Poker players, please adjudicate this discussion

In My Humble Opinion
1

Background: i often play online Texas hold-em poker, not for money, just for fun (i’m a grad student without the money to risk). I play at pokerpages.com, both in tournaments and in single satellite games, with ten people at a table. Each person starts with 2,000, and the last person left is the winner. No prizes, just fun.

Because these games are free a lot of people bet very illogically, especially early in the game. I try to bet as if it were real money, so i can improve my play. I usually play very conservatively early on, until the three or four “all-in” cowboys have been knocked out and the more serious players are left at the table.

I was in a game today, and there were four of us left. I had about 2500, and the others had about 6000, 5000, and 6500 respectively. The blinds were 100/200. I got dealt KQsuited, so i raised 500 before the flop. One person dropped out and two called. The flop came 4QQ, which i slow-played, betting only 500. Both players called. Then 4th street came Q again, so i just dumped all-in. One person folded, and the other obviously thought i was trying to buy the pot, so he called, and i ended up winning about 4000.

But my question isn’t about the hand as a whole, it’s about my pre-flop raise. I think KQ suited is a pretty decent hand in a four-handed game, and is worth a pre-flop raise. But one of my fellow-players didn’t think so, and the following online conversation, which i copied and pasted, ensued. I was just hoping for input on this conversation, and on my playing style, from people who know something abut Texas Hold-Em strategy.

After all this, i raised pre-flop with QQ. The table came: rag rag A rag rag, and i lost the hand to a guy with A rag. I then said:

But he wouldn’t elaborate on what he meant by that.

So, is my strategy wrong, and does graupma have a point? What’s your opinion, and how would you play KQ suited at a four-handed table?

2

Important detail you left out, unless I just missed it: what position were you in? If you were in an early position, it was sort of a risky move to raise with a KQs (not ‘stupid’ as that guy would have you believe, but a little risky). If you were on the button, and no one else had bet, than, while I don’t know if I would have raised, I don’t think you did the wrong thing. In either case, KQs isn’t the strongest hand, but it’s decent. An ace with some rags on the flop could have screwed you, but like you say, that’s why you want to drive one or more players out. Could be considered a semi-bluff, I think.

But, in any case, after the other guy said, in response to you rightly saying a raise pre-flop is partially done to drive out the other players: “you see, I enjoy the game, and I don’t want them to leave”, you could pretty much ignore anything else he said. He clearly is not a smart player.

3

Well, I think graupma was wrong to criticize your raise with KQ suited. I also agree with your raise with QQ. You seem like a smart better. Graupma’s refusal to back up his statement about your obviously-smart pre-flop raise with QQ shows that he’s full of crap. I guess that his point was that you should only raise if you know you’ve won, thus negating any pre-flop raise. He disagreed with your KQ raise, but accepted it because you won. When you thought your QQ bet was smart, even though you lost, he disagreed because you lost. Sounds like a very conservative player…does he win often?

4

IIRC, i was one to the left of the big blind, one to the right of the button (remember, there were only 4 of us). So, i was first to bet pre-flop, but i would have been second-last to bet in subsequent rounds.

I should also add that, when it came to pre-flop bettings rounds, all three of the other players seemed to be “calling stations” who would call the big blind no matter what, but who were scared of calling a pre-flop raise. That’s why i raised. If you just call with guys like that, then you end up facing all three players every flop, which reduces your chances of winning. I figured that it was better to try to drive one or two out before the flop.

I knew the move was a little risky, but i get sick of playing in a game where every player gets to see the flop every time. That’s not how it works in real life.

To tell you the truth, i don’t know how often he wins because so many people play on that website that you come across different people all the time.

He certainly was a conservative player, and not a very good one. He was constantly calling with hands like Q-3 offsuit, or 8-9 offsuit. I’m generally of the opinion that, in no-limit hold-em, you should either be raising or folding, not just calling unless you know you have the nuts and are trying to string people along.

And i’ve never understood the logic of people who say that it was a good raise if you won, and a bad raise if you lost. The fact of poker is that good play can still result in losing the hand, because there is some luck involved with the turn of the cards, especially if you are up against 8 or nine other players at the flop.

