blonde poker forum

I've seen a couple of his poker godfather appearences and have noted the lrge number of minimum raises he makes. At first I thought he was giving some pretty poor advice but last night he did seem to be having quite a bit of success with them. I hardly ever min raise, how are other people using the move?

Adam, I've not seen it.  Why is he doing it ?  To build a pot or some other reason.

sometimes he's doing it with a big hand to build, sometimes he's doing it on the button to steal. I think a lot of his game is very similar to mine with the exception of this frequent minimum raising.

I think it's a good tactic late on when blinds are big, but a poor strategy early on when more people can afford to call.

I think Gary Jones comes across as a smart guy. Is the min raise a typical cash game strategy? this is what he mostly plays

Poker Godfather wise, I think ActionJack Jackson's episodes are extremely informative. I can see why he's the nuts on Ladbrokes

definitely, paul jackson is outstanding on the show.
I think you might be on the mark with it being from cash games. perhaps it's getting through more because it's $100 rebuy rather than a $20 freeze. if it were a smaller buy in comp I feel sure he'd get a caller more often.

I'm not so sure - at the lower levels some people don't consider pot odds (i.e. a raise is a raise) and it seems to work fairly well. Harrington reccomends doing it in STTs in his book.

Difference is that in the early stages he was only doing it with big hands, so an inferior call would be welcomed.

For example, in 1 of his episodes, he min raised kings when the blinds were 15 and 30. There were several callers. Personally, I can't see the point of this and believe it to be a missed opportunity to get some chips.

yes, this seems odd, why would you want multiple callers here when any sort of rubbish such as A rag can hit an A on the flop or a suited connector can hit?

He said it was because he didn't want to commit any chips at an early stage, but I think it's a waste of an opportunity to double up.

If you ever speak to Paul Maxfield, ask him about this subject of min raising.
He always tells me that Europeans commit to much of their stack when raising.
He likes to follow the American way, e.g 400 with 600  rather than 400 with 1000.
If you ever seen his heat in BPO on the poker ch , you will see him put into practise what he preaches.

In March a couple of pals came to stay with me from the USA, to play at the Victoria Poker Classic.
They were suprised at how agressive the European game was, noting that a lot of players over commited their chips,unable to release even when they thought they were behind , because of the amount of chips they had put in the pot

I totaly agree with Paul on this, mind you, do you think he would give a toss if i didnt?

Hi Red Dog, just thought Id give a little imput on this topic, as Paul has been kind to share some of his info that hes picked up from playing in the States.
Every trip he makes he swears he learned something new,he tells me the game is for ever changing and he will have to make adjustments to keep up.
Doesnt seem to be doing to bad though as it is

Mad Max must be doing something right.

I noticed in the last tourney report they spelled his name right almost half the time !

I was impressed.

 ;)

Good players can get away with minimum raising because they play very well post-flop.  I've often seen inexperienced (and some experienced) players get into difficulty after minimum raising because they haven't defined their hand and can't work out whether an opponents apparent strength is genuine or due to there weakness preflop.

My theory is that if a player's holding is weak enough to fold to a preflop pot raise, then it's probabaly weak enough to fold to a less chunky bet. Even if they do call the smaller raise, they are showing weakness by not raising and are vulnerable to being bluffed off the pot by the suiperior postioned raiser.

Trying this in a 6 handed PLH tourney tonight.

started raising to 2.5x BB during the early stages and am now raising min (to 2x) in the later stages.

It seems to be working well :)

Sounds like a worthy experiment. Tricky part is not doing it too much and working out which blinds to target.

On a break now. 42 left, 177 started, 20 get paid.

Only problem was my good hands (AK, AJ, AJ) got called in several spots and missed.  :D

Made 9th for $60 in the end when my JTs on the SB ran into 52o in the BB  ::)

So how did u get on with the Gary Jones approach. Notice anything interesting?

It worked very well actually - people were still folding to the raises.

I found it kept the pots smaller and so easier to steal or pass if you have to.

