opening hand of 180 man on stars, suited connectors

[jdubs]

thoughts? as I saw this hand dealt to me, i remembered Harrington saying how he balances his play by occasionally raising UTG with suited connectors.....

PokerStars Game #4683176350: Tournament #23385773, $4.00+$0.40 Hold'em No Limit - Level I (10/20) - 2006/04/20 - 00:49:32 (ET)
Table '23385773 10' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: DIESTIR71 (1500 in chips)
Seat 2: hendy (1500 in chips)
Seat 3: angeleye70 (1500 in chips)
Seat 4: Prattatat (1500 in chips)
Seat 5: johncoltrane (1500 in chips)
Seat 6: Merlot1998 (1500 in chips)
Seat 7: bretpatrick (1500 in chips)
Seat 8: Gooseliva_42 (1500 in chips)
Seat 9: jaylane777 (1500 in chips)
hendy: posts small blind 10
angeleye70: posts big blind 20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to johncoltrane [5h 6h]
Prattatat has timed out
Prattatat: folds
Prattatat is sitting out
johncoltrane: raises 80 to 100
Merlot1998: calls 100
bretpatrick: calls 100
Gooseliva_42: folds
jaylane777: folds
DIESTIR71: calls 100
hendy: folds
angeleye70: folds
*** FLOP *** [4h 7h 8d]
johncoltrane: bets 440
Merlot1998: folds
bretpatrick: folds
DIESTIR71: calls 440
*** TURN *** [4h 7h 8d] [Kc]
johncoltrane: bets 960 and is all-in
DIESTIR71: calls 960 and is all-in

[WildBobAA]

Harrington does this to stay unpredictable vs players he regularly plays with and know his game. There's really no need to mix up your game in the 180s where people won't remember you.

[gabe]

youre good at flopping straights

[givememyleg]

I think Harrington means "changing things up" rather than starting a tourney this way.

Lucky you on the flop and stacking him. I might bet less.

[zenbitz]

Also, blinds here are worthless. And you got 3 callers, so your raise wasn't even big enough to isolate.

[adiamant]

Fortunately, as with a drawing hand you don't really want to isolate. I'd happily limp a suited connector early on, but I won't raise with it. I really need to check if in the long run it even pays off to limp. It certainly can't pay off to raise.

[jdubs]

I think Harrington means "changing things up" rather than starting a tourney this way.

Lucky you on the flop and stacking him. I might bet less.

changing things up could mean starting a tourney this way. I very rarely make raises like this with this position and so early in a tourney. and yeah i did get lucky, but I was hoping someone might offer any critique of the rest of the hand... I bet strong because of the flush draw, and because knowing in the early rounds of these, I am likely to get paid off.

[jdubs]

Fortunately, as with a drawing hand you don't really want to isolate. I'd happily limp a suited connector early on, but I won't raise with it. I really need to check if in the long run it even pays off to limp. It certainly can't pay off to raise.

I normally dont, and don't advocate this regularly- but like I said above, just trying to change things up a little, every once in a while. Also, this now makes me look like a "maniac" , and could help to get calls on a monster later on.

[jdubs]

Also, blinds here are worthless. And you got 3 callers, so your raise wasn't even big enough to isolate.

So this was a bad play?

[givememyleg]

So this was a bad play?

If you wouldn't have flopped a straight you would probably wish you didn't do this because you would never make it to showdown to show your UTG raise with 5 6 .. Without going to showdown you aren't getting an image of them saying "he raised that much UTG with 56?!?"

[zenbitz]

You don't want to isolate when you limp, because you need someone to hit 2nd best hand to make your implied odds. You need to isolate when you raise, so that you don't have to c-bet bluff into 4 people.

Raising like a maniac and then tightening up is a classic strategy. However, in a tourney you usually want to do the reverse. Otherwise, you will end up getting action when don't want it (card dead with big blinds)

However, this is not what I think Harrington means when he says mix it up. He means that when you are dealt sc in mid position, use your watch to randomly raise it 20% of the time.