In those online games, i’ve been known to fold hands like AK suited and QQ before the flop, because i was in late position and four or five people had already called all-in. Now, even if some of those people have Q-3 or even 4-6, if there are five of them then there’s a decent chance that a good pair of hole cards might still get beaten. I prefer to hang around until some people have been knocked out, and then play using strategy rather than blind luck and prayer.

5

Hello,

I’m not much of a poker study- I have played for years- both home, online and casino small time tourneys and read the Badger Sutra- but thats about it. So take what I say with a grain of salt.

I don’t think you were wrong to pre-flop raise at all- you were in a small game with players wary to call pre-flop raises. It was a risk, but thats why they call it gambling. It worked- and thats what counts. I find when I have a decent to strong hand and am in a good position- raising to get some people out can only help you. Especially with a strong pair- your QQs might have lost that time, but over the long haul, in a short game- they’d have to be the winner more often than not. At least by betting strong, you might get rid of the 8-9 off suit guy who may get lucky with a straight. Everything I have read talks about adjusting your game to fit the table and the players- there are few “theories” (besides chucking 7-2) that are 100% right all the time.

I think you played that hand better than I would have- I tend to sit on 3 of a kind, might have even checked when those came up and then raised at the river. Its a bad habit I’m trying to work on :slight_smile:

6

A four-handed game is VERY different than a full ring game. The value of big cards goes up - the value of suited cards and connectors goes down.

You had a very strong hand for a four-handed game. I would raise with that every time. Aggression is an important quality when playing short-handed. Four handed, any naked ace is playable, whereas in full ring games I won’t play suited aces below AT unless I’m on the button or in the blinds.

Note that with a hand like KQs you aren’t really raising to thin the field out. You’re raising because you rate to have the best hand, and you want to make people pay the most money before the flop when you have the best hand.

Another reason to raise suited connectors before the flop is to pot-stick people into calling you if you flop a big hand like a straight or a flush.

In a full ring game, it would be unreasonably aggressive to raise with KQs from early position. For one reason: it marries you to the hand if you wind up against a dominating hand like AK or AQ. That’s the real problem with a hand like KQs. By the same token, if you have this hand in late position and someone raises in front of you, you should fold, unless the pot rates to be extremely large.

Now obviously, the risk that someone has a dominating hand in a 4-handed game is much lower. And the frequency of the blinds forces people to play looser. This elevates the power of your KQs, and makes your raise fine.

7

I would not want to be your opponent in a ring game, Sam. Your knowledge of table size, position, and hand strength is quite impressive.:slight_smile:

8

Thanks for the input, everyone. It’s always fun talking poker with people who know what they’re talking about.

And, Sam, i agree with you completely, and i certainly would not raise early with that hand in a full ring game. In fact, that’s one of the things that amazes me most about some of the people who play online–a lot of them don’t adjust their game based on their position at the table and the number of people in the game. And that’s a recipe for losing lots of chips, in the long run.

9

I came across the same player, graupma, again today in another game. This scenario should give you an idea of how much he knows about poker.

There are about five people left in the pot. The flop comes 9-10-A. One guy bets, three fold, and graupma calls. So there are now two left after the flop.

Fourth street and the river are both Js, so the cards on the table are now 9-10-A-J-J

I’m thinking that the winning hand could be a full house or a straight (there’s no flush showing), or even four of a kind. At the very least, someone must have a hole pair or have paired one of the table cards and be holding two pair, right? Wrong!

The first guy goes all-in, and graupma calls. And they have:

First guy: 4-3 offsuit
graupma: 8-4 offsuit

What the fuck? What are they doing calling all the way to the river with this shit?

But that’s not the end of it. Obviously, they split the pot because all the cards on the table are higher than any of their hole cards. We then get the following conversation:

Preserve me from such people!!!

10

Wow, I never get in-depth discussions of poker strategy on PokerPages. But seeing this guys comments, I’m glad.

You have to put up with a lot of idiots on that site, but sometimes you’ll get in a game with 6 or more people betting reasonably, and that makes for a lot of fun. And the tournaments are always a blast, when you have a couple hours to kill.

11

Play for money. They have $.5-$1 hold 'em and $6 buy-in one table tourneys at partypoker.com, for the fiscally challenged. I play in the 2-4 games and $6 tourneys, and the competition is generally weak.

In money games, you’ll want all “such people” to be at your table. They’re a blessing.

