Aces cash NLHE...

[deepreacher]

Thought I'd post a hand to discuss the pros and cons:

- player1 sitting in seat 1 with $1295.34
- player2 sitting in seat 2 with $145.96
- player3 sitting in seat 3 with $431.10
- me     sitting in seat 4 with $385.50
- player4 sitting in seat 5 with $391.20
- nutpeddlingnit sitting in seat 6 with $440.80 [Dealer]

player1 posted the small blind - $2.00
player2 posted the big blind - $4.00
** Dealing card to davmcg:
player3 folded
me  raised - $8.00
player4 called - $8.00
nutpeddlingnit called - $8.00
player1 folded
player2 called - $8.00

** Dealing the flop:
player2 checked
me bet - $17.00
player4 folded
nutpeddlingnit called - $17.00
player2 folded

** Dealing the turn:
me bet - $34.00
nutpeddlingnit raised - $68.00
me called - $68.00

** Dealing the river:
me checked
nutpeddlingnit bet - $204.00
me folded



First thing to note is I get a 4-way pot - would this have happened if I had raised 3x?  Possibly not, but I would still almost certainly have got a call from the button - (he plays trap hands in position) - and likely then the BB.

My flop bet is standard for me representing KQ or better.  If player 4 calls, I would be immediately suspicious as he would have to be strong to call with players behind who could act.  When nutpeddlingnit calls I am actually thinking check the turn, however the flush draw I pick up on the turn leads me to bet half the pot.  His miniraise is an easy call.  Even though I improve on the river I can't call AI from this player (I would actually check raise the turn against some players from the Northern parts of Europe.....).  I think I would have got paid if I'd hit the flush though.

If I take the stronger line here: 3x pre, pot the flop, I probably end up stacked in this hand, having to call the river with my 2pr because the pot is too big on the turn. 

Also worth noting 67s is in MY range and I play it the same way until the turn miniraise.

WHy do you want to play a 4 way pot oop with AQ?

[doubleup]

WHy do you want to play a 4 way pot oop with AQ?

I'm delighted see a multiway flop cheaply with AQs - aren't you?

[deepreacher]

not in a 6 max cash game utg.

[AlexMartin]

WHy do you want to play a 4 way pot oop with AQ?

I'm delighted see a multiway flop cheaply with AQs - aren't you?

No, i want it hu.

[Smart Money]

One other point of note:

By playing hands weaker than they actually are OOP, it makes it much easier for opponents to take the pot away from you. This is because you don't know whether their aggression is down to them having a strong hand, or if they are just trying to exploit the fact that they think you're weak.

The hand you posted is a good example of this. You may well have been behind of course, but you can't be too happy laying down top two (AQ) here not knowing where you are!

Let's suppose it was a good fold, and he held the nuts with 76o. You got out with a loss of $93. Now, what if you'd have raised 4BB instead? Player 4 may well have folded his, say, KJs and villain wouldn't have had the odds to call. Blinds fold too, and you win $6. Not a big pot, but $99 better than a min raise.

Obviously the above example is speculation and it's unlikely that it would have happened just like this, however it's purpose is more to show how you're less likely to get into trouble with a decent-sized raise.

[doubleup]

One other point of note:

By playing hands weaker than they actually are OOP, it makes it much easier for opponents to take the pot away from you. This is because you don't know whether their aggression is down to them having a strong hand, or if they are just trying to exploit the fact that they think you're weak.

The hand you posted is a good example of this. You may well have been behind of course, but you can't be too happy laying down top two (AQ) here not knowing where you are!

Let's suppose it was a good fold, and he held the nuts with 76o. You got out with a loss of $93. Now, what if you'd have raised 4BB instead? Player 4 may well have folded his, say, KJs and villain wouldn't have had the odds to call. Blinds fold too, and you win $6. Not a big pot, but $99 better than a min raise.

Obviously the above example is speculation and it's unlikely that it would have happened just like this, however it's purpose is more to show how you're less likely to get into trouble with a decent-sized raise.

Your definition of trouble and mine are obviously different - I'm quite happy to be bluffed off a small pot (which I doubt happened in this case) if I will eventually get the bluffer's chips.  As I mentioned I would play 67s the same way, so I get paid off by a bluffer. 

Anyway the basis of my argument is that nl is largely about winning big pots and not creating big pots for others to win.  It's much easier to do this if your OOP pots are smaller than your in position pots.  It's also easier to achieve if you play a wide range of hands.  The strategy I am advocating achieves both.  Obviously some hands become more difficult to play than others, but I think in the multitabling world a player with 44 is going to call any reasonable raise, if he thinks he has a chance of stacking you off, so the decisions still exist. 

[boldie]

Your post flop play has to be very good to play like this (IOW you have to fold a lot more big (ish)hands than most players who play, I guess)
You are right of course when you say that a cash game is all about getting someones entire stack.

It is a dangerous strategy if your postflop play isn't top-notch and I would not advocate it for most players.

It is interesting to see though..many ways to skin a cat and all that.