Crazy thing I almost never do against a LAP

[arkady]

Villain is 40 vpip, pretty passive postflop and has a PFR of 6. Am I crazy for doing this?

Party Poker 15/30 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is CO with A/images/graemlins/club.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button 3-bets</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (10.66 SB) A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, K/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
MP checks, Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets</font>, MP folds, Hero calls.

Turn: (6.33 BB) 6/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button Raises</font>, Hero folds.

Saved myself a BB or what?

[imported_leader]

I think he might raise for a free SD (or because he's an feels like it) with AJ-ATs. I don't much like the line you took.

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
I think he might raise for a free SD (or because he's an feels like it) with AJ-ATs. I don't much like the line you took.

[/ QUOTE ]

he 3bet preflop, so i think arkady is splitting at the very best

[bank]

Why not c/c him down after the line you took on the flop?

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not c/c him down after the line you took on the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this line much more than bet/folding.

[NLSoldier]

hate it.

[arkady]

what you mean why...calling down costs 2 bets. this way i know that i could be painfully behind and it will only cost me 1 bet. 6% pfr 3-betting me can mean only a few hands.

he will not raise me w/AJ for a free SD, why? he calls down w/JJ...and raises w/AA,AK. thats what i would think a passive person does :/

[Subby]

How many hands do you have on this guy?

[wackjob]

I also hate this. If you are going to bet/fold the turn, why not just call down? I think you will be good enough times to see a showdown here plus the chances of improving on the river &amp; getting extra bets from an AK or AA on the river when you do hit.

[arkady]

I am extremely serious how I can improve to beat AK/AA?

[wackjob]

"AK or AA" Mistype while playing.. Meant you are going to get extra bets from AX occassionaly. Obviously you are drawing dead on the turn to AK &amp; AA )

[arkady]

350...also worth mentioning he will call down with bottom pair and i have yet to see him raise except a flopped straight once.

[wackjob]

I was typing my correction slowly 'cause I am playing, you should be playing &amp; typing slower too!

[Roy6]

deleted by user

[arkady]

hehhe.

but to address your corrected post, i am a little dissapointed. I specified that he is passive and said he is 6% pfr. What possible Ax hand can be possibly 3-bet me with? I fail to see AQs even being possible let alone AJ!

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
hehhe.

but to address your corrected post, i am a little dissapointed. I specified that he is passive and said he is 6% pfr. What possible Ax hand can be possibly 3-bet me with? I fail to see AQs even being possible let alone AJ!

[/ QUOTE ]

if you're so sure of these reads then check/fold seems like the obviously correct play.

he's only betting with AK. any hand we're ahead of only has 2 outs.

but I don't think you're so sure....

edit to make sense

[spamuell]

I like it and I don't know why others hate it.

[baronzeus]

I think LPPs bet with JJ and QQ here too.

[Wynton]

He's very passive preflop and "pretty passive postflop," you say.

Does this mean that he wouldn't 3-bet preflop with pocket 10s, Js or Qs? If those hands are possible for this player, then wouldn't it make sense to bet the flop and then see how he reacts?

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
I think LPPs bet with JJ and QQ here too.

[/ QUOTE ]

(i know that's my point)

[spamuell]

[ QUOTE ]
if you're so sure of these reads then check/fold seems like the obviously correct play.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's a difference between having a good idea about the hands he might hold after he bets and after he raises. The villian is passive but arkady did raise one limper from the CO so he could have a worse A or even a K or a pocket pair and decide to bet these hands.

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think LPPs bet with JJ and QQ here too.

[/ QUOTE ]

(i know that's my point)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I'm trying to support arkady here by saying that an LPP will NEVER raise with this, but he will ALWAYS bet with it. If this is true, arkady's line is optimal. However, there are lots of exceptions so there's a gray area.

[wackjob]

Here is something to consider.

If you think you are beat on the flop to either AA or AK why didn't you fold the flop? You don't have the odds to continue. The play I like better is to lead the flop or C/R the flop. You are likely to find out if you have the best hand sooner &amp; cheaper by doing this.

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
Here is something to consider.

If you think you are beat on the flop to either AA or AK why didn't you fold the flop? You don't have the odds to continue. The play I like better is to lead the flop or C/R the flop. You are likely to find out if you have the best hand sooner &amp; cheaper by doing this.

[/ QUOTE ]


Because an LPP plays QQ-JJ the same way

[arkady]

I dont know...its possible I suppose - he could.