12

Howie, what’s you pokerpages handle, if you don’t mind telling me? I’ll keep an eye out for you in the tournaments. Mine’s the same, mhendo, and i usually play in the no-limit hold 'em tourneys. I had my best tourney result the other night, 4th out of about 430.

Thanks for the advice. I think i’ll give it a go. And you’re right, these are the sort of people you want playing when there’s money on the table.

13

As others have said, these are exactly the kind of people you want in the game.

Sklansky’s Fundamental Theorem of Poker: Any time an opponent plays a hand differently than he rationally should if he could see your cards, you profit. This is especially true in heads-up and short-handed games, and somewhat less true in multi-way pots. But the bottom line is, if everyone you played with showed down exactly what you expected and played exactly the way they should play, you would earn no money.

Try to adopt the attitude that every wild suck-out is the cost of doing business. You should see it as a sign that the game you’re playing in is profitable, and use that knowledge to calm yourself down.

One other thing: Don’t discuss strategy at the table. It’s rude, and it educates the fish. The proper response to even the worst play imaginable is, “Nice hand.” And if the clod persists in telling you exactly what you do wrong and how smart he is, respond with, “Hmn. I never thought of it that way before. Nice hand.”
Then come here and bitch. (-:

14

Oh, and I was going to add that I played about 200 hours of mostly 5-10 poker on Partypoker and Ladbrokes last month, and you see the exact same kinds of plays at those limits. The players are somewhat better at 10-20 and 15-30, but they are more aggressive, which causes more variance. I find I make more money playing 2 tables of 5-10 at a time rather than 1 table of 10-20.

15

Well, i’m having to take Sklanky’s advice as some consolation right now, considering i just got knocked out of a freeroll online tournament by a what i think was an illogical call.

I was on the button, and only two people had called the big blind. I had KK, so i put in a big raise and knocked all but one person out of the pot.

The flop came rag, rag, rag. I was looking good, so i went all-in. My opponent called and picked up a club on the river to make a flush. And that was it. The other guy had called a 2000 pre-flop raise, and my post-flop all-in, with K4 suited. I think i probably made the right bet, but it doesn’t make it any more pleasant to be knocked out.

16

I have to agree on the keeping the strategy out of the table talk- its obnoxious and rude when I win a hand and get told “you never should have played that” or some bullshit…or if I slip and say “damn, mucked the straight”- then I get a lecture on how that was the right thing to do (true or not). Its annoying and gives me a chip on my shoulder towards the person who said it.

The chip gets lighter as my chip pile gets bigger though… :slight_smile:

J. Green
Smokinjbc@msn.com

17

I certainly never give unsolicited advice at the table, and i never say things like “you never should have played that.”

But when someone criticizes me for making a perfectly logical play, it gets my gander up. Especially when that same person has been making ridiculous calls all day.

But i think that Sam’s advice is probably the key here–there’s no point in educating the fish, because it might end up costing you money. :slight_smile:

18

Interesting. I’m fairly new at holdem so it’s cool to see a thread about it.

I understand why you’d want to knock as many people off the pot as possible but if you have a strong hand isn’t it more advantagious to keep them in and string them along?

I play at truepoker.com, btw (for play money)

19

Not necessarily, Rooves. The more people who stay in, the higher chance of losing to a bad beat. Also, it’s better to win small wins than lose a big one, most of the time.

20

Yeah, what ataraxy said.

Even if you go into a hand holding AA, you are still not guaranteed to win. The more people who get to see the flop, the greater the chance that someone holding 7-3 suited will flop a flush, or that someone holding 9-10 will flop a straight, or that someone holding J-5 will flop a three-of-a-kind, or that someone holding 9-7 will flop two-pair, all of which will beat your AA. As you saw in the hand i discussed above, my KK was easily the best pair, but i got shot by an unlucky flush draw. The more people in the pot, the more likely that is to happen.

The only time to really suck as many people as possible into the hand, in my opinion, is after the flop if you know, or are almost certain, that you have the nuts. So, if you have AK, and the flop comes KKA, the only hand that can beat you is AA (or maybe a very unlikely straight flush or four-of-a-kind further down the road), so it might be worth slow-playing the hand to suck people along.

I’d be interested to hear Sam’s (and other people’s) opinion on when (if ever) one should slow-play to keep people in the hand.