Min-raise

I haven't decided what I think about the min-bet or min-raise. This is when someone makes the smallest bet or raise allowed. With the min bet, it's almost always a poor player who is trying to make a "pre-emptive" bet, to prevent someone else from betting, and it often works at the low limits. The usual scenario is that there are a bunch of limpers, someone min-bets the flop, then someone else bets the size of the pot and everyone folds. Occasionally this is also a skilled player who doesn't really like his hand, like top pair bad kicker. It's actually a decent play. God knows that I've paid off this hand enough times. The good player probably figures that if his opponent doesn't raise the flop and turn, they must have a worse hand than top pair, bad kicker. Inevitably they make a bigger bet on the river and win. The action goes flop-small bet, turn-small bet, river - 1/2 pot or pot-sized bet. When this bet is 1/2 pot size, they often get paid off by a player with middle pair. And it's smart that they don't create a big pot during the flop and turn when they really don't have much of a hand.

The other scenario is a min-raise. This is scarier. The min-raise is always a bluff or a monster hand. Period. OK, it might rarely be a semibluff, but that's a bluff anyway. You often see a min-raise when you've raised preflop, and make a continuation bet on a ragged flop, and that one is almost always a bluff. If you've got a draw, it's an easy call since you have good odds; but when you have completely missed, even though you know the guy is bluffing, you can't call. Unless you have a lot more guts than I do, which is true of many no-limit players. When you do have a good hand, and you re-raise the min-raise, they almost always fold or go all-in. The folders are almost always bluffing and the all-iners almost always have a monster, so your course of action is pretty easy, unless you have great pot odds to continue.

Tonight was a good night. I played .10/.25 no-limit with $25 max stacks on 5 tables, and almost doubled my original buy-in. I hit more than my fair share of draws and flopped some nice hands. I bailed (or was bluffed out) on a couple of mediocre hands when my opponent made a big bet on the river. I was dealt AA on one hand, there were already 3 limpers so I made a big raise and there were 4 callers! The pot was already about $7, the flop was all rags, I bet the pot and took it down. When I stacked other players, it was almost always when I had the nuts or damn near, and they went all-in.

I had a guy ask "it took you that long to call" when he raised big preflop, I called with AQ, the flop was A33, and he went all-in about the size of the pot. I thought about it for a minute, because I really thought he had AK; however, I decided he was capable of making this play with a lot of aces. Turned out he also had AQ and we split. I was getting 2:1 so I think it was a decent call. This guy gifted me his stack at least once; this was when I raised preflop and he reraised; the flop came a beautiful AQT, giving me a set; yes, he could've had a straight which I considered but which was pretty unlikely. He bet about the size of the pot and I just called. I really wanted the board to pair and would have been really disgusted if a K or J fell on the turn. The turn was a sweet T, giving me quad tens. He goes all-in about the size of the pot and I called. There is no better feeling than when your opponent goes all-in and you have the nuts. Turns out that he had AK. He whined less than the usual player. But he was beat by so many hands...including AQ, KJ, AA, QQ, or any ten. Another player, Freudian Knot (I love that name), told the guy "You should've known he had a good hand" (referring to me). He said something like "He called your preflop raise and called on the flop, you should've known he had something, and you know how mschneid plays". That was somewhat flattering so I asked "How DOES mschneid play?" and he replied "tight". I assume this guy uses tracking software or takes good notes. He was right, I play pretty tight, and he plays the same. I don't bother with tracking software; I tried it for awhile and it's nice, but there's no way I can play 5 tables and also use the monitoring software - it's hard enough just to keep up with 5 tables. I could maybe manage 3 tables absolute max while using the software, and it's just more profitable to play 5 tables without it.

- schneid