Free Poker's Glass Ceiling

As a point of reference rather than a boast, I am ranked 2007th on Replay Poker at the writing, having just busted out of a 1M chip tournament, 27th of 39 entries.

Why did I lose? In part, because even players ranked 104th, 302nd, and 323rd, all of whom were at my table, will not reraise preflop. Coming over the top is almost unheard of before the flop on Replay and, I imagine, other free poker sites.

For instance, I pot raised a hand preflop from UTG+2 with AK, heart and spade respectively.

The player ranked 302nd called from the cutoff with no action between. Spoiler alert: She had AK clubs.

In a proper tournament, such as the WSOP or WPT, all the money would have been in before the flop, which was As-7s-Jd.

But, since there were still chips in front of both of us, I led out with a pot bet.

She called. I can let this call go more so than the one preflop because she might have some concern I had raised with AJ. Again, though, she wouldn’t need to worry about that if she had come over the top preflop.

The turn brought the 8s, putting me on top pair with the nut flush draw.

I bet half-pot.

Finally(!), she shoved.

I called to reveal we were chopping when the river did not bring a spade.

If you don’t think she misplayed this hand, consider that her suited AK was stronger than my unsuited one before the flop. She had the best hand but did not get her money in, probably bc I might have AA or KK. Yet she could have put me on a range including far more hands that were either more vulnerable to hers (QQ, JJ, TT, 99) or flat out inferior (AQ, AJ, AT, KQ, even a suited QJ, QT, or JT with bolder players).

Because of the rarity of a reraise in free poker, players with top hands will be forced to face down multiple callers more often than in real poker. When one person calls, more will follow.

The player ranked 323rd would later limp with 89 off in the hijack (with no action behind, for f— sake), then call my pot raise from the small blind with AQ, encouraging the player to her immediate left, ranked 14,800-and-something, to join the fun with a suited 84. They both hit the flop and I lost more chips with a continuation bet for value.

Additionally, a lack of counterpunching makes it easier to bluff-raise preflop from early positions with middle connectors or worse (which Ms 323 should have done from the hijack with her 89). When you’re confident that nobody, not even someone with a monster, is going to come over the top, the worst consequence is to see a flop and miss.

Conversely, if more people re-raised pre-flop, the culture would evolve. Other players would naturally be more cautious about limping or calling raises with weak hands, and especially raising with them. You’d have to seriously worry about giving chips away without seeing a pot.

I believe this cowardice toward reraising preflop is why dogs win so much on Replay, rather than the preposterous notion that the algorithm is rigged.

Thoughts?

1 Like

I don’t know if this is the reason or others reasoning for your statement.

My own personal opinion in general is I don’t criticize other players strategies, and I don’t think I have ever done this.

The beauty of poker is everyone should have different strategies which makes it challenging to play.

3 Likes

I don’t know whether or not you’ve criticized other players’ strategies, but anyone can. One person can say they wouldn’t do something. Another can counter that they would. That’s what discussion (see the category title) is. It’s healthy and shouldn’t be discouraged out of fear of offending. Such fear is a huge problem in current society.

That said, I agree that the beautry of poker is the diversity of play. What I’m talking about here is how the collective of players here seem to have by and large adopted the same preflop strategy and my opinion is that playing it is detrimental to the person with the best hand. If you have a different opinion, I am willing to listen, but, while I am not going to make anything personal (note that I haven’t named anyone), I am going to be critical of certain tactics.

So, let better understand your post, you think someone is using a bad strategy, why would you point it out? Just make a mental note of the individual’s play and exploit it. The next time you play it seems it would be to your advantage.

In any poker game, you have to play different strategies or mix it up depending on the situations. Anyone who doesn’t have different strategies while playing, maybe you should name them on here. I’d really like to know.

Why the concern about player rankings? Surely you understand that they have little to do with player skill and so much more with the ability and perhaps need to convert real money into play money.

So, which is it, remain silent about a collective strategy for which I’ve offered individual examples, or only tell you? :slight_smile:

The idea of the post was to spark debate about strategy, a purpose for which this forum category and others were designed. Why is your only objection that I’m making use of them?

I brought it up because forum users often comment about the luck of poor players who call people down and keep winning hands and, yes, the size of a player’s bankroll is an indicator of their skill, whether you doubt it or not.

I would be surprised to find that hundreds of players on this site have purchased billions of chips. That is the bankroll level for most if not all of the top thousand. I think there is a level of success in converting however many chips they may have purchased. Be it from zero to a few million, acquiring billions out of that initial investment denotes some ability.

1 Like

Because we’re all here to discuss poker strategy. We can’t do that without praising and/or criticizing individual plays and by extension the players who make them.

The alternative is to shut the forum down.

I agree. It’s not always that accurate but it IS an indicator. A player with a bad bankroll is one of 3 things:

1 ~ a player with weak skills. We can profit off of this player.
2 ~ a player with strong skills who plays splashy and poorly when he plays for free money, for the fun of being splashy - in short, he could be good except that he does not care about his chips. We can profit off of this player just as easily.
3 ~ a newer site member whose skills could be weak or strong or anywhere in between. We take our chances with this one.

1 Like

(1) & (2) Not the way this is coming across to me.

(3) Sounds like criticism to me.

I usually try if not always play my cards and the player each hand.

His post wasn’t discussing any strategy which I could see except criticizing several players play. As I stated I don’t like to criticize another’s strategy. I try different strategies myself all the time and I don’t feel I’ve found the best one but feel you have to mix it up.

OMG, Smooth!

Critique is an element of discussion.

I post that I disagree with playing choices. Others are then free to defend them in reply.

The whole thing is discussing pre-flop raising, re-raising, 3-bets, 4-bets etc. How is that not discussing strategy?

However it is coming across, you suggested in a single reply that I should remain silent in one sentence and just tell you about other players’ strategies in another.

Also, I freely admitted earlier in the thread and do so now that I am being critical of certain strategies. Again, this thread exists in a forum category titled Poker Discussion. What do you think discussion is, if not critiquing differing points of view?

replay has several levels… nif you fell you hit your peak… you can always be chalanged in team poker…

@pickettpocket I was frustrated by the passive preflop play too. It does make it difficult if you’re trying to learn how to play high level poker, because a lot of the advice you’ll get simply won’t apply when people don’t 3-bet and most hands are heavily multi-way. I just made a decision to play hands as if players were 3-betting correctly. When I value own myself with KQ because AK shouldn’t be in my opponents range, I just chalk that up as the correct play and don’t worry about the losing those chips - the opponents passivity will cost them far more in the long run.
The glass ceiling is there in terms of what you can learn on Replay, but the good news is that real money poker isn’t that much different - at least not at any stake I’ve played.

1 Like

Totally get it. But to be fair, every type of game has its own strategy. The passive play and lack of preflop reraises create a loose, unpredictable environment. Players just want to see flops and take it from there. It’s not what you’d see in a serious tournament, but in that setting, it works often enough. Ur right, it punishes solid fundamentals, but sometimes adjusting to the chaos is part of the game too.

I don’t think it’s all that unpredictable. Quite the opposite. The more players in a hand, the more certain one or more have a piece of the pot.

Thank you for the invitation, but poker isn’t that much like baseball for me.