|
Ugh, I've been toying with the following idea lately, and it applies here:
Basically, I noticed that when I "go all-in a lot", this incites some suckers to gamble with me. I guess it's not +EV for tactical reasons, but for psychological reasons. Some people have good restraint, but others get a rush out of this kinda thing, and they'll call me with absolute garbage.
But the problem I am facing here is this: To make this strategy consistent - and I think the strategy is great at exploiting the weaker players and getting their money faster, and it's also absolute killer if you get a good run of cards - I need to go all-in on quite some situations, and try to keep this on the whole a +EV deal.
But I'm often faced with situations like this one.. if I'm up against a "gambler" I'll get called here by a weaker kicker or a shitty draw or even middle pair.. but against the thinking players these all-ins seem to be counterproductive. I'm basically doing a lot of "only get called by a better hand" pushes vs thinking players (or, players with constraint, the non-gamblers)..
It feels like I'm minimizing value against draws and weaker hands.. those that would stay in if I played it slower.. and maximizing my losses when I'm up against a good hand. Any insight here would be appreciated (gabe?)..
[disclaimer: my normal, more weak-tight postflop strategy works fine, but I'm fidgeting with different strategies for learning purposes, and this one looks promising]
|