It felt I could use the chips you were given a lot more effectively than raising 3-4 BB.

Towards the later stages I think you have to change again and start raising more otherwise you always get called by big stacks.

The "small raises" syndrome is also Richard Gryko's style, ditto Anthony Lellouche, the young, but nice as it happens, Frog.

It works very well for Gryko, but it only woks if you can "play" well down the streets. Very irritating to play against, but nice if you catch a hand, as someone else has done the raising for you.

I was picking up most pots uncontested sometimes getting called in 1 place - just like raising a bigger amount but risking much less.

Slightly off topic, but I believe Gary Jones really is a superb commentator of TV comps.

I agree with you on that front.

I thought Roy the Boy was out of order commentating on last nights Poker Million.  Always goes to far in his criticism.

Who won last nights heat please?

Bengt Sonnert

Thanks

Whom Roy kept referring to as Bernt !

Not to mention his wholesale slagging of Martin Smith, who was obviously to me , very nervous.

 ::)

What was it he said about Martin ? something like "Call yourself a poker professional ?  you're a disgrace" or similar.
No need for that. If he doesn't like his play say so, but in a constructive way.  No need to try and belittle him.

described Martin Smith calling himself a pro a digrace and an insult to the intelligence of genuine proffessional players.

I've said it before and I'll say it again,
WILL SOMEONE PLEASE GET BRINDLEY OFF MY TELLY?!

he's rude, opinionated and completely ruins the viewing experience. It's not like football where you can watch it with the sound of if you choose. You need to be kept up how much has been bet so you need commentary. NO MORE ROY BRINDLEY PLEASE

Entertaining tho.  :D

Maybe, but, reading between the lines, I don't think Adam is overly keen on Roy......

on the tables, Roy is charming and pleasant company..or at least I have found it to be so

I myself prefer other "colour" commentators...Padraig is hilarious, Ulliott very funny, Gary Jones good, Barney back in the halcyon LNP episodes excellent and I could listen to Vicky Coren all night ( :-[)

but just because you don't like his style, doesn't mean he's a bad person

Roy reminds me of Geoff Boycott, always says how HE would have played it better.  Don't get me wrong I think there is a place for critique in the commentary, we don't want to listen to some sycophantic drivel all night but we don't need to belittle players just because they play a different game to the commentator.

Boycott has mellowed dramatically since his throat cancer, and is actually much better to listen to, hugely knowledgeable without the "it was better in my day2 syndrome

Fred Trueman on TMS was the worst tho' "in my day i'd have done a shift down pit before bowling 40 overs a day never bowling a bad ball" drone drone drone.

Your point on Roy is valid in my opinion

My guess is that he's trying to market himself as the bad boy of poker. By the sounds of it, it seems to be working.

Fred never droned! He was actually named Radio Broadcaster of the Year once. Forget when.

I would have liked to see him commentating on his heat of the BPO

Fred never entered the BPO.

Yes - he played a terrible heat.

He droned, as Professional Yorkshiremen have a way of doing.


that's my cue to duck...

sorry talkin about Roy.... started typing 30mins ago got distracted ...post moves on!

but it was a better competition in his day......

I also thought Martin had a good game plan (if it was premeditated).  To win one of those 6 seater crapshoots you have got to get all your chips in and get lucky at some point.  Rumit was early chip leader and got involved in a lot of pots (not criticism, just observation) but utimatley went out in 4th I think.  Martin Smith played very tight but then got 2 double ups and was chip leader at one point (I think, doing this from memory) so it could have worked out well for him.

i have stopped watching the million masters and there is only 1 reason for me stopping roy the boy is ruining it

it's not even as if he's wrong ALL the time. I thought some of martins play was a bit ropey but he has no need to lay it out so rudely. I don't want a Brindley tutorial on how to play the game his way and how not to play it any other way. I know a bad commentary style doesnt make him a bad person but I'm pretty sure I wouldnt get on with him. not my kind of guy.