Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

small stakes poker cash game by Jonathan little (Discussion)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • small stakes poker cash game by Jonathan little (Discussion)

    i wanted to give credit to Jonathan , and i want to say thanks and i learn alot from this book, every time i reread this book i learn more new stuff.

    i am here to give some feedback and view about your play those example in the book, i think there is better way to play it.

    page 16 , you give e.g Hero having AQ raise preflop and three caller call. Flop A-7-5, hero bet half pot flop half pot turn and half pot river hopping any Ax hand will call down to river. i do agree this play has its merit, and it work some of the time but let me tell you what did i face.
    when hero bet so small in flop yes we allow more wide range worst hand to call in , but let me tell you once first caller Call with A2, second hero maybe calling with 6 8 and third caller will be calling with 56. what kind of turn card drop will we know is safe to bet again?
    2 suppose to be a blank and safe card but it make caller 1 have 2 pair, a 9 , a 4 is not even safe , maybe if there is flush draw the turn card complete the 3 card flush , how would we we know if they have hit their card? Villain that i met alot like what you describe loose passive preflop , flop , turn, but not really at river. at river when you bet for value they will fold when they beaten and they will call or raise when they beat you, let say we bet flop bet turn , river check back, we are still guessing, when villain miss all the draw and they know if they dont have show down value they will also bet when hero check .
    By betting small we allow more villain to come in to crack us and when we win we win small amount from maybe a few player but when we lose might lose our whole stack.
    a typical example AA against 1 random hand we have 80% chance of winning , but against 5 player our equity drop a lot, yes we can say that but our reward increase too if AA shove and 5 player call that is a super good for Hero yes our equity drop , but when we win w grow our stack by 5 times. but not much player is so dumb to call an all in , and when we bet small to allow players to come in more and more player will come in to take chance and take bingo shot. let me quote another example hero AA bet 6 caller into flop , flop KQ5 with flush draw, do we bet or check, if we check are give free chance for player to hit their flush, we bet small like what the book suggest once one donkey call with flush draw or any hand the player behind will be peeling the flop lighter and lighted , the last player will even call with 56, turn drop a 6 that dont complete flush , how would we know villain has better hand then us in turn, if we dont bet we are giving flush draw a free chance, to draw, if we bet and river come a blank do we bet or check, if we check do we check call or check fold. villain will only call us loosely at flop and turn , but will not call us loosely at river, even when we check villain also not so dumb to know his hand is beaten he need to bet to try to bluff to has a chance to win the pot. and if villain hand beat us villain also will bet the river, when we are betting so small we allow all sort of nonsense hand to come in, we are suppose to win more but it increase the variance because all sort of hand come in they might hit their miracle 2 pair they might not they might bluff us at river they might also value bet us. we are making our life more miserable by betting small and allow all sort of hand come in end up we cant range so many villain end up we will be at the guessing end.

    second thing i wanted to discuss about by betting half pot flop turn and river yes we can easily make them call down three street. but in Nl poker cash game i thought whats important is to play to stack our opponent, use the example of AQ and flop A-7-5 if villain has AJ he might or willing to call us down 3 street. preflop hero open $6 one callier, the pot is $15, if we half pot all the way we might or might not get villain whole stack, but if we plan our bet sizeing early and try to stack off villain, true, some villain might manage to get out of the hook and we are losing value, but there are time villain is going to pay us off with bigger stack, and if villain are able to run off the hook if villain has a Ace the next time villain can play the same move with 89 bet the flop and bet the turn and jam the river, villain is not going to call us down light we can bluff him off,there is poker, if villain is going to call us down light why should we give him a chance to pay us less when he can pay us more.

    there are more things to discuss in this topic let me end here first welcome all player here to give some comment and feedback. i do understand what Jonathan is driving at , when we bet small we allow more worst hand to call us that is our objective and what we want, but when more hand going to call us , when the first idiot is calling us down light , the player behind will be calling down light and lighter end up ridiculously draw is coming in gut shot draw etc, end up we also dont know how to range villain

  • #2
    why no one respond to the thread where is all the JL supporter that support his way of playing please give some responed

    Comment


    • #3
      It may be easier to break the post into several smaller ones, because there is a lot of different stuff to cover.

      if I get the general gist, I think that JL has a higher tolerance for getting sucked out on than someone like, say, Harrington. So JL is willing to trade an increased chance of losing to a marginal hand on a subsequent card, for the extra equity he gets by having those marginal hands continuing to put money in the pot.

      that's my general take at least.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks OPK, your saying make sense,i agree and understand you point. Actually in my thread is only two point to discuss but i quote alot example. The first point , i am say what is the merit and cons of betting small, i am discussing should we bet so small to allow all nonsense card come in second topic i am saying should we bet bigger to to stack off villain then to bet small to allow villain to pay us lesser.

