raises 4x the BB. I call. The blinds fold and we're heads up. The flop comes J-9-3. He fires out a continuation bet--if you've been watching this player for awhile, the size of his bet may betray crucial information. Most of the time, I will try to settle things with a raise right here. If he reraises, obviously I'm out of there, but if he calls, I have to consider what sort of player I'm dealing with. Does he have a J? A medium pair? Two overcards? Is he slowplaying a strong hand? These are the questions you need to be able to answer by reading your opponents--and you can only do that with some experience. I wish there was some magic formula, but there isn't.
Consider what you might do with that same hand in that situation on the following flops:
1. A-K-T
2. T-8-2
3. A-8-6
4. K-9-3
5. Q-7-6
Situation one is pretty easy... you're pretty much done with this hand. The only way I'd put in any more money is if my opponent checks to me twice and read him for genuine weakness. Situations two and three are great opportunities to profit off a strong draw, especially in situation three if your opponent has made top pair. In situation two, I'd probably raise just about every time, simply because pairing either of my cards might also win the pot for me (although I'd be a little wary of a 9). Situation three is trickier, because you ought to mix up between calling and raising depending on your opponent's bet amount and your take on the situation. Situations four and five are the sticky ones, because the K and Q are cards likely to help your opponent. Here, I will often call a small bet on the flop and reevaluate on the turn since I have position--if it comes a seemingly harmless card and my opponent fires again, I'll usually give it up. If he's going to bluff at it twice, more power to him. I'll probably get him later. Remember, good players will play loose for the small bets early in the hand, but will only play for big bets with a big hand on the later streets; weak players won't understand the difference.
Somtimes you'll get dream flops like A-7-7 or K-9-7 or 5-6-8. In that case, I usually prefer to go to war early in the hand, because to get paid off, two things have to happen:
1. My opponent must have a good hand to pay me off, and
2. My opponent must not suspect I have such a strong hand.
If he has nothing or has a marginal hand, I probably don't stand to make much anyway, so a raise on the flop probably won't lose very much in the long run. If your opponent has a hand like a big pair when you flop a straight, there's a good chance you will break him if he calls your raise on the flop, because by then the pot is snowballing out of control.
Hope this helps a little bit. Remember, in a 6-handed game, people tend to play looser and have big hands less often. In a full ring game, you usually need to hit two pair or better to continue with marginal hands like connectors, but in 6-handed games you don't need as strong of a hand. What you DO need, though, is a good sense of where you stand in the hand, and that usually takes experience. Just keep practicing, post some hands with tough situations, and you'll vastly improve your play.
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 7:17 am GMT by ComedyBee
Thanks for that xcutter, however i would like to say that i was surprised by the call with 97 to be honest. Is your general strategy to be calling alot preflop but giving up alot after?
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 7:48 am GMT by fiezk
Doyle talks to great extents about his love of low suited connectors and one - even two - gappers in SS2. I'm surprised that you wouldn't call a small raise with them. Remember, position and hand reading ability is the key. Pay attention to your opponents betting patterns.
If you consider Diamonds excellent description of the common flop situations, you are very likely to get payed off big time if you hit two pair or better. If you tend to raise (for information and protection) the flops you hit that doesn't contain too many scary cards, most opponents will likely move in on you if they have a decent hand (like TPTK or overpair) - sometimes they might even move in empty out of frustration.
I also recommend playing big draws (pair + flush draw, flush + straight draw etc.) very aggressively. This is +EV as long as there is the slightest chance your opponent will fold. It also increases your chances of getting payed off. Against tight opponents (that are capable of folding tptk and overpair) I would also play concealed draws (like straight draws) very aggressively.
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 8:51 am GMT by supafrey
| fiezk wrote: | Doyle talks to great extents about his love of low suited connectors and one - even two - gappers in SS2. I'm surprised that you wouldn't call a small raise with them. Remember, position and hand reading ability is the key. Pay attention to your opponents betting patterns.
If you consider Diamonds excellent description of the common flop situations, you are very likely to get payed off big time if you hit two pair or better. If you tend to raise (for information and protection) the flops you hit that doesn't contain too many scary cards, most opponents will likely move in on you if they have a decent hand (like TPTK or overpair) - sometimes they might even move in empty out of frustration.
I also recommend playing big draws (pair + flush draw, flush + straight draw etc.) very aggressively. This is +EV as long as there is the slightest chance your opponent will fold. It also increases your chances of getting payed off. Against tight opponents (that are capable of folding tptk and overpair) I would also play concealed draws (like straight draws) very aggressively. |
The value of playing draws goes down significantly if we're certain that our opponents will call (lower stakes = more likely, maybe, but I generally hate those kind of generalizations about stakes vs stakes decisions...)
A big draw that's 40 percent to win is still just that if we know our villain isn't planning on dropping his top pair to resistance. The value in our raises is supposed to come in from the added concealment of our hand vs strong players that would never think we're "smart" enough to bet when we may be losing. At lower stakes, the value of this drops drastically for obvious reasons (or so the assumption goes). They will call you, and they frankly don't care what hand you're pretending to have. Simplify. Simplify. Simplify. Simplify.
