$10 NLHE Full Ring: 10NL

$10 NL HE Full Ring: 10NL

I had shown down a few hands by this point and decided to add in a few suited gapped connectors .. because... well to be perfectly honest because Harrington suggests doing it for deception. Also there was a good chance that a raise from me on the flop, with air, would induce a fold from this player. He was fairly erratic and unpredictable.. because he had tendencies to bluff at pot a lot and I had seen him place big bets on the flop. At this point I had not seen what he was betting with because players were folding to his river raises.

Stacks:
1488311 with $15.75
BTN with $9.95
SB with $1.90
BB with $2.00
UTG with $10.00
UTG+1 with $9.95
MP1 with $6.70
MP2 with $6.40

Blinds: $0.50/$0.10
Site: pokerstars
Dealt to UTG+1:7♥ 9♥
Sklansky group 5
Preflop:
1 players fold.
UTG+1 raises $0.30 to $0.40
MP1 calls [$0.40]
5 players folded.
Total folds this street: 6
Potsize: $0.95
Flop: 6♠ 7♣ 6♣
UTG+1 bets [$0.50]
5 players fold.
MP1 calls [$0.50]
Potsize: $1.95
Turn: 10♣
UTG+1: checks
MP1 bets [$0.90]
UTG+1 calls [$0.90]
Potsize: $3.75
River: 6♥
UTG+1: checks
MP1 bets [$4.90] [ all-in ]


WHAT NEXT?

Fold PF.

I have just been editing the post to explain why I played the hand in the first place.. it probably wasnt written at the time you posted.

If he has been stealing pots like you say he has I would call. He may have a str8 or flush. Would he raise PF with an A6? I'm not about to fold a boat.

Stu_Ungar said:

I have just been editing the post to explain why I played the hand in the first place.. it probably wasnt written at the time you posted.

Click to expand...

Like Shrog said,fold prf.
playing SC and gapers is fine but you should be playing them in postion where it is alot easyer to draw and induce value.
these kind of hands start giving reserve implied odds when your playing them much OOP.
As played i probably call.

Yea, I see what you're saying...but for the most part, when playing 10nl FR, I think you could play a much more solid game without worrying about deception OOP and mixing up plays. The tables are full of bad players that you can play a solid TAG game and show a profit.

You don't need to deceive anyone at 10NL, you can raise these type of hands but not from UTG+1. I'd probably call if this guy was really that bad and you've seen him do something like this before, but there's no reason to be in this spot really.

I agree with what has been said so far. Nice idea, but not from EP like this. There's too many things that could happen and too many people to act after you. With him on your left, wait until he's in the blinds to try something like this where you'll have position on him post-flop.

As played, your river check is a green light for him to bluff you or to make you think he's bluffing you. I would have tried a small blocking bet to ease the sting if he's got you beat. He could still re-raise, but the chances of him flatting your smaller bet are more when you set the price.

Agree with above, and not just a 10nl thing. Raising hands like that from EP in FR is just not going to be profitable. The goal when raising from EP should always be getting value with a good hand. If called we're oop and we are going to be playing against the best of the hands that are left to act which will likely be very strong. So to counter the fact that we'll be playing oop against a strong range we need to have a very strong range ourselves. That means we should not be raising hands like 79s for "deception". If we just stick to premiums we can represent sets and/or overpairs on almost all boards. This is enough deception imo.

As played though I think I bet/fold turn. Makes the hand much easier to play and balances the times you bet your air (not to mention gets value from worse occaisionally and of course protects from hands with equity). As played on the turn, I just fold river. He just overbet shoved on a board where we literally beat nothing. He's not shoving a flush, this would just be turning it into a bluff which would be pretty bad here. Since we were an EP raiser hands like JJ/QQ are still in his range as well as hands like AT/7x/6x. I just think this is a bluff like never and we don't beat anything here. But again this hand is much eaiser to play if we just fold preflop or bet turn.

I agree with zachvac.. blocking bet on the river.. and muck to a re-raise. Also, I like the idea of adding suited 1-gap cards to your arsenal.. but not at 10NL. As you said it's for deception and most players at 10NL aren't going to notice one way or the other.. better to stick to a tighter preflop selection at 10NL

edit: missed SeanyJ's post (sorry for saying the same thing lol)

SeanyJ said:

You don't need to deceive anyone at 10NL, you can raise these type of hands but not from UTG+1. I'd probably call if this guy was really that bad and you've seen him do something like this before, but there's no reason to be in this spot really.

Click to expand...

Agree with this completely as everyone has. I would add playing SC etc is not necessary for deception, I do it because I can usually just outplay the others who fold to much. I occasionally wake up with a huge hand but other than that I just stealing/delayed stealing on the flop or the turn with these kinds of hands.

Thanks for the feedback guys.

Is the consensus that I should remove 1 gap SC completely from my game or only play them in position?