        Comment


        • #5
          I guess JL would say that if we bet larger, we force our opponent to play correctly -- fold hands we beat, keep hands that may beat us. So better to keep Villain in with cards we beat because we profit when our opponent makes mistakes.

          not saying that is right. But I think that is his view.
          Last edited by OPK; 06-14-2017, 06:46 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            OPK , thanks for your reply and discussion otherwise i will feel like i am talking to wall.

            yes you are right by betting bigger we might or encourage more player to play correctly --- fold hand that we beat.but we also need to understand that is not river, we still have more card to come at turn and river. and we can argue or say that the chance of them drawing is slim , i also agree if one of them is doing that is fine , but lets say 5 to 6 donkey all come in to take a shot , we will have no idea which card is blank or safe at all. Use JL book example
            Hero AQ
            Flop A 7 5
            first donkey come in with AJ second donkey come i with 68 , third donkey come in with 35 and the fourth donkey come in with 27

            now what card is bad for us any J any 2 any 9 , any 3 any 4, we practically have to escape half of the deck , while villain range is so wide we dont know villain range villain is going to put us very likely to have a Ace with high kicker, any Ace that come out we wont be able to extract more value while while all those wild come come out we are either behind or we have a chance to get bluff out.

            and let be honest , have you ever see a villain in small stake game playing AJ AT fold to a pot size raise if villain decide to play this hand and see the flop A 7 5, they do know hero might have AK AQ but they are not going to AJ AT, if they going to fold why in the first place they call with AJ AT , they are also worry if hero has KK decided to c bet or hero has A8 Ace small kicker, and to be truth when villain play 6 8 and see flop A 7 5 they are also not going to fold to a single bet in flop , our bet size from half pot to near full pot no one is folding if they are folding they will also question them self why play this in the first place. and you tell me they didnt put hero have Ace, yes they wanted hero to have A and better still high kicker , so when they make their straight at turn or river they can get more value from hero. that is their thought process.

            so by betting small we allow more worst card to come in , but we will have more unknown card to dodge, while betting big some of the worst hands will be force to play correctly , but they are still worst hand that is 100%- 99% still calling us for sure, so by betting big we get more value from one or two person rather then by better small we get more small value from more opponent

            Comment


            • #7
              I do not have that book, and I am not sure what position we are in. But I do not think that JL (or anyone else, really) would advocate limping with AQ to open -- or even calling a small bet here with AQ. If you were the second to act you would raise to discourage everyone behind you from getting too well-priced to fold, and if you were one of the last you would punish the limpers or small-bet callers by betting pot.

              In general though, I would say say that if a small bet is getting four callers then the bet is too small. Ideally you want to be head's-up, or at least with only two opponents. Sometimes and at some tables, 2.5x BB is enough to do the trick. Sometimes and at some tables, 4x BB is a "small" raise that narrows the field.

              i think JL would want a small enough bet to keep one or two people in with marginal hands when we have equity, but he is not advocating a bet size that leads to a family pot. Isn't JL's small-bet theory more for post-flop than pre-flop anyway, anfter you have narrowed the field and determined that you are going to keep playing the hand?

              At least, that's my take.
              Last edited by OPK; 06-14-2017, 11:51 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                With regards to AQ on an A-7-5 board, Jonathan seems to advocate (as a rule) betting relatively small on three streets against loose passive players, because those players will very often pay you off as they generally overvalue hands like top pair. If you bet larger, you may get some of the worst top pair hands to fold.

                That isn't a strategy you would employ against better players - against better players, you probably want to be looking to check at least one street as most good players will not call down three streets with one pair.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi jpgiro , you are right , but the stuff that i wanted to discuss is , there are hands villain is not going to fold no matter how big or how small we bet , e.g AQ board A-7-5 if villain has AJ he is not going to fold when you bet pot size bet at flop or half pot size, so why give villain a chance to pay us lesser. if they going to fold one barrel bet , they wont call with that hand when they flop a top pair decent kicker or top pair top kicker , no one is folding , you ask yourself if you call with AJ flop A-7-5 player bet you fold?
                  JL is right in one thing when he bet smaller he keep alot of worst hand in like example in a board A-7-2 , he might keep 25s in he might keep 67s in , while betting bigger end up will force villain to play correctly , this one i agree.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X