When I first started playing, I rarely did them, did pretty well for a beginner.
Then: Read a bunch books, watched the videos, started following the pros' advice, raised pre-flop whenever the experts deemed appropriate, followed them up with continuation bets if need be...
Game went straight down the toilet.
All but cut the PFR's and am doing a lot better now (particularly in tourneys). The more I think about them, the less sense they make to me. I could expand on this and probably will in the near future, but for now I'll just put the question out there for my fellow poker players:
Do they work for you, or am I right in feeling like they kinda suck?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't do them, but from what I've observed from other people in my poker group doing them, I don't think they're terribly effective.
ReplyDeleteI think they're needed when you have a big hand to get the riff raff out. I was in a tournament at Hollywood Park. I had 2-5 in the big blind. The player under the gun (who had just lost a big pot) called. Three other callers. So I of course checked my option.
ReplyDeleteFlop came A-3-4 giving me a straight nobody could have predicted. The player under the gun went all in. He had pocket aces. I knocked him out of the tournament and if he'd made even a moderate raise I would have folded pre-flop.
If you've got a big hand I don't think you want to allow a bunch of limpers in. Too easy to lose the nest egg!
Pre-flop raises are great unless you go all in against Art when he's not paying attention to how many chips you have. Then your KJ gets called by his 8-10 off suit, he hits the 8, and you hand over your last $36K and go home down $60.
ReplyDeleteI just don't think the 3x big blind is always effective in doing what it's meant to do -- and as Doug said, get the riff raff out. But generally speaking, the pre-flop raise is a good thing. But like anything else, it's all situational and position.
Hey guys...
ReplyDeleteThanks for getting the ball rolling.
To be clear, I'm not saying it's NEVER a good thing to do, just that on balance, it probably loses more money than it wins. You're putting at least 3x the big blind in on a hand that could easily come up zilch on the flop, and then when it does, the onus will be on you to put in even MORE money (4 or 4 more BB's at least) for a continuation bet, just so it's not obvious that you didn't hit the flop...except lots of players will suspect it IS a continuation bet, so you very well might not scare anybody out, and now you've put in 7-8 Big Blinds on a completely shitty hand. And even if you DO hit the flop, you won't necessarily make much money (having pre-flop raised makes it a lot easier for the others to put you on a hand), and could even lose a big stack, depending how things go down.
The only three really strong scenarios for pre-flop raising (barring crazy-ass shit going down) are: a) Everyone folds to you pre-flop...So you won a few blinds at most; b) You get some callers, you miss the flop, you make a continuation bet, and everyone folds...so you won a few blinds at most; or c) You hit your hand really strongly on the flop, and someone else hits it slightly less strongly and doesn't put you on your hand. Which is i) infrequent, and ii) just as likely to win you a nice-sized pot even if you DIDN'T raise pre-flop.
Whereas...
If you generally call the BB (or call a raise, if your hand's good enough), a) Putting you on a hand is much harder, b) You've got a lot less on the line, and c) The onus is NOT on you to bet the flop. If you hit the flop, great: Let someone ELSE bet it, and you call or raise, and no one will be able to tell what you have. If you miss it, big deal, so you fold.
I guess my attitude toward hands have kind become like De Niro's in "Heat"; always be able to walk away. Much harder to do if you've PFR'd, and even harder if you've continued.
My $.02.
So for what it's worth, fellas...
ReplyDelete1. Last night, I did only ONE pre-flop raise the entire night, and it wound up doing damage. If you missed it: BB was $2K, I raised it to $8K with Jacks, John raised me all-in to about $15,500, and I called him, simply because I was already in for $8K, and wound up losing the hand;
2. I wound up going out on the bubble, on a hand that SHOULD have demonstrated the downside of PFR's, but luck intervened. Blind was $3K, Ric raised to $9K with 8's, I raised HIM all-in to $25K or so with K's. Ric (who had me slightly covered) called, but I suspect he would NOT have if he didn't already have $9K committed. And yeah, he hit his 8 on the flop, but the odds against that were enormous, so but for that very lucky beat, Ric would have been all but eliminated because of his PFR.