To address the flop raise, I didnt really think about. My feeling regarding the flop probe bet is that even passive people are capable of raising silly holdings, nobody online takes the flop seriously. However against this guy, it might have been better to just fold to a flop raise. But that requires an even better read and I would prefer to have closer to 1k hands before I do that.

[wackjob]

I don't think they do.

[arkady]

C/Ring the flop imo is silly, he might actually fold a worse hand and it will provide little information. So let's say he 3-bets, then what? Fold to the 3-bet? No one would do that...i am certainly not capable.

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think they do.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does he play it? Check/fold flop?

[ggbman]

You want to show this down. You know he won't give you a lot of action with a worse hand. You know he's probably continuation betting the flop near 100% of the time.

His range of hands here includes things that have you crushed, and some holding you have crushed like TT, JJ, QQ. You also mention that he calls down with any piece. So if he check behind the the turn, he is ALWAYS calling a river bet. So showdown this hand! It's that simple, check call the turn, and if he checks behind value bet the river.

Gabe

[zimmer879]

As long as you're very confident in your read, I see nothing wrong with your line. You save a bet when behind and gain a bet when ahead, because he would likely check behind either the turn or the river. As a default c/c is the way to go though.

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
As long as you're very confident in your read, I see nothing wrong with your line. You save a bet when behind and gain a bet when ahead, because he would likely check behind either the turn or the river. As a default c/c is the way to go though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the mere fact that no player is 100% predictable really means we want to show this down, the pot is already reasonably big, it's more important to get to showdown than to try to get him to call down with a worse hand IMO.

[arkady]

You know you just basically echoed what most of the forum thinks and does. No one cares about saving bets or making specific plays, everyone just makes sweeping general statements. ggman, you can at least pay attention to the HH before posting advice - I can't value bet the river if he checks behind since I am out of position.

Pot is big, must call.
Hand is good, must showdown.
Etc. Etc.

I don't want to showdown, thats the whole point of betting and planning to fold to a raise. To eliminate the showdown and try to save a BB. Is it right, I don't know? But I am trying to distinguish situations that don't require an automated response and maybe should be played differentely than what the norm suggests. Everyone has been so engineered to think a certain way that exploring any option that seems to clash with the norm is being met with feverish resistance.

So, on one hand I am angered by the close minded responses on the other hand I am instilled with uncertainty, as I don't have any other solid proof as to why this may be a good move.

I just know that this type of robotic thinking cannot possibly be sufficient if one plans to tackle the higher limits of poker.

[wackjob]

I hate bet &amp; fold unless you are on a pure bluff. Other than that every possible way to play this hand has been addressed.

[Buck_65]

Well played IMO, although I'd call down in the moment because I'm not the best at recognizing when I'm clearly beaten while actually playing.

[Guy McSucker]

I think this is an interesting line but I am really not sure about it.

The problem is that, although he is a very tight preflop raiser and presumably an even tighter preflop 3-bettor, you've taken an unusual line and are liable to get an unusual response.

Donkbets get on people's nerves. Sometimes these people respond by raising when they wouldn't raise if you'd had the lead before. I have enough hand, and enough doubt about what a raised donkbet would mean, that I don't want to fold if he raises, so I don't want to donk.

The excellent way-ahead/way-behind line (check-call flop, check-call turn, bet river) of course suffers this same flaw, but there are two main differences:

1) the donk bet comes on the river, when it's easy for the opponent to just call and show down. I think you're less likely to be raised by a worse hand out of anger at your donkbet on the river than you are on the turn.

2) you get to see all five cards, and perhaps improve to a winner. That's not relevant here because if you are losing it is irretrievable.

I think difference (1) is enough that if I were to fold this hand before showdown, it would be to a raised river donkbet.

Guy.

[kiddo]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is an interesting line but I am really not sure about it.

The problem is that, although he is a very tight preflop raiser and presumably an even tighter preflop 3-bettor, you've taken an unusual line and are liable to get an unusual response.

Donkbets get on people's nerves. Sometimes these people respond by raising when they wouldn't raise if you'd had the lead before. I have enough hand, and enough doubt about what a raised donkbet would mean, that I don't want to fold if he raises, so I don't want to donk.

The excellent way-ahead/way-behind line (check-call flop, check-call turn, bet river) of course suffers this same flaw, but there are two main differences:

1) the donk bet comes on the river, when it's easy for the opponent to just call and show down. I think you're less likely to be raised by a worse hand out of anger at your donkbet on the river than you are on the turn.

2) you get to see all five cards, and perhaps improve to a winner. That's not relevant here because if you are losing it is irretrievable.