I can't stress that enough. The vast majority of people overplay themselves out of hands. Basic "bet when i have it", "play cheap when i don't" really works wonders for later streets - especially against the calling stations that low stakes players seem to claim are rampant. Continuation bets on the flop shouldn't even be part of this question - as a rule I almost DEMAND that any strong player do a cont. bet atleast 70-80% of the time they were the preflop aggressor (they're not bluffs, Action Dan). Play with position and you will find that the slightest of continuation bets will let you draw when you need to, and bet out when you don't. If people are calling you too often, or frankly always, let them get comfortable with that in the early parts of your session. Punish them later with large valuebets when you have made hands and I promise you will get paid off (large as in 75%-150% of the pot).
Okay I didn't mean for that to be so rambly.
EDIT: Okay I realized that a hand I played recently sort of illustrates when draws may be smarter to play more aggressively. I promise I'm not just posting it for the bragging rights.
http://www.pokerhand.org/?561170
Things to note:
1. I was out of position. I knew he was planning on playing this hand strong, but I had to make a stand because later streets could easily not improve my hand very much, and then i'll be stuck with 2nd pair and no kick. In general, OOP play requires more aggression on earlier streets.
2. Stacks are somewhat deep.
3. I have like.. alot of outs on the turn, i think.
4. Sometimes even the wrong play at the right time works. ^_^
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:24 pm GMT by ComedyBee
I don't think i could bring myself to play that. Maybe a bet, but not an all-in. I understand about being aggressive, but i would have figured one of the others for a Q, even any worth while T would have tou beat there.
I would have been dead worried about the two calls of the all-in.
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:45 pm GMT by supafrey
A few things.
1. The second all in was my own, calling the first one. It was heads up.
2. Dont confuse that hand for me saying "play aggressively and call down bluffs" .. that's not why I posted it. Remember in my earlier post when I said that you should USE POSITION to allow yourself to draw cheaply when need to... in that hand I didn't have it, which is one of the main reasons it necessitated the push push push nature of my play. It was riskier, and more uncomfortable, leading me to have a grossly difficult call on the later streets. If I was in position with that draw, I could have slowed down the pace a little bit. This is what you should be focusing in.
Against calling stations, things like semi-bluffs and pushes (especially on the turn or river) should only be used when absolutely necessary - my hand's particular situation demanded that, and I was simply pot committed to make the final call. If you're playing simplified poker against weak opponents, try to not put yourself in dire situations where big pots and dangerous situations happen when you're not in the best of it. If you're drawing, let yourself make the pot smaller. If you have big hands, balloon the pot up. I'll say it one more time : POSITION IS KEY, especially when BLUFFS aren't working. You want to be able to decide when to control the pot size, and the easiest way is to be in position.
Drawing hands are awesome against lots of limpers + calling stations for obvious reasons, but only when you're not disproportionately risking your chips with limited returns. Allow yourself to make money on your made hands and limit your risk. See alot of pots if you want.... draw when there's value... but SIMPLIFY.
More rambles i guess. Damnit.
EDIT:
P.S. The fact that I'm probably losing the hand on the turn is irrelevant. Between pot odds, how much I have to call, and my skankload of outs (clubs, another T maybe, another 8 maybe, a jack maybe) there wasn't anything I could do. As the cliche goes, don't confuse your goal in poker: It's not about winning X amount of hands (I was very likely going to lose this one) ... It's about winning X amount of dollars.
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:03 pm GMT by ComedyBee
Do you think that Chris Fergusons BR management techniques can be applied here? That being about taking 5% to a table and leaving when it is 10% of your roll.
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:03 pm GMT by ComedyBee
Do you think that Chris Fergusons BR management techniques can be applied here? That being about taking 5% to a table and leaving when it is 10% of your roll.
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 3:45 pm GMT by supafrey
Personally I hate that advice. Like, alot.
I play best when I have the big stack, and won't leave a table unless the game has suddenly become tougher. The amount of money I have in front of me should be as big as possible... the bigger the stack the better.
The 5% part is fine. Play within your role.
Don't leave the game unless you have a reason to - chances are that if you managed to dbl up and the players are still the same then the situation hasn't changed all too much. It's probably still profitable... you may need to make a few adjustments, but nothing's really any different. Don't limit your winnings.
Posted Tue Oct 17, 2006 5:17 pm GMT by Jauron
Probably depends on what type of player you are. I know some players who's best game is their very aggresive game, when they try to switch to their "safe" game they just end up calling and folding with busted draws. They put no pressure on anyone and end up getting chipped away at until they go into super aggresive mode again and loose it to poor decisions.
I know players who only have one gear, even with a big stack you know they will end up broke if you can just keep them there long enough.
I also know players who once they build a stack won't allow themselves to risk it and can get run over and over. Their holdings need to be so strong it's very likely they will be forced to fold to big bets.
If you have at least 2 good gears in you, you should play until you feel you aren't playing well or the game isn't good. The problem with that is are you a strong enough player and honest enough to admit and tell when you are not playing well? I've seen good players blow up after one bad beat...
If you've only got one gear, set a goal and get up. If you've got more than one quality gear and can be brutally honest with yourself stay put. Only problem with that advice is it relies on the person to tell what they should do, and nobody wants to admit they only play well one way.
|
|