So I'm sticking with my story...though I continue to feel like an idiot for not calling those other two pre-flop all-in's that we won't speak of again.
I was actually going to post a comment about not doing PFR, assuming that you were arguing for them. But seeing as you've taken that side of the debate, I'm going to mix it up and show both sides of PFR on one type of hand.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I don't think you can talk about PFR's in one context, because there is position to consider, and quality of the hand itself. For example, PFRs with QQ and JJ is different than PFR with 6-3 suited, and the texture of each is different with position.
So, given all that, I'm going to use the latter here - and talk about 6-3 suited, which is one of my favorites, for purely random luck of draw reasons. I could easily be talking about 8-7, 5-2 or whatever - but this is essentially all small suited connectors - that have the advantage of probably being live cards, but the disadvantage of being of little equity if it comes to a high card showdown, or even pair v pair.
Now then, it's way different to do a PFR with these cards in first position than on the button, but for the moment, I'll ignore that, and we'll just talk about the PFR itself. The goal of the PFR in this case is misdirection. By raising with 8-7 suited, you are giving yourself 2 chances to win. a) everyone folds. b) you hit something people can't see. I think you've been arguing strongly against a), but neglecting how much money b) can net you over the long run. Your argument that you would get those big pots either way is not necessarily true. If you raise with 5-2, presumably the only callers you get are serious ones. If you limp with it, and hit your big flop, people may leave more often than not. With PFR, You'll crack Aces and get paid off big, or you'll lose 7x blinds and have to run away. Over the long run, the hidden stealth of your raise with low cards pays for all the run ins with big cards or misses.
And then there is texture to consider on the flop - this is key. This is everything. You don't have to continuation bet - you can play it however you need to. You can get away from 6-7. Or you can can raise big and represent. Now if the texture of the board is a single high card, like an A, then you can use that. If you get called by a pair of 9s in late position or a loose player playing Q10, and the flop comes with an Ace or a King - then your continuation bet looks solid. How can they call you? And if they do, can they really call your bullet fired on the turn? No. If the board comes all low cards, or suits not related to you, and they fire back - you can let go. The PFR is not the death of you at all - it is one aspect of the texture.
Now I have testing the PFR many times with 6-3 suited, trust me. I have played tourneys where I did and didn't do it. I have had most success by raising it - mostly choosing button late position so that, like I said, ppl fold or I can represent a big hand if I don't hit my suit or straight. However, every once and awhile, I have limped with it, mostly in the BB or SB, and I have hit big - and seen the side of the argument you are talking about. Wow - if I can hit big like that, why waste 3x all the time - just pay 1x and see where it gets me. Because, playing 1x calling all the time will get no one to fold, and then your wimpy hand must have equity to beat high card, which you know it does not. Then how much money do you have to spend to win that pot? Those 1x calls are throwing money away when we talk about PFR with small connectors.
If you raise 3x in late position with the small connectors, I guarantee you will make more, or lose less (both key in poker) than doing the 1x call all the time.
That all being said - 2 weeks ago, I limped on the button with 6-3 suited and flopped 2 pair against Doug and J when they also connected, and I got lucky. The reason I limped there was all context and texture - I had a low stack, and couldn't afford to PFR, and I had been playing a lot of pots and I knew they would call either way. In that case, might as well save my $$.
Now then, if you're talking about PFR with QQ or JJ, I think it's even more essential...
Vaughan -
ReplyDeleteYou make a persuasive and eloquent argument for certain circumstances in which PFR's are appropriate. I would include hands like Q's down to 9's or so as well, depending on the situation.
Case in point (And I'll address your points in a sec, just let me get this part out): As I already described briefly on Facebook, I declined to PFR with Q's the other night simply because I was overly cocky about my anti-PFR stance, and I got knocked out of the tournament because the BB had 6-2 offsuit and hit an inside straight on the river.
On the one hand, obviously, if I had PFR'd, he would (let's assume) not have called, and I would have won a blind and a half with my queens.