I think difference (1) is enough that if I were to fold this hand before showdown, it would be to a raised river donkbet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this thread is important. The above post is excatly the kind of "normal" answer that I to would often give.

Personally, I dont think a pretty passive guy react to a donkbet with a: "Ok, lets raise for once". A passive guy is passive because he sees to many hands that beats him every time he got something himself. If he has any doubts at all he will only call donkbet.

But the important thing in this hand is not if Arkady saved a bet or not. The important thing is that if a pokerplayer constantly is aware of new ways of saving bets (or winning more bets) in a pretty straightforward hand like this, he will sooner or later win more then the guys that dont think like this.

In this hand there is always a point where this guy is so passive that he will never raise turn without our Hero drawing dead and then our Hero has found a good way of saving 1BB. And if we are constantly aware of possibilites like this we will - sooner or later - learn to do this donkbet and do it with EV+ at least 8 times out of 10.

The answer "I hate it" to this post is more of an attiuted towards poker then an answer to the post.

[setjes]

[ QUOTE ]
Donkbets get on people's nerves. Sometimes these people respond by raising when they wouldn't raise if you'd had the lead before. I have enough hand, and enough doubt about what a raised donkbet would mean, that I don't want to fold if he raises, so I don't want to donk.


[/ QUOTE ]

Aggreed. Even some passive players tend to overplay their hands HU and a donkbet encourages those players to make a desperation raise to get you to lay down a better hand. However, even in case he is this kind of player he will and can only be doing this (considering his PFR%) with a very narrow range of hands (I'd say QQ-TT, maybe 1 or 2 other hands you're ahead of but I doubt it).

I don't hate the line you took but I still think I can't fold this anywhere. Sometimes certain players change gears and will do strange things HU. I want to see a sd cause I got a a hand that beats a couple of his possible holdings, so I c/c turn and river until I've got a really good read of how he plays HU

[meow_meow]

I have to say I find this play a bit strange, especially given your responses in the donk-betting thread.

Had you bet or cr'ed the flop, I'd have much more confidence that his turn action means you're beat.

[Anders_G]

Why does the topic say he's a LA-P when you say he's a LP-P in the post? Surely confused me a whole lot until I read the stats you had on him.

Also, I don't like your line, but then again I never understood people who check/call flop and bet out turn (aka donkbet). I'd raise the flop, and it's not close.

[setjes]

Why would you want to raise the flop? Do you think it's a valueraise (on what range of hands do you put him)? What do you do when you get 3bet or raised on the turn?

[AlwaysWrong]

You played this right on the turn. It's not all that close imo. To get to showdown you need to pay 2 big bets to win 10 big bets. You're getting 5-1 so you need to be winning here like 18% of the time. There's no chance you're winning 18% of the time. Case closed.

My question is why didn't you bet out on the flop?

[ISF]

If your read is that strong I think its fine. I doubt a 6% pfr is threebeting any hands you beat other then JJ and AA and if you have alot of evidence that he is very passive post flop then well played.

These situations is one ot those u have to have a good read on the villian to be able to fold your AQ.. But I think u made the right decision with the info in hand.

[kiddo]

[ QUOTE ]
You played this right on the turn. It's not all that close imo. To get to showdown you need to pay 2 big bets to win 10 big bets. You're getting 5-1 so you need to be winning here like 18% of the time. There's no chance you're winning 18% of the time. Case closed.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are at least 8 options.

1) We checkcall turn and river: Cost 2BB.
2) We checkcall turn and get free showdown.
3) We bet turn and are raised by a hand we cant beat and fold: Cost 1BB.
4) We bet turn and are raised by a hand that we can draw out on and fold: Cost 1BB.
5) We bet turn and are raised by a hand that we beat and we fold: Cost 1BB.
6) We bet turn and are called by better hand: Cost: ?
7) We bet turn and are called by worse hand: Cost ?
8) We checkfold turn.

You are saying there is no chance we will win 18% at river if we checkcall turn and river (1). Thats true. But this is only interesteing if we are check-folding turn (8). And that isnt our preferd option, is it? Our Hero did (3)-(7). Im to lazy to play around with figures, estimating each altearnative, but (3) and (7) has to happen a really high % of the time to make this a good play.

[MAxx]

[ QUOTE ]
I like it and I don't know why others hate it.

[/ QUOTE ]

sounds like you can trust your read, and sounds like you saved yourself a BB when overwhelmingly behind here to this player.

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
ggman, you can at least pay attention to the HH before posting advice - I can't value bet the river if he checks behind since I am out of position.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get it? If he check behind the turn, value bet the river? I don't see how being OOP has anything to do with it?


