Well, the natural name for this Pressure Cooker and GAG combo was obviously PC GAG, but I worried some people might find that mildly offensive, much as I found it amusing. In the end, I wimped out and went with GAG Cook.
I really had a hard time with my pre flop ranges on this one, folding more with hands I was supposed to raise, and raising more with hands that I was supposed to fold, than I had done in any of the other runs. I made this one strangely tight from early position, and then quite wide from late position, and the transition from tight play in early seats to very loose play later was hard to keep straight, especially given that the shape of the range was quite different than I normally use.
I don’t think I’ll be able to simply describe what I did here, as this strategy involved taking a much greater diversity of post flop line types than any other before, but I’ll start with the easy part, describing how it differed from its two component styles.
Relative to GAG, the pre-flop opening range is quite a bit tighter early, and much looser close to the button. While it continued to search for chances to take geometric lines and other lines angling to get all of the chips in the middle (both with value and with bluffs), the most predominant post flop line was a Pressure Cooker type line, with escalating small bets on every street.
Pressure Cooker raised with 100% of hands pre-flop from any position if there were no prior raises, so relative to Pressure Cooker this was very tight. Pressure Cooker also took only two lines post-flop, either the annoying small escalating bets with most of its hands, or large over-bets with premium hands. Post-flop lines after raising pre-flop broke out roughly as follows:
- 10%: normal bets between 50% and 100% of pot, usually either on the flop, turn, or both, with a check on the river (though some bets on the river two), taken with moderate value where I thought the hand was at reasonably high risk of being out drawn
- 10%: check fold; normally taken in very multi-way pots (5 or more) with a hand with no show down value, no draw, and a very high chance of more than one opponent having a very strong hand already
- 20%: geometric or other lines aiming to get all chips in the middle, taken with most of my best hands and best draws (and marginal hands that also had good draws)
- 60%: annoying pressure bets similar to Pressure Cooker, though I tended to increase the size a little relative to what was described for that strategy; note that these bets where made with a very wide range of hand types, from complete trash to drawing hands to marginal made and even modestly solid value hands
Note also that from the blinds I would in general play more passively pre and post flop, creating further diversity in play, and that the percentages above are approximations for how I played from the other positions after a raise.
Here’s the pre-flop range used, though again note that I made fairly frequent mistakes that resulted in my not following this. Still, this was the range I was trying to follow:
- 6: AA-99, AK, AQs-AJs, KQs, JTs, 98s, 76s
- 5: +88-66, AQ, ATs, A5s, A4s, all suited broadway, all suited connectors
- 4: +55-22, AJ, Ax suited, KQ, JT, suited 1 gap
- 3: +AT, KJ, QJ, suited 2 gap
- 2: +A9, all broadway, Kx suited, J9, T9
- 1: +A8, Qx suited, suited 3 gap, Q9, 98
- 0: +A7, 87, 76, all suited cards
All of these were played for a raise if there was no raise in front, not caring about limps except that with more limps in front the bet would be bigger. Pre-flop bets were almost always pot sized, with a small percent that were slightly larger (raises from the small blind, or with a hand that was less likely to do well multi-way).
GAG Cook results:
Tables played: 50/100 NL Holdem 9 max
Hands played: 1,003
Chips won: $190,806
BB/100 hands: 190.24
Note that I’d generally expect this to do better than GAG, as I get all of the GAG big pot opportunities, but am also making a profit with all of my pressure bluffs, which are also further improving the value I get on the larger bets (probably). GAG made almost all of it’s winnings over one very short session, and I didn’t have a session here quite that dramatic. Still, this is just my guess, and I’ve learned that these things don’t always work out quite like you’d expect. It may be that with GAG, when people are only seeing you make these huge bets, that because there is a tendency for people to think that every large bet where you don’t show your cards down is a bluff, it may be that here people mostly assume that the small bets are bluffs and the big bets are value.
One other thought… it occurred to me after the fact that this style resembles small ball in a number of ways, as you are mostly making small bets. Perhaps the main difference is a much higher frequency of large bets and lines that try to go all in, both with weaker hands that you’d use in Small Ball, and with more bluffs.