On the other, a) That's a pretty lame take for pocket Queens (and it was my first remotely playable hand of the whole tournament, so consider my state of mind here), b) The odds of the cards coming for him the way they did were microscopic, so I'm not entirely convinced that playing out of concern over something as unlikely as THAT happening are entirely founded, and c) The thing is, on the flop, all he had was an inside straight draw. He made a minimum raise, I raised him 4x it, and he CALLED it without having anywhere near the proper odds for it, so if his play had really made sense, he WOULD have folded, and I would have won slightly more than if I'd PFR'd.
So in short, I'd say this was an almost cartoonishly effective illustration of when one SHOULD pre-flop raise, but by itself, it doesn't really make a strong argument in favor of the tactic in general.
Now on to your point...
Okay, let's talk 6-3 suited (just to continue with your example).
ReplyDeleteAccording to my poker simulator, this is a hand that wins...
Against 9 opponents, 10% of the time;
Against 5 opponents, 13.5% of the time;
Against 2 opponents, 25% of the time.
For purposes of comparison, 7-2 offsuit, the worst hand of all, wins...
Against 9 opponents, 4% of the time;
Against 5 opponents, 7.5% of the time;
Against 2 opponents, 19% of the time.
So 6-3 suited is, depending on amount of opponents, somewhere between slightly stronger than and twice as strong as the worst hand you could have. This is not to criticize it, just to clarify where we are on the hand scale.
Okay. So to review, the arguments for PFR'ing with it are:
1. Everyone could fold, and you win the hand right there, pre-flop.
Well, obviously, that's an argument for PFR'ing with ANY hand. Question is, how often will this happen. Naturally, a lot depends on the amount of players and how tight they are, but by and large, my observation is that at the level of play we're at, a) there aren't a whole lot of pre-flop walks, and b) when they do happen, it's usually because someone made a monstrous raise like all-in because they have Jacks or something and don't want to take any chances of losing the hand.
But by and large, a 3-4x the BB PFR will get at least one caller, sometimes several. Let's face it, people like to see flops, especially when the stakes are as relatively low as our games are. And on top of that, not only are you going to get callers most of the time, but occasionally you'll even get a re-raiser. What then? Call (or re-raise) the re-raise? Pretty ballsy and not likely to work out. Fold? Probably the wisest move, and there go a few wasted BB's. So...a) doesn't do much for me. But let's look at...
b) The board hits your hand, and people don't expect it (because you PFR'd, so they assume you have something stronger than 6-3 suited).
Well, sure, we love that. But...
1. How often does that happen?
As said above, this is a winning hand (betting and everything else aside) 25% of the time (or in pessimist terms, a losing hand 75% of the time) against a mere two opponents. And that's IF you hang in there all the way to the river. How often does it SEEM like a potentially winning hand on the flop, i.e., how often would you like the flop enough to call a bet on it? Probably not too often.
And sure, if you don't hit it, you could continuation bet it, but that only works out if i) Everybody folds (so you don't win much) or ii) You hit your hand on the turn and/or river (which won't happen much).
So okay, I'll concede that when this hand DOES hit for you, it will probably pay off big...though again, certainly not necessarily. If I called your PFR with, say, A-Q, and a rag flop comes, I'm probably going to let you bet on it, and if you do, I probably fold. Done and done.
(cont'd)
So now we're talking about a hand that a) Doesn't win much, b) The few times it does, it pays off big SOME of the time. Does that make it worth PFR'ing?
ReplyDeleteWell, that brings us to: What's the advantage of PFR'ing with it over just calling with it? Let's explore that option:
a) If you just call with it, you still have the mystery on your side. If you don't pre-flop raise much, no one will really know WHAT you have on any given hand. So not much advantage either way there.
b) Sure, if you PFR and get a caller or two and hit your hand, the pot will be bigger, but on the other hand, if you don't PFR, you're more likely to have MORE callers, so that's that many more people that you've got a great hand hidden from after the flop. One guy could have Jacks, one guy a flush draw, one guy top pair or even two pair, etc. So again, I'd call that a push.
c) The fact of the matter remains, it's a relatively weak hand, so what it boils down to: Most of the time, calling with it is a waste of a BB, and PFR'ing with it is a waste of a few BB's.
