A general Question: LAGS. SLAGS and LAPS

[MecosKing]

Hey all-

I am a new member, and longtime player in the PP 10-20 sh's. My Pt #s are 29%VP,17pfr, 2.5pfa. I used to be about a 3.2bb/100 winner, then went on a ridiculous antirush for around 6k, and when the dust setted, i ended up at 1.5 or so for 50k hands. So i tightened up from LAG (35/19/2.7) to SLAG (current stats)...and am having a somewhat tough time winning. Im not losing, but after about 50 hours of playing, i have been hovering. AA winning 50% and KK 60, and JJ 44 probably have somethin to do with this...

The purpose of this post is just to ask what you guys think of a playing style that i am seeing a lot of these days, and most of these guys seem to be pretty decent winners, at least the hands i have logged.

They are ostensibly LAPS, making lots of -EV moves (or so it would seem) like cold calling pf raises with hands like KJo (This is wrong, right?) and even worse like 910s- Most are 40% VPers, some a tad more. They do a fair amount of flat calling on flops also, but the thing is they almost always bet when checked to, and tend to pickup pots where no one has a showdown-worthy hand.

A typical hand against one of these is I have AQo UTG, and raise, and he cold calls from the CO, and the board comes somewhat busy, like J86 rainbow, I bet he calls, turns a rag like a 5 which puts a flush draw out there. Over alot of hands, i ultimately think checking here is the best option-The problem is that he will bet anything then, and i will have a hard time calling him, because he is not a MANIAC by any means- the cards he plays arent terrible enough to be kept honest with an Acehigh, and i have been shown A8o in this situation too much to call, even though he might well have 910s, or even Ax. So, i muckit, and this seems to happen all the time against the LAPS that bet when checked to.

The obvious way to punish these guys is to CR them on the turn, but the bottom line is that you generally need a hand to do this, and more often than not your going to miss.

So i guess my question to everyone is is this just a phantom problem, i.e. something thats not a real problem, but is more a product ot my running bad and missing more often than i should, and therefore i SHOULD be folding these hands and thems the breaks, or is this 'LAG masking as a LAP' style actually one that can net a profit against TAGS and SLAGS? I have alot of hands logged with these guys, and they seem like winners, most of em.

Any help is appreciated...My thoughts on SH can be found in a few articles at bet-the-pot.com, in the short handed section--the link to the thread if anyone cares is

http://bet-the-pot.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1751

Thanks for any input. Great forum btw- hard to beleive this is my first time here.

[___1___]

MecosKing,

Sounds like youre describing "TheBrownEyes" type players here. They coldcall a ton and play fairly well postflop. Very annoying.

Anyway, I think its a phantom problem plain and simple. Just a product of running poorly. Also, having the player you describe on your right makes life easier, if you ask me.

___1___

[MecosKing]

LoL. Yeah TheBrownEyes. Got into a shouting match with him once when i was playing a bit drunk. Hes more of an actually passive player though, as in, he usually lays his hand when he hasnt got much- playing him isnt a lot of guesswork. The types i am talking about are players like Ziels4, amhsmuk, DECRAZYONE, and Edlpm41, if youve ever played with them. These guys all show big wins over a decent # of hands with a style similar to what im sayin, cept for EDlpm, whose much more manaical than LAPpy.

EDIT: If anyones read Harmons section in SS2 on playing short, she says that the player most often picks up the pot when no one else has a hand they are willing to showdown is the one thats going to win the most in the long run. This seems true, and it also seems like players that are playin the way i describe are doing this.
However, i guess the ultimate question is, does picking up pots this way make up for the massive -EV chip hemmorhage that you are engaging in by getting into these hands in the first place?
My miniscule sample size seems to suggest that it may, but then again, its so counterinuitive i have an awfully hard time beleiving it, and like i was saying, and ___1___ was saying too, it may be due to runnin bad...

[___1___]

MecosKing,

Really?!?! How many hands are we talking about as far as Ziels4(I've always thought he was a maniac), amhsmuk (ugh), and DECRAZYONE (who seems to be the more passive than the rest)? I'd say amhsmuk probably wins at a decent rate, DECRAZYONE is probably a small winner, and Ziels4 seems a little to maniacal to be a long term winner, but who knows.

___1___

[Silverback]

Anyone played VolcanoeJoe, while Im at it what about Kalastaja or similar? both at $10/$20


I dont cold call raises, but some players do as they would also in a full ring game so I see nothing wrong with it, they lose intiative but still have position so I guess its how they way there hand up, maybe they want the blinds in.

[arkady]

what is astonishing is how long these players have been around. They either do win or have a lot of money coming in from some other place.

Btw, J, Edlpm was the guy pumping his 23s on that flopped flush I showed u the other day in that monster pot. I love him.

[___1___]

[ QUOTE ]
Btw, J, Edlpm was the guy pumping his 23s on that flopped flush I showed u the other day in that monster pot. I love him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thought that name looked familiar. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[MecosKing]

Silverback-

Ive seen volcano, never played with him. Kalistaja is a very formidable opponent though. Ive played with him alot, and analyzed his play alot. Hes TAGgy/SLAGgy, and never misses a value bet. Interesting you should ask about him because him and ThaSuperFish are the two winning players whose games ive looked at most closely to figure out what theyre upto. Kali overplays overpairs and TPTK hands sometimes, but i think he makes up for it by never missing a bet when HHIG. Kali does open raise from most positions with hands like A8, which i usually muck unless im CO or button...

Again, the reason that i might feel this way is because I went up against them most often when i was gettin slung somethin awful by a horrid run of second best hands and bad beats, which was bad enough to make me rethink my overall game.

