by TightWad » Thu Apr 21, 2005 7:55 pm
Kent,
Actually, there is one concept that comes to mind that differentiates big pots from small pots...I think it applies more to limit, but I think it still has its place in NL.
In limit-speak, I'm referring the idea of "gaining bets when the pot is small" vs "increasing your chances of winning" when the pot is larger. For example, if I flop a set in a heads-up battle of the blinds, I'm going to do everything I can to maximize the value, even if it presents small risks. If I think my opponent can't even call a small bet on the flop, I'll go ahead and check it, giving him a chance to catch up or at least bluff. On the other hand, if I flop a set in a raised 6-way pot, I'll try to bet, raise or check-raise in such a way that I can hopefully eliminate gut-shottish hands, because the pot's already large and I want it!
I think this sorta applies to NL, as well. For example, say you're in the BB with AA...folds to the SB, who raises, and you decide to flat-call. The flop comes up A-T-3, and the SB checks. Now, I'm not a NL expert, so perhaps I'm incorrect, but I'd think the correct play here is to check behind. Yeah, maybe your opponent will hit a gutshot, but right now, the pot's very small, and the most your opponent can have is 4 outs to beat you. Therefore, I think you check and let your opponent catch up a little, or at least bluff at the pot. Winning about 8 big blinds with a set of aces would seem like a waste.
Different scenario; you're in the BB with AA again, but this time, EP raises, two people call, you reraise, and get two callers. Flop comes up A-T-3...now, the pot's got some meat to it, so I think you'd be more inclined to protect your hand.
Hey, I could be wrong with all this...all I'm really trying to say is that the size of the pot does often affect how a hand should be played.
-TW