I'm not sure either of these is particularly useful against the typical PS 180 crowd

[jdubs]

You don't want to isolate when you limp, because you need someone to hit 2nd best hand to make your implied odds. You need to isolate when you raise, so that you don't have to c-bet bluff into 4 people.

i understand this point and use it often, and usually only c bet in a heads up or maybe 3 way pot


Raising like a maniac and then tightening up is a classic strategy. However, in a tourney you usually want to do the reverse. Otherwise, you will end up getting action when don't want it (card dead with big blinds)

However, this is not what I think Harrington means when he says mix it up. He means that when you are dealt sc in mid position, use your watch to randomly raise it 20% of the time.

this was essentially, a random raise with sc.. not a raise I make often...

I'm not sure either of these is particularly useful against the typical PS 180 crowd

so what is useful for the PS 180 crowd?

[ripjohngotti]

It worked you got lucky. Was it a good play no


It was a dumb move everyone has stated it harrington mixes his play up but later on in a tourney i doubt he would raise with 5/6suited early on in a tourney. He also plays with pros u dont


just be glad it worked out Howd u do in the tourney?

[jdubs]

Ok guys, after reading the passage again, I have to believe my play here was in keeping with HOH. Check it out:

"I have one unusual play I like to make with any suited connectors. If I'm in first or second position, I'll raise with them about 15 % of the time, representing a top pair. I need to bluff some percentage of the time in early position, and by using suited connectors as my randomizer, I ensure that my bluffs can't be read. When the connectors turn into a big hand on the flop, it's almost impossible for anyone to put me on that hand, and when I finally show down the winning hand, my opponents remember it for a long time"

p.186 Harrington on Hold' em Vol I

Isn't this exactly what I did?

[Laeelin]

yes, but against the wrong people..

they will not remember it.
they will not put you on an overpair.

Your trying to play poker when you should be playing cards.

You need to not only understand the move, but also the reasoning behind the move... in this case, you understood the move, but missunderstood the reasoning... so you did the move correctly, but at the wrong time.

[Lukie]

I don't like putting 1/15 my stack in on the first hand of a tourney with a 5x raise from UTG with 6 high, personally. In a major, live, deep stacked tourney at a table full of nits that know your style, this may be a good changeup move.

[jdubs]

yes, but against the wrong people..

they will not remember it.
they will not put you on an overpair.

Your trying to play poker when you should be playing cards.

You need to not only understand the move, but also the reasoning behind the move... in this case, you understood the move, but missunderstood the reasoning... so you did the move correctly, but at the wrong time.

So the "right" time would be later on, perhaps ITM or at the FT?

[Renton]

you so didn't deserve that pot.

j/k

nice one though

[supermoneyz1]

Just because the results in a hand are in you're favor, does not mean its a good play.

What are the odds of hitting a miracle flop? lets define this as (2 pair, full house, str8, flush, andstr8-flushdraw) Compare those odds with what you'll get paid when you make you're hand. Yet, factoring the net loss you lose for all the times you dont make you're hand. Then also the scenario arises when you hit a miracle flop the opponent might still fold since he has not said he has a power house hand. Basically if you plan to raise this expect to lose tons of EV in the longrun.

If you are going to follow Harrington word for word then why does he say fold AJ utg at a full table? Because being UTG is the worst position and there is to much of a chance that there are better hands out there. At you're level of buyin forget about the deception, and start worrying about the mathematics behind some of you're plays.

[givememyleg]

yes, but against the wrong people..

they will not remember it.
they will not put you on an overpair.

Your trying to play poker when you should be playing cards.

Agree 100%.

[jdubs]

OK, I don't really believe this was that bad a play, if I make this move say- 10% of the time, UTG or UTG +1, how many times will I win the pot? - If you consider the various ways I am winning the pot:

A) it gets folded all the way around- I take the blinds, which at this point are worthless, granted, but this probably happens 10-20% of the time, maybe.