[ QUOTE ]
I don't want to showdown, thats the whole point of betting and planning to fold to a raise. To eliminate the showdown and try to save a BB. Is it right, I don't know? But I am trying to distinguish situations that don't require an automated response and maybe should be played differentely than what the norm suggests. Everyone has been so engineered to think a certain way that exploring any option that seems to clash with the norm is being met with feverish resistance.

[/ QUOTE ]


I respect this. The thing is, in my opinion, this is not a case to deviate from the norm. Look at the title of your post. "Something i hardly ever do..." What if your opponent does somethnig he hardly ever does and raises this turn with a worse hand?

Poker players are not always predicable, i've seen guys with% VPIPs in full rings game of 96 suited and put in a gajillion bets with no hand/no draw on the flop. Given the tendancy of players to not always do the same thing, when you have a medium/strong hand in a big pot, i think you always want to show it down.

Kiddo's post was very good, and it's not that i don't understand or agree with what he is saying, i just don't think this is a spot for it. Also, i truley am baffled as to the comment about the HH, so maybe you can tell me what if anything i am missing there. I was a lot of people of people just basically say "this line sucks." I actually attempted to give an analysis of why i don't like and what i would do, and yet you singled out my post. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Danenania]

I think in theory it's a good line, but I see way too much crazy [censored] from supposedly passive players like this (even with many hundreds of hands on them for stats) to not see a showdown with this hand. However, if you have a strong enough read then more power to ya. In a live game I think it would be great.

[paco]

[ QUOTE ]
You know you just basically echoed what most of the forum thinks and does. No one cares about saving bets or making specific plays, everyone just makes sweeping general statements.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is right, but even passive opponents are capable of a turn raise with a check behind on the river. What was his perception of you? I would def 3-bet with a hand like KQ suited pf and usually not let a turn donkbet keep me from showing down (especially against donks or tricky players).
I like your reasoning, but I don't think its right a high enough percentage of the time. It would be great to feel confident enough to save a bb in these situations, but I'm not sure if we can, and thus in this case--IMO--need to take the boring, rote, 'sweeping generalization' play of calling down.

Edit: in calling down I mean show down, and think that is optimally done by the WA/WB river donket-fold that everyones familiar with

[paco]

[ QUOTE ]
You played this right on the turn. It's not all that close imo. To get to showdown you need to pay 2 big bets to win 10 big bets. You're getting 5-1 so you need to be winning here like 18% of the time. There's no chance you're winning 18% of the time. Case closed.

[/ QUOTE ]

CAse isn't closed becasue, a different line would have him c/c the turn and bet the river--whole different line, amt of bets, are reaction from opponent.

[rory]

check check check call call call bro

[arkady]

I am more content with the discussion that transpired today, even if the majority think I am wrong. I only singled you out, because I had to respond to someone - don't take offense.

I misunderstood what you mean by the check, but someone that tight preflop will be betting the turn with anything, even JJ. A check on the turn would then make it very difficult for me as I would be tempted to simply call.

To address Guy, I think a donkbet on the river is the worst option of all. If he has as strong a hand as I suspect he does, I will get raised, be forced to fold and sit there wondering why didnt I just call. Against this sort of player I would never donkbet the river - suicide, as he will go into call down mode with a worse hand right on the turn.

For the others who say, I have seen too much crazy [censored] from "passive players". Well, I got quite a bit of hands logged in the past few months, believe me I know what you mean. Sometimes I just want to toss gametime into the trash, because it has mislead and confused me. Of course no one is 100% certain about anything, otherwise 2+2 would not exist. If we could all get certain decisions, poker would be formulaic and not be poker. However we need to strive to pick out situations which do not resemble a typical scenario and see if we can win or save 1bb more. As Kiddo correctly pointed out, this will be the difference in earn and that is what everyone on this board is trying to achieve.

I know I am defending my position, I sort of have to, but by no means am I actually convinced that it is the right move. Hence I brought it out for discussion...I am now trying to determine if there can be a more meaningful gauging system to quantify how successful these moves are. Currently, my only solution is to leave party and find a smaller site where I can form closer to 100% reads. That way these kind of decisions will not leave me second guessing myself.

Anyway, good thread and I liked the input from everyone.

[arkady]

LAP = Loose and Passive. What is LPP? Maybe I dont know my acronyms.

[arkady]

Check raising the flop and leading the turn only to get raised is going to cost us the same (as he will 3-bet that flop with the hands that I think he has). So we have accomplished very little.

