Protection mechanism: crutch or good poker?

[EricE]

Maybe this will generate some discussion, maybe not. We’ll see.

I have been thinking a lot about how I bet, well no, actually about how much I will call with a given hand. I don’t know if this is unique to me or not so I’ll put it out there and you guys can tell me if you operate under similar rules. I am most interested in knowing (your opinions on) if this set of rules is helping or hindering me.

Basically it is a tiered structure of the size of your stack (relative to the buyin) that I am willing to call with a given hand (TP, overpair, Two pair, set, straight, flush, FH).

[all examples we assume no reads]
Eg. Let’s say I hold AK and raise it up, 3-4 callers. The flop is TK5 rainbow. Someone before me goes AI with a full stack. There are times I would call this but only with a specific read or feeling that this opponent could do this with TPGK. Readless I fold. That is because I only have TPTK and my calling rules don’t allow me to call such a large bet all at once with only TP.

This set of rules is never something I really articulated to myself, until now. They just developed out of my experience.

Another example will help solidify your understanding of my rule set.
Eg. I hold KT and limp into the flop, 3-4 callers. The flop is TK5 rainbow. Someone before me goes AI with a full stack. Two pair allows me to call this. Especially with top two pair I would like to get it all in there for I am likely to be good even against 3-4 callers.

An over pair fits somewhere in between TP and Two pair. I am willing to call short stack pushes but not full stack pushes. If a full stack pushes it’s more about how I feel at the moment, hehe.

I also want to point out that this rule doesn’t cover how much I’ll put into the pot with a given hand but rather how much I will call at ONE TIME. Meaning that if I held AK and the flop was TK5, as above, and someone was betting the ~pot(or less) into me on each street, I am willing to call through all streets. [not that I would, I likely would raise the flop or turn but you get the point]

Realize that any reads can and do override these rules. They get broken all the time but I use reads to justify breaking them.

This whole thing surfaced in my mind as I was contemplating a move up in stakes. I was contemplating betting a certain hand the way I would bet it at the lower stakes in order to limit my risk. I immediately realized that this wouldn’t work as people would read it as weak and I would be pushed off pots I should have won simply because they have a given expectation of what hands equate to (in bets) also.

Now we come to where I question if this as good poker. I continually analyze HHs on this forum where people ask if they should call so and so’s push on the flop with TPTK. Most say they will call it and some say they will call it every time. My rules don’t allow me to do this but is this holding me back or protecting me?

Your feedback and discussion is appreciated.

[rubixstreub]

I don't think it has a much to do with instant all ins from other stacks (whether large or small) although I agree it's much easier to call a SS push from a large stack.

For me it comes down to my holding vs. the size of the field.

TPGK/TPTK is always 2/3 - full pot bet hoping to take the pot right there, or reraising 3x against the original raiser and hoping he'll drop it from there or throw out blocking bets on the turn/river. If someone comes along I'm really slowing down trying to put out 1/2 blocking bets and if I'm reraised on the turn it's a good sign I should bail. I think I've lost about 90% of time when I push with TP or it's pushed into me. It's just not a good hand to get aggro with unless you've got good reads your villian is a donk. I'm learning this the hard way it seems. I win little pots with these holdings and go broke in big pots.

OVERPAIRS... Depends on the board, and I'm more likely to call an all-in with KK when the board is xxQ or xxJ. than rag rag rag. But you're right, you give them more credit than TPTK but still very valunerable to sets.

2 PAIR - I'm playing this strong and I'm really just worried about giving draws horrible odds. I honestly don't hit these much at all and I hardly ever get action back when I do (limpers tend to play passive post flop too). I usually hit them from the blinds or with a limp and if the board is tame and I get resistence it's pretty easy to tell a fellow limper hit his set. Overall, they're hard to drop though, and only stronger discipline and experience will give me the will power

Obviously this is the most transparent way to play these hands and I'm sure a good majority of players above the 25NL game play this way, or play better. I have a feeling the best answer to your inquiry is experience and study. Hope that furthers the discussion.

[zenbitz]

I think what you are describing is a "default" strategy. That is, unless you have more information you are going to behave in a predictable fashion (folding TPTK to an all-in).

