I am wondering if I am making a long term mathematical mistake. I play No Limit $25 with .10/.25 blinds. Max buy in is $50.00 and I always have at least $48.00 in chips on the table.

When faced with calling a bet "ON THE FLOP" I find I no longer even consider pot odds. I automatically look at my oppponets stack size. I have become obbsessed with taking thier stack. If they have more than $20.00 and I have 5 or more outs then I bet one third of their stack. If they don't have a hand they fold, if they have a hand they call or re-raise. If they are tired of my aggressive play they call or re-raise. (My aggressive play seems to make it the table vs me).

If they re-raise me and I have 13 or more outs I put them all in. If I have 5 -12 outs I just call and see what the turn brings.

I am wondering from "A MATHAMATICAL VIEW POINT" if II am going to get my self in trouble in the long run. I am thinking maybe I need to have at least 8 outs to play this way lol.

Please respond before pratice makes permanent and I go broke lol.

($25 NL) (Buy in $10-$50) (blinds .10/.25)

Example 1:
UTG has $27.00 and limps
seats 3-9 fold
I am on button with $48. 65. I have 9s8s, I limp
SB folds
BB has $42.00 and checks

Three people see flop $.85
Flop is 8d 7s 6s

BB checks
UTG bets $1.00
the first thing I do is check UTG stack size. I have just about become obsessed with getting thier whole stack. Think I have read to much Super Sustem. Anyway if he has more than $20.00 I will try to get his whole stack.

I am going to raise about one third of his stack, $9.00. If he re-raises me I am going to put him all in.

From a Math perspective, not considering the opponents weakness, strenght or tendencies, just purely based on Math, is this a positive or negative play long term?

Example 2:
UTG has $27.00 and limps
seats 3-9 fold
I am on button with $48. 65. I have 9s8s, I limp
SB folds
BB has $42.00 and checks

three players see flop of $.85
Flop is As 9d 7c
BB checks
UTG bets $1.00
Again I want UTG's whole stack. If he has an Ace I have five outs. Again I am going to raise him. Iin original post I said one third of his stack, in reality with only five outs I will raise him three times his bet up to one third of his stack depending on opponent. In original post I was trying to stay away from opponent dependant stuff and deal with the math.

I raise him $3.00. If he re-raises more than $9.00 I will fold. If he re-raises $9.00 or less I will call and see what the turn brings.

Again from a math perspective, not considering the opponents weakness, strenght or tendencies, just purely based on Math, is this a positive or negative play long term?

If this is still to confusing, don't worry about it. I will figure it out.

In NL pot odds really only come into account when a pot is very large or when you have to call a bet on the river. How much money is in the pot on the flop is pretty much irrelavent, especially if you both have decent sized stacks behind you.

Hand 1, I would also raise here, most likely you have the best hand and if you dont you have the best draw, even vs a set you have a ton of outs.

Hand 2. A raise here is a very tricky play, if you get called you are almost defefinatly behind in the hand, and its not clear what of your outs are clean, the last thing you want is for another 9 to hit or an 8 only to find your are drawing dead to A/9 or drawing to two outs with another 8.

I like the first play, but I think the second play is not going to make you money. Your raise may cause your opponant to fold, but you arent stealing enough money to make up for the times you are dominated or drawing almost dead.

Sir Raise a lot, I know what you're saying about stack sizes. Many times I find myself calling a large flop bet with a double gutshot for instance, because my hand is well disguised and I can take a full stack from someone with trips or a big pair (unless they fill up, heh..).

I am currently learning this whole NL thing from a limit back ground. I think you potential problem is that you are playing on the basis you can gain a stack each time you hit an out. In reality this might not be the case. I think you are in danger of losing lots of medium size pots.

So far I have been trying to play based on value of hands but I do look at stack sizes and players in say if I am considering calling a small raise with 55 LP. One the the things I took from super system was to win lots and lots of small pots. I think you need to preserve something of a table image to be able to do this and if you are betting too often in situations where you might not even be in the hunt you risk that.

I guess you need to consider how much action you want.

Rich

its a very qualitative analysis when you get into implied odds....Generally you are making the presumption that bets you are facing are value bets....which may or may not be the case....

Sir Raise alot seems to be oversimplifying things, and i would presume you would go broke with the wide tolerances of calls on raises and the like.....

Gregor:
That is exactly what I was thinging and is why I asked the question. It seemed that from a mathamatical point of view, I would be destined to go broke and for some reason I have no desire to go broke. I just wanted to make sure because I still don't know all the little concepts concerning no limit play.