Raising the flop for information is another generic and imo often incorrect approach to determine information. In these mid-limit 6max games, people don't care about the flop.

My response to donk-betting in the previous thread was a general sentiment about donkbets into PFRs. I said they are annoying, give me heart problems, but never did I question their effectiveness. I think it is a great tool to curb people's aggression. If I know that BB donkbets me 80% of the time, believe I will think twice about stealing with the usual Ax/suited rags/etc.

[cookie]

LPP = Loose passive (preflop) passive (postflop)

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
I also hate this. If you are going to bet/fold the turn, why not just call down? I think you will be good enough times to see a showdown here plus the chances of improving on the river &amp; getting extra bets from an AK or AA on the river when you do hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

In July's 2+2 magazine, Drew Pruitt writes (http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/issue7/Pruitt0705.html)


[ QUOTE ]
After seeing someone raise the turn, then fold to a 3-bet, some players will make comments like "For the same two bets you can see a showdown." This shows a lack of understanding where profit comes from when playing a hand in poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Granted, his discussion is regarding river play, but I think this same concept works here. Hero is betting into a passive player for value. If he's raised he's almost certainly beat.

[arkady]

lol, nice to know. these must have been developed recently, I only know of lag(p) and tag(p)

[7ontheline]

I think your line is fine since you have a read and are going with it. It is the equivalent of the WA/WB line of c/c, c/c, bet, except you are betting one street earlier. The purpose of the river donkbet is usually to scare the other player with the presumably better hand into calling and to get a call from worse hands thereby winning more and losing less. People are much less likely to raise the river without a monster, content to go to showdown. With your read you can donk the turn because this has the same effect - he won't raise without a monster, but he will still call you down. You're not winning less than you would have, and don't have to call the turn if you're behind.

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
I think your line is fine since you have a read and are going with it. It is the equivalent of the WA/WB line of c/c, c/c, bet, except you are betting one street earlier. The purpose of the river donkbet is usually to scare the other player with the presumably better hand into calling and to get a call from worse hands thereby winning more and losing less. People are much less likely to raise the river without a monster, content to go to showdown. With your read you can donk the turn because this has the same effect - he won't raise without a monster, but he will still call you down. You're not winning less than you would have, and don't have to call the turn if you're behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're HU in position and you think a good player is going for the c/c, c/c, b/f line, wouldn't it make sense to bluff him on the river? It need only work a small percentage of the time to make this move profitable.

[arkady]

I know the purpose of the river bet, lol. This is not the place for it given his range of hands, no river card will scare him.

[AlwaysWrong]

I think an important thing here is that your line can be correct even if it's possible that you were winning here and folded the best hand. Yes, sometimes crazy things happen and the guy who never bluffs bluffs but poker is all about odds, not about 100% certainty. If he only bluffs here 1 time in 20 or 1 time in 10, that's fine you can still fold and it either still saves you money or costs you very little.

[7ontheline]

Just articulating it for myself, really. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Anders_G]

[ QUOTE ]
lol, nice to know. these must have been developed recently, I only know of lag(p) and tag(p)

[/ QUOTE ]

LAG/TAG are a bit obsolete, as well as "weak-tight".
I think that the paradigm shift occured when people started using pokertracker they got a better overview and realised that postflop aggression often varies from preflop ditto.

Labels together with my personal biased opinion about approximate vpip/pfr/af-tot together with common nicknames.
-----------------------------------------
LA-A/LAG/maniac | vpip &gt;40, pfr &gt;35, af-tot &gt;2.5
LA-P | vpip 30-50, pfr &gt;25, af-tot &lt;1.5
LP-A | vpip &gt;25, pfr &lt;10, af-tot &gt;2
LP-P/fish/callingstation | vpip &gt;35, pfr &lt;10, aftot &lt;1

TA-A/2+2er/solid | vpip 20-30, pfr ~5% less than vpip, af-tot &gt;2
TA-P/weak-tight | vpip &lt;25, pfr ~15, af-tot ~1.5
TP-A/rock | vpip &lt;20, pfr &lt;10, af-tot &gt;2
TP-P | some people with short stack fit this description. noone else. maybe people who jump levels and aren't comfortable.
-----------------------------------------

This is to be considered the new bible, thank you. Also, don't hijack the thread about the numbers used.

[tansoku]

[ QUOTE ]
Villain is 40 vpip, pretty passive postflop and has a PFR of 6. Am I crazy for doing this?

Saved myself a BB or what?

[/ QUOTE ]

How many hands of poker have you played?
How many times have you ran into players like this?

You had a read, you stuck with it, and saved yourself a bet.

NH