Again, not making the argument that you should NEVER pre-flop raise with it; clearly it's worked out for you enough for you to have some fondness for it. Point is, the arguments for calling with it don't really suffer in comparison, and the arguments AGAINST pfr'ing with it instead of calling have some weight. On balance, I'd say it's the sort of hand you PFR with once in a while, just to mix things up, and depending on the circumstances.
The arguments for PFR'ing with Jacks and Queens are a bit stronger; you PFR when you don't want to see a flop, but IF you do, you're still probably in pretty good shape.
Other than that...still more agin' it than fer it. But you raise some excellent points, and since you kicked some major come-from-behind ass at the last tournament, they can't be entirely dismissed.
In short, I look forward to our next game.
Too many words. Can't comprehend. I'm all in.
ReplyDeleteI think Peter makes a key point: I would take issue with the assumption that if you PFR you have to make the continuation bet when you don't hit. One of the reasons to play low suited connectors and low pairs is they're supposed to be easy to get away from. If you play 3-3 and get nothing but over cards, why make the continuation? That to me is the pointless move... unless you've put an opponent on a specific hand (perhaps by reaction to PFR) that you think you can beat or push him off of.
ReplyDeleteWhere I do like a simple call of the BB is in late position. That's because one of the problems is in most of the games I play you'll rarely get a chance to see a flop with a simple call of the BB. If you're on the button and nobody's raised you might have an opportunity. But if you're in early position and you don't raise, what do yo do when someone else raises 3xBB? If you have 9's do you re-raise? Call? What about low suited connectors or low pairs? If you fold you've just thrown away some money. So you've completely defeated your attempt to see the flop cheap. Sometimes making the raise yourself means others will only call and then you're the one in the driver's seat.
>>If you play 3-3 and get nothing but over cards, why make the continuation?
ReplyDeleteWell, "to CB or not to CB" is worthy of a whole thread all on its own, but the argument for it would be, it's PROBABLY the only way you're going to win the hand. If you've PFR'd and then check the flop, someone else is going to realize you didn't hit it, they bet, and then you'll probably want to fold unless it's a baby bet. On top of that, if you make it a pattern of checking the flop when you don't hit it, people will know that when you DO bet the flop, you HAVE hit it, so that will reduce your winnings considerably.
If you CB, you win if everyone else folds, or if someone calls and you suck out on the turn or river (and in the latter case, you'd win a bundle).
The long and short of it is, I think you generally want to keep your story consistent. Pre-flop raise says "I have a hand." Continuation bet says, "Do you hear me? I HAVE A HAND." Checking just says "Ummm....Do YOU have a hand?" So while I'd never make the argument that you HAVE to CB if you've PFR'd (too many abbreviations?), I'd say that if you DO pre-flop raise, you should probably be CB'ing the majority of the time (though, as always, it's circumstance-dependent).
But your arguments against the PFR are pretty much the same I would use against the CB. Using the 3-3 example, if you don't hit on the flop you're probably beat most of the time. How often are you really going to get everyone to fold with the CB? Especially if everyone knows you always make the CB. And if there's an A or K on the flop and there were no PFRs you're really wasting your bet. Nobody's going to be afraid of you if you didn't raise pre-flop. I'd say you ultimately lose a lot more money than you win by making the CB when you miss the flop.
ReplyDeleteWhereas if you hit that other 3 (a 1 in 8 chance) you probably have the best hand most of the time and you can use your history of checking the flop to trap. Or you can bet and you'll probably get called by top pair anyway, at least in our game.
And when I've missed with a low pair or suited connectors I'm not really worried about someone reading weakness. I'm not putting more money into that pot anyway. Unless I decide to really bluff which only works if I don't do it every time.
In my mind the PFR is a way of getting information whereas the CB is just a desperate stab at salvaging money you've already lost.
But yes, the continuation bet probably is worthy of a discussion on it's own!
Doug -
ReplyDeleteYeah, what I should have added above is that your example is one where I would not CB, but I still would say that IF you are one who tends to PFR, you should be following that up with a CB fairly regularly. It's all circumstance-dependent, of course.
Anyway, here's as good a place to mention as any that today was my first time placing in the money in a casino tourney, and I did so with minimal PFR's, but when I did use them, I was glad I did, so I'm still pretty much where I've been on them, for what that's worth.
See you tomorrow night...