B) I get 1-2 callers, C- bet the flop, and take it down. Perhaps, 30 % of time.

C) as above except, make a further C bet heads up on the turn (based on read) that takes the pot, maybe this happens 10-20 percent of the time.

C) Flop a monster, and get paid alot. I'll give this 2-5% of the time.

Given these 4 ways that I have of winning the pot, and considering I make this initial move (raise UTG or UTG +1) only 10% of the time, it seems to me a worthwhile investment. Is this a flawed way of thinking?

Laeelin, I see your point that this is maybe against the wrong type of opponent, but realizing the various ways I have of winning this pot, even against the 180 crowd, it seems to me at least not -Ev $.

[jdubs]

Just because the results in a hand are in you're favor, does not mean its a good play.

What are the odds of hitting a miracle flop? lets define this as (2 pair, full house, str8, flush, andstr8-flushdraw) Compare those odds with what you'll get paid when you make you're hand. Yet, factoring the net loss you lose for all the times you dont make you're hand. Then also the scenario arises when you hit a miracle flop the opponent might still fold since he has not said he has a power house hand. Basically if you plan to raise this expect to lose tons of EV in the longrun.

If you are going to follow Harrington word for word then why does he say fold AJ utg at a full table? Because being UTG is the worst position and there is to much of a chance that there are better hands out there. At you're level of buyin forget about the deception, and start worrying about the mathematics behind some of you're plays.

Hitting a miracle flop, isnt the only way of winning this pot though when u make this move....

[DaNutsInYoEye]

So, how did you finish the tourney?

[jdubs]

So, how did you finish the tourney?

busted out pretty early on this hand-

PokerStars Game #4683464405: Tournament #23385773, $4.00+$0.40 Hold'em No Limit
- Level III (25/50) - 2006/04/20 - 01:21:27 (ET)
Table '23385773 10' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: STEVEN73 (1020 in chips)
Seat 2: hendy (1945 in chips) is sitting out
Seat 3: MannyIsGod (221 in chips)
Seat 4: cat1965 (2295 in chips)
Seat 5: johncoltrane (1985 in chips)
Seat 6: Merlot1998 (3868 in chips)
Seat 7: bretpatrick (3850 in chips)
Seat 8: Gooseliva_42 (4105 in chips)
Seat 9: freak216 (2367 in chips)
cat1965: posts small blind 25
johncoltrane: posts big blind 50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to johncoltrane [Td Tc]
Merlot1998: folds
bretpatrick: calls 50
Gooseliva_42: folds
freak216: raises 125 to 175
STEVEN73: folds
hendy: folds
MannyIsGod: raises 46 to 221 and is all-in
cat1965: calls 196
johncoltrane: raises 1764 to 1985 and is all-in

Came over the top of freak here, due to his very loose play..... figured I had him easily beat...

bretpatrick: folds
freak216: raises 382 to 2367 and is all-in
cat1965: calls 2074 and is all-in
*** FLOP *** [3h Jh 6s]
*** TURN *** [3h Jh 6s] [Ah]
*** RIVER *** [3h Jh 6s Ah] [8s]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
cat1965: shows [7c Ad] (a pair of Aces)
freak216: shows [9s As] (a pair of Aces - Nine kicker)
freak216 collected 620 from side pot-2
johncoltrane: shows [Td Tc] (a pair of Tens)
freak216 collected 5292 from side pot-1
MannyIsGod: shows [Kd 8c] (a pair of Eights)
freak216 collected 934 from main pot
Merlot1998 said, "nh"
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 6846 Main pot 934. Side pot-1 5292. Side pot-2 620. | Rake 0
Board [3h Jh 6s Ah 8s]
Seat 1: STEVEN73 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: hendy folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: MannyIsGod (button) showed [Kd 8c] and lost with a pair of Eights
Seat 4: cat1965 (small blind) showed [7c Ad] and lost with a pair of Aces
Seat 5: johncoltrane (big blind) showed [Td Tc] and lost with a pair of Tens
Seat 6: Merlot1998 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: bretpatrick folded before Flop
Seat 8: Gooseliva_42 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: freak216 showed [9s As] and won (6846) with a pair of Aces

[supermoneyz1]

OK, I don't really believe this was that bad a play, if I make this move say- 10% of the time, UTG or UTG +1, how many times will I win the pot? - If you consider the various ways I am winning the pot:

I reccomend this move 0 percent of the time.

