My last blog detailed playing what many Internet players would consider a Donk’s approach. And, there are at least two side to any issue. After doing the article, I got a bit of concurrence from a couple of pros.
Lee Watkins has an article up entitled, Weak Lead. I didn’t really cover this but it does go hand in hand with the idea. Here’s the paragraph that he continues to discuss in the article:
Using a weak lead, a player bets out a relatively small percentage of the pot. For example, if there’s 800 in the pot, the amateur would put out a bet of less than half – say 300. Looking at this bet, an aggressive pro may assume that his opponent doesn’t have much of a hand. He may guess that the bet indicates some sort of modest connection with the flop or even a poor bluff. The pro may look at this bet and come over the top with very little, or maybe nothing at all. Knowing that a player is on the lookout for these sorts of signals means you can offer up a weak bet when your hand is actually very strong.
It is the non-standard approach that goes along with my view in the previous blog.
We all know that the non-standard approach can be had. It has certainly happened to me. I’ll limp that big hand against an aggressive blind and get drawn out on a hand he’d have probably folded.
Daniel Negreanu provides an excerpt from his new book along the lines of the article:
Another bone of contention I have with certain authors is the theory that you should play your hands aggressively on the flop so as to better define your hand, and at the same time, to gain more information from your opponents. This theory is actually very effective in limit hold