Rethinking min-raises

[Nakamura]

Min-raises used to be made with all sorts of hands. For example, drawy hands such as a SD or FD, two-pair or a variety of speculative hands. Occasionally it would be a big hand. The pattern seems to be changing to me. Very often it seems like this bet is being made with a set or better. Do we need to adjust our strategy and rethink stacking off in these spots?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, 6.5 Tournament, 10/20 Blinds (9 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP3 (t1500)
CO (t1490)
Button (t1470)
SB (t1690)
BB (t900)
UTG (t1500)
Hero (UTG+1) (t1500)
MP1 (t1320)
MP2 (t2130)

Hero's M: 50.00

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with A, A
1 fold, Hero bets t80, 2 folds, MP3 calls t80, 4 folds

Flop: (t190) 10, Q, 7 (2 players)
Hero bets t130, MP3 calls t130

Turn: (t450) 6 (2 players)
Hero bets t320, MP3 raises to t640, Hero raises to t1290 (All-In), MP3 calls t650 (All-In)

River: (t3030) 8 (2 players, 2 all-in)

Total pot: t3030

Results:
Hero had A, A (one pair, Aces).
MP3 had 7, 7 (three of a kind, sevens).
Outcome: MP3 won t3030

[Extremophile]

see chardrian's comment :

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...on-t90068.html

[Nakamura]

see chardrian's comment :

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...on-t90068.html

Agreed. For those too lazy to scroll through the thread, chardrian was basically saying min-raising ranges on flops incl air, min-raising ranges on the turn usually means the nuts.

[rong]

Agreed. For those too lazy to scroll through the thread, chardrian was basically saying min-raising ranges on flops incl air, min-raising ranges on the turn usually means the nuts.

This kind of ties in to a thought I've had whereby, against an intelligent player, a valuer bet can be the perfect bluff. Bit of a contradiction in terms there, being that a value bet is designed to be almost worthwhile for villain to call, but I'm sure it can be applied differently.

[rong]

Naka,

I see on your op ad that you are playing both SnG's and cash games, how do you find that?

Any issues with not playing an optimum cash game strategy as it is so ingrained in you to play SnS strategy?

I have just started cash games yesterday, $5nl tables, intending to grind my way up, and so far so good, but I have decided to temporarily quit SnG's while I improve my ring game play.

On a side note, amazing how bad players are at this level!

[Nakamura]

It depends on whether your opponent can fold a big hand when they get min-raised. Plus you need massive balls to min-raise with air ... but, if it works for you.

I suck at cash. The thing is, the players on Cake suck worse than I do, so I can use it to clear the Cake bonus . I don't like the pansy post-flop stuff. I'm getting much better at it, but I always try one retarded SNG move for the session and blow away all my profits.

[rong]

lol

I'm liking it so far, bit more thought needed in decision making, where perhaps SnG's have bedcome a bit automatic. For instance when you do hit a big hand, every chip you can extract matters so much more than in a SnG. And I really enjoy stacking people for cash, so much more than in SnGs.

[Nakamura]

You should try HUSNG's or HU cash. The most uncomfortable excitement you can have in 20 mins. Plus you get to sing bling blang blaow when you stack him, which is always entertaining.

[rong]

I went through a stage of playing $1-$2 3 man winner takes all SnGs on Pacific. At those stakes it was easy, think I was winning approx 50% of the ones I played in. Nobody was anywhere near aggressive enough. But I got bored pretty quickly with them, and I just wasn't good ebnough to do it at higher levels.