Online Poker Bonus

I have a different preference. I like to reraise with a small pair before the flop and then "represent" whatever hits the flop (to your opponents, you seem to have started with something before the flop, and to have hit it on the flop). This is a more deceptive approach, allowing a chance to win every pot you play. Imagine having made it three bets with 4-4 over the top of your opponent, and now the flop comes down A-8-2. Your opponent checks to you, and then you bet out with your 4-4, just as if you have A-K. Your opponent now folds his K-Q, and you have won this pot fairly easily.

But let's suppose you play this hand according to the mainstream "calling" theory. You call the two bets with 4-4, and one other player and the big blind also call. The flop comes down A-8-2, and now the big blind checks. Now the original raiser bets out with his K-Q, hoping that no one calls him. By just calling the preflop raise, you've given the K-Q the chance to use deception. The K-Q is now representing an ace! You have to fold your hand right here. You can't call the first bet, because you have to fear that someone has an ace, or maybe the big blind has an eight. You have gone from a position of power to a position of weakness simply by not reraising before the flop—quite a difference.

By reraising, you'll win more pots, but you'll also get yourself into trouble more often. Consider the following scenario. You have three bets in with 4-4, but the original raiser has K-K. He decides just to call your raise and then play his hand hard on the flop if an ace doesn't come. This is a common strategy for people who hold aces or kings. The flop comes down B'O'S-This appears to be a good flop for you. After all, it's unlikely that the original raiser has a seven or an eight in his hand, so unless you're up against a big pair instead of the more likely two big cards, you're winning at this point. The K-K bets out and you raise him, and now he reraises (three-bets) you.

You have a fair amount of money already invested in this pot. If you had known your opponent had kings, you would have thrown your hand away, but it's also possible that he could have been playing a big flush draw this way. You end up calling him all the way down, only to have him show you K-K. You have just lost a fortune using my reraising approach! Every approach offers its own risks and its own possibilities.

Now let's look at the play of the hand using the mainstream calling approach. You just call two bets with 4-4 before the flop, and now both blinds call. The flop is [Q-jVJ-g, and the big blind (who wouldn't have been in the hand using my approach, because the reraise would have pushed him out) bets out, and now the K-K raises to protect what he correctly feels is currently the best hand. You now fold, having lost only three small bets. Clearly the mainstream approach has done well in this situation.

But if the original raiser had A-K rather than K-K, then my reraising approach would yield better results here. I like my approach because it is mathematically more likely that the first raiser has two big cards than that he has a big pair. But remember, my aggressive approach does lead to more fluctuation in the size of your stack across time, and if you don't have much of a bankroll, pursuing it may put you in an awkward spot. online sports betting

Now let's look at a few other examples that compare the two approaches to playing small pairs, using my "three bet" theory with the mainstream theory of calling to build a pot.

• Poker – Weird Things Can Happen When You (0)
• Poker – Stealing The Blinds (0)
• Poker – Playing The Majority Play Hands Before The Flop (0)