A) it gets folded all the way around- I take the blinds, which at this point are worthless, granted, but this probably happens 10-20% of the time, maybe.

You took the blinds, woohooo the blinds are so small it does not make any difference. Plus, its more like 5 percent. I've played these 20-180s plenty of times, the chances of getting folds to a preflop raise will not happen at level1 blinds.

B) I get 1-2 callers, C- bet the flop, and take it down. Perhaps, 30 % of time.

C-Bet the flop for an extremely small pot? Why not cut you're losses you missed the flop.

C) as above except, make a further C bet heads up on the turn (based on read) that takes the pot, maybe this happens 10-20 percent of the time.

Based on read? give me a friggen break this is the first hand of the tournament.

C) Flop a monster, and get paid alot. I'll give this 2-5% of the time.

More like .1-2 percent, villan needs to hit a hand and you need to hit a bigger hand.

Even with off percentages you gave I bet this would still show a pretty BIG net loss. Also, account for all the times you completely miss the flop. Account for the times where you hit you're hand and opponents hits a bigger hand. You're just pissing away you're chips save them for the end game. This is not deepstack ring, with good opponents where you need to mix it up. Its a 20-180 home of the donks!

Given these 4 ways that I have of winning the pot, and considering I make this initial move (raise UTG or UTG +1) only 10% of the time, it seems to me a worthwhile investment. Is this a flawed way of thinking?

Laeelin, I see your point that this is maybe against the wrong type of opponent, but realizing the various ways I have of winning this pot, even against the 180 crowd, it seems to me at least not -Ev $.

You need to think about
1. What being UTG implies
2.the type of opponents you're facing...
3. long term EV (huge net loss face when you dont acquire the dream scenario)
4. no need to mix it up at this level...

[jdubs]

OK, I don't really believe this was that bad a play, if I make this move say- 10% of the time, UTG or UTG +1, how many times will I win the pot? - If you consider the various ways I am winning the pot:

I reccomend this move 0 percent of the time.

A) it gets folded all the way around- I take the blinds, which at this point are worthless, granted, but this probably happens 10-20% of the time, maybe.

You took the blinds, woohooo the blinds are so small it does not make any difference. Plus, its more like 5 percent. I've played these 20-180s plenty of times, the chances of getting folds to a preflop raise will not happen at level1 blinds.

B) I get 1-2 callers, C- bet the flop, and take it down. Perhaps, 30 % of time.

C-Bet the flop for an extremely small pot? Why not cut you're losses you missed the flop.

you get two callers and the flop is 300 at 10-20 blinds.. you don't c-bet this at least part of the time?

C) as above except, make a further C bet heads up on the turn (based on read) that takes the pot, maybe this happens 10-20 percent of the time.

Based on read? give me a friggen break this is the first hand of the tournament.

granted, I was speaking hypothetically, at a point later on when u might actually have a read

C) Flop a monster, and get paid alot. I'll give this 2-5% of the time.

More like .1-2 percent, villan needs to hit a hand and you need to hit a bigger hand.

no argument here, its a very rare case


Even with off percentages you gave I bet this would still show a pretty BIG net loss. Also, account for all the times you completely miss the flop. Account for the times where you hit you're hand and opponents hits a bigger hand. You're just pissing away you're chips save them for the end game. This is not deepstack ring, with good opponents where you need to mix it up. Its a 20-180 home of the donks!