Another example - I am going to limp/call small raise with my small pocket pair, but fold unless I hit my set.

At some level, it's easy to have a solid strategy that you only deviate from for specific reasons (the reason could be "I have been playing too predictablly for the last 2 hours).

I don't think this is bad poker - as long as you make adjustments where necessary.

Note that if your RULES are bad, then it could be bad poker! Like "Always limp - re-raise all in with AQs pre-flop".

I actually think this is a really GOOD way to play heads-up. Establish a clear pattern, try to establish that villain knows your pattern, then change it. Example: I am going to bet out when I miss the flop, and slow play when I hit top pair or better. If you can show down several hands doing this (or fold when re-raised and are bluffing), then the NEXT monster (top pair) you get, bet it hard.

A totally different, but equally valid strategy heads-up would be to act more or less randomly. Call! Raise! Fold! Whatever! Just confuse the poor guy, or get him to make mistakes. (This works if you can read HIM). Since you know what you have, and he has NO idea (since you are acting more or less randomly), then you have an edge.

[Miffed22001]

I like this post.
interesting stuff.
I agree with most of your thinking.
If i have tptk/gk i call any short stack allin
i need a read to call a medium stack
i dont call a large stack or a stack of the same size as mine
I will always call the allin with top 2 pair. I will pay sets here i think (this is a leak that i dont know if i can plug, can you really fold top two pair?)
if i set i call any all in
Overpairs is dependent.
a short stack i will always call, ill probably call a medium stack too for the amount of times they push AQ on a Q high flop for example.
Again a big stack is a problem.

A point i would like to make though is this. While its good to consider stack sizes in relation to the strength of our and their hands what about the 'bully' factor? How likely is it that a big stack might try to bully us off our better hand simply because they think they can? This is a play we have all made i think
Taking note of the HU suggestion. There is a post in 6max that fnord made i think where i discussed playing typical HU poker then changing. eg start by raising good hands and call down if possible and show then strat to raise any crap and show it. The idea being to confuse the opponent. This will only become a problem if the opp doesnt play in a standard fashion, playing against this style would be difficult.
anyways i made a long post. Hope there is something of value

[johnny_fish]

Everything depends.. Position, stack sizes, opps, cards. Those are the variables on which to optimize your actions. Essentially long term success is completely determined by relative optimizing capability.

[EricE]

Well it seems the responses show that people have similar rules they follow themselves. I would like to hear from someone who thinks this is a bad idea and why. I mean, lots of people say they will call an All in holding AQ on a 4Q9 flop. Maybe calling is not based on a read but the PF action and number of callers. If this is the case then maybe someone could lay out a scenario where you would be willing to call a flop push AI (from a big stack) readless.

[Peluri]

I just purchaces poker tracker and found out that my
biggest leak is 1 pair play. All other hands 2pr, trips,str,fl, boats
are showing hefty profits but I am actually losing 1 pair play.

I have played TPTK very aggressively and I guess I have
to re-evaluate my TPTK play. I guess I am not calling
with 1/2 stack raises. And not making continuation
bets after turn if I get smooth call after flop bet (usually
1/2-1 pot bet). If i get big raise after flop I will fold.

Maybe I will lose some pots this way which I could win but
this is big leak in my game I want to plug it.

My biggest winning preflop hands are pairs, AK, AQ,AJ and
some suited conns like 89s.

My biggest losing hands are KJ,KQ and suprisingly QQ. So
I guess I stop playin KJ,KQ if I not cant limp in with them and
does not hit at least 2pr.

These in absolute dollars.

Peluri

[arkana]

I just purchaces poker tracker and found out that my
biggest leak is 1 pair play.

Dont stress it dude, its supposed to be a loser because it includes all the times you folded a pair! Unless you somehow got the amount you won\lost in at showdown with one pair, but the stat that PT displays includes all the times you folded and since we fold one pair hands a lot I think you will find everyone's net won with one pair is negative. I know mine is.

I think your Won $ At SD% with one pair is a better stat to look at to see how often you are paying off better hands. Mine is 49.37%.

Edit: can someone confirm how the net amount won\lost with one pair is calculated in PT?