[Vincent Lepore]

[ QUOTE ]
does picking up pots this way make up for the massive -EV chip hemmorhage that you are engaging in by getting into these hands in the first place?


[/ QUOTE ]

If these fellows play extremely well after the flop they are not giving up much EV by calling with weak hands preflop. Assuming they somewhat pick their opponents, but even then if they play very well post flop they can make up for a lot of preflop errors..

Vince

[Nate tha' Great]

Hey, good post. I remember you from the 10/20 back in the day.

I think you need to continue to bet the turn most of the time here. Yes, it's annoying when these sort of players have position on you, but I think checking it to them allows them to take fullest advantage of that position. Once you check, you opponent can either:

1) Bet the turn and take a free showdown.
2) Bet the turn and bet the river as a bluff.
3) Bet the turn and bet the river for value.
4) Check the turn and take a free card.
5) Check the turn and see a showdown for one bet on the river.

That is just too many options for a player with some reasonable postflop skills. In fact, I think it is almost never correct to check both the turn and the river out of position after having the lead on the previous streets unless specifically you would be very uncomfortable if your opponent raised.

[MecosKing]

Nate-

Whatup dude. yeah i remember you also. I went onna massive rush for awhile, then a massive antirush, now i play under a couple of different names (rakeback-gotta pump that EV up as much as possible).

Yeah i hear you on that--I hate checking this because IMHO, you are putting your opponent in a situation where, no matter what he holds, betting is almost always a +EV move-- and so he will take it down with Qhi because hes got position...And I dont very often call down an AKhi or AQhi because the fact of the matter is, with five random cards out and a busy board, they are rarely ever good!

So yeah betting is an option, of course, i cant call a raise there at all...Also, what does anyone think of check/calling and then mucking to a river bet?

Part of me wants to say that if AQhi is good, and you call the turn bet, then your opponent will probably not bet the river unless he has a hand he can beat you with, becaue he will think that you are ready to make the ace high calldown against him anyway.

On the other hand, you may say that if you are thinking of calling, you are better off betting, right? Maybe, but the problem with that is that if you get called, and brick the river, you pretty much have to bet the river because if you check it here, I think you are more likely to induce a bluff than you are if you check/called the turn, and checked the river... Because betting turn/checking river REEKS of no pair which will often muck to a river bet, whereas check/calling maybe looks more like a micro PP like 66 or something, or at any rate a big unpaired hand that you are willing to see the SD with.

Also, what does anyone think of limping good hands in EP against opponents like this? Like, KQo/s, AJ, ATs, AQo even maybe? Not AK prob or PPs obviously- anyone like this idea? That way you can either flop it or drop it, or maybe make a move on an LP bettor who looks like hes trying to steal the pot?

I tried this as a solution and got VERY mixed results...It solved the problem sort of in that it kept me out of what may have otherwise ended up as 'trouble' but it also gave rise to some pretty unconscionable beats when i did flop a good hand--so i dunno.

Has anyone else tried this, or am i just spinning my wheels thinking on this subject, when the proper answer usually is bet bet bet?

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
So yeah betting is an option, of course, i cant call a raise there at all...Also, what does anyone think of check/calling and then mucking to a river bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's going to be a better plan then checking and calling both streets. Even a lot of pretty aggressive players will frequently give up on trying to fold a better hand if the action progresses like that.

I still think betting the turn is probably better, though.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, what does anyone think of limping good hands in EP against opponents like this? Like, KQo/s, AJ, ATs, AQo even maybe? Not AK prob or PPs obviously- anyone like this idea? That way you can either flop it or drop it, or maybe make a move on an LP bettor who looks like hes trying to steal the pot?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't especially like it. The LAG opponent is still going to have position on you, but now he has the added advantage of knowing that you're unlikely to have an extremely strong holding.

It's really just a very difficult spot if one of these guys has position on you. In a 10-handed game, it might be tolerable if there are some other good players in the game, especially as your position relative to the LAG could sometimes prove advantageous in multiway pots. But in a shorthanded game when most pots are going to be contested heads up or 3-handed, being out of position against one of these guys is just very difficult. I'm not saying that you can't make a profit in these spots but it's probably as not as large as it might be at another table.

[Silverback]

[ QUOTE ]
Harmons section in SS2 on playing short

[/ QUOTE ]


Whats this? Worth getting?

[MecosKing]

Meh. SS2 is an overall good purchase. I mean for 39 bucks its fun reading at any rate. Theres talk that Harmons Limit section in it is going to become a staple as far as limit holdem reading-dare i say on the level of sklansky? Okay maybe not quite, but she advocates a very aggressive positional SH style- it seems like she divulges a few secrets that other pros havent wanted to yet.
-As far as the rest of it, the NL (ive heard) is pretty similar to SS1, and the Negreneau 2-7 triple draw section is also really good, if you play that game. It deals with all games though, so unless your interested in reading about all the poker games, it might not be worth it.

[joker122]

at 5/10 i bet here probably 80-90% of the time, depending on my image.

at 10/20, where the players aren't nearly as weak-tight, i think spots like these are where variety is key. i try to constantly switch gears when i'm in this situation, regardless of my hand. in order of thier frequency, i interchange betting, check-folding, check-raising, and check-calling.

it would clearly be very poor poker to check-fold the turn each and every time you miss with overs and your opponent has called the flop, because your opponent could peg your hand as soon as you checked the turn, and could pick up the pot every time with a bet. however, if you check-raise or check-call a certain percentage of the time, he will have to rethink his auto-bet.