Does the same apply to SC?

I think the problem I am facing is that I read an awful lot on poker, but THB there really isn't a decent book aimed at $10 NL.

The books available are probably aimed at much higher stakes.. so I read the theory and think..'yeah that seems logical' and then end up over-complicating my game.. which really doesn't need to be that complicated.

I guess the thing is that for someone looking back at $10 NL they see it as being so easy and really cant understand the desire to make it more complicated than it needs to be.

However for the likes of myself for whom $10 NL is the most advanced thing I have played so far.. Its difficult to guage if I am playing it correctly or not... If I am doing enough, too little or too much.

Oh and as for the results of the hand.

I called.

He had played 68o

He had Quad 6's

Stu_Ungar said:

Thanks for the feedback guys.

Is the consensus that I should remove 1 gap SC completely from my game or only play them in position?

Does the same apply to SC?

I think the problem I am facing is that I read an awful lot on poker, but THB there really isn't a decent book aimed at $10 NL.

The books available are probably aimed at much higher stakes.. so I read the theory and think..'yeah that seems logical' and then end up over-complicating my game.. which really doesn't need to be that complicated.

I guess the thing is that for someone looking back at $10 NL they see it as being so easy and really cant understand the desire to make it more complicated than it needs to be.

However for the likes of myself for whom $10 NL is the most advanced thing I have played so far.. Its difficult to guage if I am playing it correctly or not... If I am doing enough, too little or too much.

Click to expand...

SC & SG are fine to have in your range. Just make sure there in late postion where u can try to steal the blinds with them and when called u will both have postion and a hand that is unlikly to be dominated.
I also read a lot of poker books and i also play 10NL and i agree most of the stuff out there is written for higher stacks where your playing against atleast a litle competened villains.

The problem with decepetion at 10NL is most villains are only using level 0 thinking and using level 2-3 thinking against them is useless cause they arnt puting u on a range but only looking at there own cards.
So to beat a level 0 villain u should be thinking on level 1,no need to try higher.

Fold, They kept calling your bets, they maybe have High pair there, which is now fullhouse.. Or 6 there.. Or maybe ten? Just fold. ;/

Here's where I would play SG.

1) late position + limpers + calling stations.. wanting to take advantage of implied odds when the flush/straight comes in
2) late position + unopened + tight players in blid.. standard steal attempt

When I would play SC

1) middle to late position + limpers + unraised.. again implied odds, opponents don't have to be quite as bad as with SG because our straight will come in a bit more frequently

2) same as with SG.. standard steal from late position, though honestly this is a fringe case at 10NL to be in steal position with SG/SC at a full ring.

Bottom line.. at these stakes you're playing these kinds of hands for the implied odds on the straight/flushes in multiway pots. They're not good to play heads up at micro full ring... basically at all. Could you squeeze some marginal EV out of them with solid reads? Sure. But doing that consistently at 10NL is probably going to be very difficult.

Thanks spore.

Would you play all SG and SC in those situations or just a percentage? Harrington is big on the idea of playing only around 30% of the SC and SG dealt to you in any situation.

I play them whenever I feel that I'm going to see a nice cheap multi-way flop with players that are capable of paying me off. I'd have to look at my stats but I would imagine I do it a bit more often than that.. but then again I'm playing 2NL at the moment so the situation arises more frequently at 10NL.

30% is probably about right.. but don't just pick some random 30% do it with hands that you're going to see a cheap multi-way flop with players that will pay you off when you hit.. because that is where the value of these hands come in, the implied odds.

Stu_Ungar said:

Thanks spore.

Would you play all SG and SC in those situations or just a percentage? Harrington is big on the idea of playing only around 30% of the SC and SG dealt to you in any situation.

Click to expand...

Please take what I am about to say constructively.

Stop trying to put hard and fast percentages on things. Also there is no concrete way to do anything, example raising with Aces.

I have had similiar discussions another CC member about this becuase we were studying No Limit Hold'em theory and practice. Now I haven't read HOC so keep that in mind but when Sklanskly and Miller say I do x 25% of the time you have to understand that that is a moving target. sometimes you will be right to do it 80% sometimes you will be right to do it not all. trying to constantly be deceptive is not necessary unless you KNOW the opponent is good enough to notice. They describe the moves like raising with SC or limping Aces as you are foregoing value in a limited number of instances to create additional value later, BUT it isn't necessary if the opponent isn't good enough to be thrown off by what you are doing.

Thanks guys.. I do get what you are saying... its not really the percentage, rather picking the right spot where its likely that I will get preflop folds.. but if that doesn't happen then there is the chance of hitting a big hand. But I have to feel that the player would be willing to pay me off.

What kind of rules of thumb exist for SC and SG?

I understand the ideas behind set mining... are there any similar 'guidelines' for SC and SG?