Ok , Ok I understand your point. At this point in the 180 , not the time to make this move. Perhaps later in the tourney when the average opponent's level is more skilled.. i.e. the final 2 tables.

Given these 4 ways that I have of winning the pot, and considering I make this initial move (raise UTG or UTG +1) only 10% of the time, it seems to me a worthwhile investment. Is this a flawed way of thinking?

Laeelin, I see your point that this is maybe against the wrong type of opponent, but realizing the various ways I have of winning this pot, even against the 180 crowd, it seems to me at least not -Ev $.

You need to think about
1. What being UTG implies
2.the type of opponents you're facing...
3. long term EV (huge net loss face when you dont acquire the dream scenario)
4. no need to mix it up at this level...

thanks very much for the feedback! I appreciate it man.

[Xanadu]

I don't think this is an absolutely horrible play, but it isn't good. When you read Harrington's advice, realize that he is playing in live tournaments primarily. Early in a live tournament, a 5x BB raise is nowhere near as much of your stack as online. That's the real reason IMO why this wasn't a good play ... you risk too many chips with it.

[Laeelin]

Laeelin, I see your point that this is maybe against the wrong type of opponent, but realizing the various ways I have of winning this pot, even against the 180 crowd, it seems to me at least not -Ev $.

I disagree, i believe that this is a -EV move in any sense.

Your OOP!
You will win less with the better hand.
You will lose more when someone else has a better hand.

being OOP against fish really really sucks. They will not let go if they hit any pice of the flop(and they think that overcards are catching a piece of the flop). Against good players, at least you will be able to get more folds after the flop because they actually respect UTG raises.

There is no reason to make this play OOP unless your playing against aware players. IMO, even then it's not a good play, just a required play because against AWARE players, you need to make sure they know you can be bluffing in any posistion.... and choseing SC's as your bluffing hand is a lesser evil than pure rags, or hands that are easy to outkick.

[Miffed22001]

this is gross.
180s are so fishy to start with anyway. make a hand push it hard. Ok you did that part but why play oop. These fish ared destroyed by limping trash sooted stuff in lp and then letting them donk into into on great flops

[lolzzz_321]

[jdubs]

OK after playing another 180 last night, and considering the comments in this thread, I see what y'all are saying- you're right, these people are mostly total fish, and making a move like this makes no sense against them- they are unaware! I did'nt even consider doing this last night, but did make alot blind steals in position, and when called made alot of c-bets,
made some good calls/plays at the final table- had the chip lead for most of the final table, ended up 3rd after getting a cripling bad beat. A good night though....

[Miffed22001]

OK after playing another 180 last night, and considering the comments in this thread, I see what y'all are saying- you're right, these people are mostly total fish, and making a move like this makes no sense against them- they are unaware! I did'nt even consider doing this last night, but did make alot blind steals in position, and when called made alot of c-bets,
made some good calls/plays at the final table- had the chip lead for most of the final table, ended up 3rd after getting a cripling bad beat. A good night though....

play more sir!
(and win) :P

[jdubs]

OK after playing another 180 last night, and considering the comments in this thread, I see what y'all are saying- you're right, these people are mostly total fish, and making a move like this makes no sense against them- they are unaware! I did'nt even consider doing this last night, but did make alot blind steals in position, and when called made alot of c-bets,
made some good calls/plays at the final table- had the chip lead for most of the final table, ended up 3rd after getting a cripling bad beat. A good night though....

play more sir!
(and win) :P

Now if I only had more time to play! ..lol ( I have been relegated (sp?) to playing on Mondays only pretty much) Getting more confidence in my MTT play though, of course its only at the micro-level, but we all have to start somewhere right?

[supermoneyz1]

I disagree, i believe that this is a -EV move in any sense.

Plays are either -EV or they are not. It doesn't matter what you "believe" about them.

[Laeelin]

I disagree, i believe that this is a -EV move in any sense.

Plays are either -EV or they are not. It doesn't matter what you "believe" about them.

Thats just being silly.

