Beat/Vent Thread

[Garth Kay]

By the way there's nothing wrong with min raises.

That is the first time I have min raised pre flop in 4591 hands.

And Scott understands the power of the min raise.

[Garth Kay]

[ ] min raising UTG is playing perfect poker

What's wrong with min raising if we know it will extract further value or induce a spew from a villain?

Every four bet min raise pre?

[Brett Kay]

Actually it was because i said to Min Bet.

More of a tactic to induce an extra bet somewhere. Obviously with two callers aces are still up 60% of the time.

UTG is considered strong when raising, no one (theoretically) should be raising with crap cards. So we are trying to lead into players with marginals that feel the need to call, or reraise, then it is a matter of getting the most of the money in to take it down.

Think of low pockets that still call, mid pockets that will reraise. High pockets that feel they are still good. Not to mention marginals that when they hit the flop will also pay off with an extra bet as well.

[Brett Kay]

Sometimes the imperfect line is better than the perfect line against players that you have history with

[Garth Kay]

By the way, I did post this in General Poker Chat not Hand Discussion!

[trishan]

It's the old dilemma of risk reward. By min raising you are taking on much greater risk (that a smaller pocket pair calls and hits a set, someone calls and hits 2 pair or makes a flush) and by taking on the additional risk against more than one weaker hand you should expect to get commensurate reward. You really have to weigh up all factors.

If I am deep in a MTT - I would prefer a standard UTG raise with aces to minimise risk. Open shoving certain stacks is another good way to minimise risk.

[AceLosesKing]

[ ] min raising UTG is playing perfect poker

What's wrong with min raising if we know it will extract further value or induce a spew from a villain?

Every four bet min raise pre?

You can get the same value by raising 3x. This is a $4.40, no one folds. You don't know that villian/s will spew. Especially in a 4.40, there is less chance that you will be 3b with KQ/AJ/the like here. Players are generally passive and call too much.

I assume that is supposed to say "ever 4b min raised pre?" Off the top of my head, I don't think I ever have. I despise min raises, I've probably made it 1.5xBB at some point though. But I see your point here.

UTG at a FR table I do not want 4 hands coming in when I have Aces. If I am at an aggressive table with a 30/70 in the blinds, then I might min raise. But otherwise, I either open 3/3.5/4x or limp/re-raise, depending on table dynamic.

You're sitting on 20bb, if any good player was paying attention they should realise this is a strong hand. With villian's hand and board the money still goes in anyway. The hand isn't played horribly (I can see the point you/Brett are trying to put across), but I don't think its optimal.

[trishan]

The maths is interesting. Here is equity against 2 players assuming a min raise with quite conservative calling ranges (top 11.5%) and 1 player with a slightly tighter range:

Hand 0: 72.748% { AA }
Hand 1: 13.667% { 77+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KQo }
Hand 2: 13.585% { 77+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KQo }

Hand 0: 83.684% { AA }
Hand 1: 16.316% { 88+, ATs+, KTs+, AQo+ }

You basically lose 10% of equity for each additional player in the hand (63-12-12-12 against 3 players with top 11.5% hands). So you must expect to make 10% more per player that comes along than if you went agaisnt 1 player.

[AceLosesKing]

Very interesting analysis Trishy.

[trishan]

Scenario 1 - Standard UTG raise

Garth 1000
Player 1 1000

If we assume money goes in Garth averages 1400 profit. (70% of 2000.)

Scenario 2 - Min-raise & 2 players

Lets assume Garth gets two people to come along pre then as the hand plays out 1 players money goes in at some point while another will contribute X to the pot before folding.

Garth 1000
Player 1 1000
Player 2 1000

Garth has 60% of at least 2000 (2 all in players) plus whatever Player 2 contributes. To be profitable:

.60(2000+X)>1400
X > 333

In this simplified version Garth must be able to make at least 333 from the 2nd player and stack at least one of the 2 players to be profitable.