A random thought

[bjsaust]

Sometimes I like to ask myself "what range of hands would go all in on this flop?" and if I'm getting ready to go all in with the weakest of those hands I stop and ask myself if thats such a good idea then.

[dranger7070]

wow... so basic, yet fucking genius lmao. definitely something people (newbies like myself) need to take into consideration...

hell of a random thought imo

[Micro2Macro]

Nice. You should add to this thread whenever you come up with another random thought.

[hangchiong]

bjsaust,your thoughts on the micros from last year has helped me a lot in my progress in 25NL.

1.Value bet a lot
2.Dont bluff

3.Now that you post in this thread,i would believe,why all in?

So this question comes up!

1.Why should i call this re-raise or min raise?
a.What does he have?(Range of hands)
2.Why am i going AI on the flop or turn with TPTK?
a.What does he have?(Range of hands)

I would defitnely need to improve my skill on the 3rd question.

[Erpel]

Good thought provoker, thanks mate.

When I read this first I thought - I'll open shove the flop with just about no range of hands. Then I thought about it and figured that that's not really what this is about.

I think this relates closely to what is called flop texture analysis, knowing the nuts and determining the relative as opposed to absolute strength of your hand.

The principle extends to any street, but the difference is most stark on the flop where theoretically you can make a decision for all of your stack before you are strictly speaking required to.

What isn't said is that if I'm at the very bottom of hands that I think should be willing to go all in my opponent should be really bad for me to think he has something worse often enough that it's profitable for me to proceed to go all-in.

It kind of relates to some basic thought exercises I try to go through when in a hand - like I try to determine what my opponent wants me to do and unless the cards clearly dictate a correct move one way or another I tend to go out of my way to disappoint my opponent. You want me to put money in? Ok, I'll fold my overpair. You want a free/cheap card? Ok, here's your massive bet/raise.

When we're at the strongest end of our range we can proceed with no fear and no deep contemplation. But when we're at the weakest, our reasoning needs to be at its strongest.

It's important to give opponents credit - especially when they are weak and passive and betting big.

[bjsaust]

Somewhat Hangchiong. This is really more spot specific. The place it mainly applies is where you have a hand that you normally think is a very strong hand and you'd be happy to get all in, but if you stop and look at the board, maybe in this case that hand isnt really as strong as you'd think. I guess its an extension of 1st level thinking really.

Erpel, spot on. Its not only our range we're looking at, its his range. If we're at the bottom of our range, but we think he'll get in with a lot worse then getting all in isnt so bad, but we need to be thinking about both ranges. It especially applies when we're the one pushing. People think "I have x hand, I want to get all in!" without thinking "hang on, what hands will call me if I push?" Sometimes you wont like the answer. Thats where range manipulation comes into it. Perhaps by calling we allow a villain to make mistakes with a wider range, whereas if we push we let him play correctly by folding or calling depending on his actual hand?