There is to much information to process in each situation to say exactly what the most +EV move is most of the time... If it was that simple, bots would be ruleing the poker world.

You look at the situation and make what you think (aka: believe) is the most +EV move.

Only in abstract is your statement true.

[supermoneyz1]

you misunderstood my point, yet now that I put some thought into it I am at fault for being hypocritical.

Saying I believe its -EV implies that it might not be -EV to someone else. A play mathematically is either -EV or it is not with all factors accounted for.

It is obvious in this thread that raising a suitor connector given opponents calling range, heros position through out hand and low blinds make this incredibly unprofitable in all aspects of EV. Yet, saying "I believe" kind of rubbed me in the wrong way when reffering to EV.

[Laeelin]

Saying I believe its -EV implies that it might not be -EV to someone else. A play mathematically is either -EV or it is not with all factors accounted for.

I don't agree with that either...

There are moves that are +EV for one player, and -EV for another.

A couple examples would be:

Daniel Negranu vs. Dan Herrington and Continuation betting...
Gus Hanson vs. Phil Hellmouth and Slowplaying...

Or, if you want a local example:
Rippy vs. Laeelin and preflop raises...

Radically diffrent playstyles can totally change what is +EV for each player....

Yet, saying "I believe" kind of rubbed me in the wrong way when reffering to EV.

+EV and -EV are only simple math equasions AFTER all the involved players are all in and all cards are face up... Before then it's all educated guesses... and I try not to call my edcuated guesses facts... (key word "try")

Though I must admid that in the $22 - 180's, I'm sure it is a fact... but someone reading this might be playing in another MTT against other players where it is +EV ..

[Rondavu]

I was gonna say Harrington doesn't play 180's, but I think the point has passed.

[Toddy2]

I would limp w/ this at the early stages.

[supermoneyz1]

Okay I was going to let this go realizing this is kind of a stupid thing to be arguing and for me to even bring up, but since you misunderstood what point I was trying to make i'll respond.

Quote:
Saying I believe its -EV implies that it might not be -EV to someone else. A play mathematically is either -EV or it is not with all factors accounted for.


I don't agree with that either...

There are moves that are +EV for one player, and -EV for another.

A couple examples would be:

Daniel Negranu vs. Dan Herrington and Continuation betting...
Gus Hanson vs. Phil Hellmouth and Slowplaying...

Or, if you want a local example:
Rippy vs. Laeelin and preflop raises...

Radically diffrent playstyles can totally change what is +EV for each player....

DId you read what I wrote? I said with all factors accounted for into you're decision. What you listed are factors.

No matter what plz remember this is online poker and there is a winning formula to it based on mathematical expected value, deviating from it and being unique at such low stakes will OFTEN result in -EV moves.

So lets take you're laeelina vs rippy example,

Even though every player has a different style, their plays are still based on EV. So if rippy decides to raise 67s UTG @ full table in a tournament, his EV will defenitely change due to the image, he will often cause opponents to have a looser calling range against him. Yet, when it comes down to it, even when you give him the benefits of raising that utg, the play will still show a -EV value in long term profits.

Though I must admid that in the $22 - 180's, I'm sure it is a fact... but someone reading this might be playing in another MTT against other players where it is +EV ..

I see what you're saying. But you still are wrong for saying "I believe this play is -EV", since you are specefically reffering to this hand in this thread. The hand posted in this thread IS -EV, and the math proves it and so does every reply.

[zenbitz]

Y
I'm not sure either of these is particularly useful against the typical PS 180 crowd

so what is useful for the PS 180 crowd?

When I said I wasn't sure, I meant I wasn't sure. I have only played like 10 of these, with 1 9th and 1 12th. I haven't done a scientific analysis, but my feeling is that most people are not real weak/tight early. So, they will call when you push. So push with good hands, not bad ones.

I'm sure others with more expereience can be more useful.

[jdubs]

Thanks, the last one I played, I was able to win- and I didnt raise UTG with suited connectors once