Greetings,
I just played regular speed Sit & Go against a smart player with a 89 Sharkscope rating. He had great intuition and made fabulous reads. However, he defaulted to a 50 chip raise from the SB instead of a 60 chip raise in the first round. I'm wondering if anybody has any insights into what kind of adjustments could be made assuming the few details I've shared. I've only encountered him once, but I have seen a few other players open for 50 or 55 chips instead of the more standard 40, 60, or 80 chip raises. When you get to these marginal adjustments, what is the optimal adjustment assuming the player makes rational decisions.
Thank you,
REBTgenius (Jeffrey)
Well firstly if you feel he has an edge on you and is raising to 50 chips it would seem like he wants to play smaller pots because he thinks he can outplay you. The solution to this would be to 3bet more, raise larger on your button and force him to play larger pots (the larger the pots the more the skill difference is negated).
If you think you are perfectly capable of playing him post flop then I would recommend playing it exactly the same as if he were raising to 60 and just adjust your bet sizing accordingly. Obviously if he is raising smaller you can open up your range a little bit out of position but otherwise I don't think any major adjustments need to be made.
Hope this helps.
Greetings soulori,
I'm not sure if this particular player thought he was better me; I think it was a default position he profitably used against most opponents (I've watched him play a few other opponents and he maintains the same pattern). Thanks for the recommendations in terms of potential adjustments. I did call slightly more of his raises on hands like QJo, K10s, Q9s that I may have otherwise considered dominated. I just didn't have a standardized 'chart' or the precise knowledge that I wanted (if 'x' raises 50 from SB call with hand XX, but if 'x' raises from SB muck with hand XX). But your suggestion makes great intuitive sense, especially about playing opponents who play better than me post flop (opening more from SB and for more, 3 betting, etc.)
I just played a couple of games and I'm thinking about deviating away from the standard 60 bet opening against the majority of my villains. I simply get no fold equity against these guys and can manipulate the pot and outplay them post-flop. I think I discovered a massive leak in my game tonight, but I'm holding off on making any firm conclusions. I seem to win with a 'cog dissonance' type strategy (however, I do raise a little more from the button) and get massive variance with the 60 chip opening. It seems like I'm facing a lot of loose aggressive villains. I'm finding that I need to vastly widen my limping range and be more selective with raises from the SB.
Thanks for the feedback and suggestions,
Jeffrey
If you're facing loose aggressive villains a lot then just lower your opening raise size. I wouldn't say abandon it entirely because to refer you to the cog dissonance videos you mentioned earlier, these small raises can be used to control an opponent that is raising you a lot (your limps and standard 3bets).
You shouldn't be getting massive variance with a 60 raise open on the button, so I would assume you are building pots too quickly or calling too lightly and putting yourself in some really tough spots post flop. Of course, it also depends on effective stack sizes, if you're opening to 60 when shortstacked with 400 then you're going to see a lot of variance as you're almost pot committing yourself every time.
I would highly recommend moving down and adjusting your raise/bet sizing to find a style you are comfortable with (unless you currently play the $5 games, moving down would just mean you're paying way too much rake for the reward). It sounds like 'small ball' is going to be more your thing, you're obviously already familiar with cog's videos, you may also want to consider taking a few coaching sessions from him, i've had one myself and would highly recommend him and from what you said, he'll probably be the perfect person to help you.
I've had a few private coaching sessions with Paul as well, and it really helped me improve my game. He's really a great teacher and I can definitely recommend this to anyone.
Jack
By the sound of it just seems like a standard amount the villian has become accustomed to using over time. I see this from time to time myself & providing he isnt deviating from the amount in relation to weaker or stronger hands, i tend to just treat it like a normal 3x and base my calling/3betting ranges off that. The obvious assumption as mentioned is that he doesn't want the pots to be as bloated, so if you run into him again you may wanna try take him out his comfort zone.
Greetings guys,
Before I read your posts I watched a bunch of Primo's videos (again) this morning. I watched the 'from scratch' series from Beginner to Intermediate. Since I already watched it and took notes, I could pretty much watch it straight through. I think the problem was that I was applying too much of a similar strategy against varying types of opponents. Because I had been watching a lot of 'advanced' videos I was misapplying the logic of the 100 dollar games to the $5-$33 games.
Also, I was playing too many games, basically sacrificing quality for quantity. As a result, I was missing little timing tells and other nuances. I think my play became perfunctory to the point of being transparent; even to some of the more donkish players. Sometimes doing everything 'right' is wrong.
I am more comfortable with a cog dissonance type strategy for the most part. I'm really interested in cognitive/behavioral psychology and would rather play a psychological game then one based solely on the 'exact science of poker.' Of course, I still rely on my Nash Chart and pay attention to effective stack sizes and pot odds. What I'm trying to say is that I always thought there was 'one' ultimate way to play. It's actually kind of silly in retrospect, especially when I just think of my friends who play Chess. They all employ their own unique strategies like the French or English Defence or various gambits. If a game as formulaic as Chess requires elements of human creativity, then I imagine Poker would demand even more.
The suggestion that I contact Cog Dissonance was very much appreciated. It's a fabulous suggestion. So far I've only had one hand history review from Ryan, which was extremely helpful. I went back to it several times. After viewing many videos, the feedback really made sense and took on additional value. I think just getting some lessons in with Rypac13 or Cog Dissonance or whomever would be useful. If anything, it would be a more efficient use of time as it took several hours of reviewing videos to discover some leaks that crept back into my game.
Thanks,
Jeffrey
Greetings Legaless,
I appreciated your response and think your comments are very insightful. Your speculation seems to conform to my experience with this particular villain. Maybe he thinks he's getting enough fold equity by betting 50 instead of sacrificing another 10 chips for a trivial number of extra folds. Nevertheless, it appears he's accusted to this bet and he doesn't vary it when he's in the 10/20 level. And I liked your comment about taking him out of his comfort zone. One interesting side note is that this player was not afraid to lay down hands (against me or other opponents), so perhaps he's a little nitty and risk averse.
Thank you,
Jeffrey
You actually consider folding QJo, K10ss preflop to a 3x raise? If villian opens up 100% of buttons I will usually 3bet those hands all day. Otherwise I will usually flat OOP but will 3bet if I haven't established a pattern of 3betting with the villian yet. Pretty sure this is standard.
Greetings ravenfan1733,
I probably didn't pick the best hand examples when I was trying to illustrate my point. I wouldn't fold those two hands to a 3x raise against most opponents, except a select few very tight players who only raise hands like AK-A9off, Ax suited, QK, 99-AA. Against a hypothetical player, I would play all those hands. My range would depend on the limits and more importantly, the character of the player.
If anything, it might be safer to play hands like 67s or 87 against some players as they aren't as likely to be dominated. I'm currently focusing on playing the very low limits ($5-$11). I would play KQ-K10 (suited or not) QJs, QJoff, Q10off, Q9s and Q9 off and K9off to a 3 bet, but be very careful about domination, especially against some players. I'm just trying to avoid playing weak hands out of position as it's something I did way too much of in the past.
If the opponent raises every single button (or limps every single button), I do catch on (sometimes not fast enough). I do try to discourage excessive limps by raising the BB with a decent hand. Also, I would three bet the above hands if the villain is raising almost every single button (unless he was an extreme nut case who would put me to a horrible decision every time by going all-in). I'm still learning, and any help/feedback/criticism is greatly appreciated as it can't hurt. I just came off a terrible losing streak after a fabulous winning streak. I've been reluctant to play games until I watch more and more videos and commit to even more study. I think my most recent results are showing some progress.
Thank you,
Jeffrey