However, he says muck it to an LP raise if there are no players because theres too good of a chance its either not the best hand, or if it is the best hand it will lose anyway. I mean the LPer is not raising with 78o, hes at least got overcards to your 9s like AJ, so if your 9s are best at the time, theres still a pretty decent chance that youll endup losing the hand... Combine that chance with the chances that he's got better than 99 to start with, and 99 starts to look like a pretty easy fold, without odds to draw to a set.
As far as the AK/AQ thing.... it does sound a bit strange. I guess the idea is that AK is so strong that you should raise it anyways, just in case you DO hit, because then you have built yourself a big pot where everyones putting thier money in with second best, and drawing slim (hopefully) to trips/kickers. I suppose the reason you dont do the same with AQ is because the Q is too vulnerable, and thats why the hand isnt strong enough. My guess is that his reason has nothing to do with the strength of the queen as a kicker card, since a bunch of limpers are pretty unlikely to have AK, but rather the strength of the queen as a top pair card that is vulnerable to a king hitting, hence making it not strong enough to raise many limper with?
Thats my guess. And truthfully, without ever reading that particular passage, i play pretty similarly to that-- i am not sure what my threshold is exactly, but i will raise AK into more limpers than i will AQ, even though i have never thought out my reasons for doing so.Statistics: Posted by MecosKing — Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:48 pm
]]>