|
|
|
|
#1
12-27-06, 12:44 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Yes. It's barely different that a min raise, which IMO, is worse than limping.
|
|
#2
12-27-06, 09:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
This I don't get. In effect, if you're in position with, say QJs, and you would limp after limpers anyway because you believe you can outplay them in a multiway pot, what's wrong with doubling the bet and in effect say "lets all play, but lets double the stakes"? All the minraise does is to make the bets on later streets bigger. If you're better than they are, why is this bad?
__________________
"Animals die, friends die, and I shall die. But the one thing that will never die is the reputation I leave behind." Old Norse adage |
|
#3
12-27-06, 01:09 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
So, you are raising QJs for value, then? In other words, you think it's the best hand right now? Because if you don't, then you are basically building a pot with the intention of "stealing" it after the flop - and you can do that with any two cards.... so why do it with QJs and not KT or 44 or 72? Or are you just gambling, because you have a hand that can hit some flops (but won't won't be the best hand most of the time)?
Not only that, but with your min raise, you have opened the door for any of the limpers and certainly the blinds to reraise and push you off your hand, so you'll be throwing away twice as much money (I assume you'll fold to a real raise) as you needed to. IMO, if you want to play for "double the stakes," move up in limits. |
|
#4
12-27-06, 01:36 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
OK, I see your reasoning. I was again parroting Sklansky's point from the NLHE book. As for pushing people off their hands later, I'd rather make a normal raise here for that purpose.
Again, this is still me thinking like a limit player with position and positive equity.
__________________
"Animals die, friends die, and I shall die. But the one thing that will never die is the reputation I leave behind." Old Norse adage |
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
