Passive play theory vol.1 [Archive] - Two Plus Two Older Archives

View Full Version : Passive play theory vol.1

The Truth

09-01-2005, 05:32 AM

Agressor is loose passive, like 54/4/.4

Where should it be different?
I have my idea, but lets see.

Party Poker 30/60 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP3 with Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif, K/images/graemlins/club.gif.
3 folds, MP2 calls, Hero raises, 2 folds, SB calls, BB calls, MP2 calls.

Flop: (8 SB) 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls, SB calls, BB calls.

Turn: (6 BB) Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls, SB calls, BB folds.

River: (9 BB) 4/images/graemlins/club.gif (3 players)
SB checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls, SB calls.

Final Pot: 12 BB

catlover

09-01-2005, 08:30 AM

On the flop I think it's close between calling and folding. On the turn I think you should have raised it. If you get reraised you are in a tough spot but that's poker.

On the river I think it's close between calling like you did, and raising to prevent an overcall.

TStoneMBD

09-01-2005, 08:39 AM

looks good. a turn raise makes alot of sense but i dont think you could be comfortable folding to a 3bet because im not really sure what range of hands a .4AF player would 3bet on this turn. he might 3bet a smaller flush then Qh along with a set.

09-01-2005, 10:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Agressor is loose passive, like 54/4/.4

Where should it be different?
I have my idea, but lets see.

Party Poker 30/60 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP3 with Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif, K/images/graemlins/club.gif.
3 folds, MP2 calls, Hero raises, 2 folds, SB calls, BB calls, MP2 calls.

Flop: (8 SB) 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls, SB calls, BB calls.

Turn: (6 BB) Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls, SB calls, BB folds.

River: (9 BB) 4/images/graemlins/club.gif (3 players)
SB checks, MP2 bets, Hero calls, SB calls.

Final Pot: 12 BB

[/ QUOTE ]
PREFLOP: Standard. FLOP: If the aggressor truly is this passive, I think you should fold this hand out, your overs are probably worthless and the QH is not enough incentive to continue, if you had the KH than I would continue in the hand. Another thing, If you really want to call here, raising the flop may be better than calling since your opponent is so passive, that way if you dont improve on the turn you may be able to take your free card, but this play really is pointless in this spot since there may not be a card in the deck that can help you. TURN: All you have is a marginal call here so raising is out of the question. Hitting the queen makes your hand look prettier but it doesnt change your situation. You are still trailing here vs a passive bettor so there is no need to protect your hand. This is another reason you shouldve folded the flop, becuz you can end up going too far if the turn card gives you one of those "phantom Improvements" If you do decide to raise you have an easy fold if your passive opponent reraises you since that would mean your flush outs are no good. RIVER: Once you get this far you should call and hope for the best, I will be very surprised if you win this one.

adspar

09-01-2005, 02:53 PM

I know the villain has an AF of .4, but that is from playing over half his hands. I don't know if you can exactly correlate that to like the aggression of 25vp$ip/0.8AF but his bets aren't nearly as scary as a 20/0.4 so it might not be such a doom and gloom scenario.

jdock99

09-02-2005, 06:21 PM

I play a little lower than you do, but in my games even the most passive player decides to 'take a stand' every once in a while and will donk bet all the way through w/ nothing or a draw. I find this to be especially true when a passive player 'donks' in a spot that most players with a strong hand against a TAG will check/call the flop and check/raise the turn or go straight for a check/raise on the flop. I find that players w/ high passivity numbers will often play semi-strong hands and draws pretty standardly. They are so passive overall mainly due to the junk hands, like when the CC a raise w/ Q5 off and then when they flop nothing take 2 off any board w/ no ace.

legend42

09-02-2005, 07:33 PM

I think this is a good point. The other significant PT stat here is his CR%. If it's anything above never, I think you have to take into account that he could be doing this with a naked Ah or something.

lil feller

09-03-2005, 12:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
On the river I think it's close between calling like you did, and raising to prevent an overcall

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Why wouldn't we want an overcall? No better hand is folding for 2 bets here, I wouldn't think, and anybody with 2pair or better is certainly raising the turn. Raising this river is horrible, simply horrible.

lf

lil feller

09-03-2005, 12:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I know the villain has an AF of .4, but that is from playing over half his hands. I don't know if you can exactly correlate that to like the aggression of 25vp$ip/0.8AF but his bets aren't nearly as scary as a 20/0.4 so it might not be such a doom and gloom scenario.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does anybody have a link that helps explain the relation between VPIP and AF? I think I get it, but don't want to bog down the board with repetive discussion. I'll try a search too.

thanks,

lf

KidPokerX

09-03-2005, 02:23 AM

I dunno. I would definately call this flop, if not raise it right there. I may end up raising if I still truly thought my KQ was still good. With the Qh you may be able to knock out someone with a Kh (or even Ah) while still maintaining the free card possibility if you don't improve. This is in an ideal situation of course, but more often than not a quick raise right out on the flop will put you in better situations.

lil feller

09-03-2005, 02:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I dunno. I would definately call this flop, if not raise it right there. I may end up raising if I still truly thought my KQ was still good. With the Qh you may be able to knock out someone with a Kh (or even Ah) while still maintaining the free card possibility if you don't improve. This is in an ideal situation of course, but more often than not a quick raise right out on the flop will put you in better situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are never, ever, ever getting the ace of hearts to fold on that flop, and thinking that you can is crazy. If the Ah is in the hand raising the flop will only get you 3bet by the hand with the best draw.

Calling on this flop is questionable at best, but once you turn top pair raising is essential. A turn raise might, just might, get the Kh to fold. You'll never get the Ah to fold, not even for 2 bets, unless the player is aware and the board pairs on the turn.

lf

The Truth

09-03-2005, 03:42 AM

Agressor had 8s-10h,
cold call hed a weak 9, no heart. ::Shrug:: I guess they went on crazy monkey tilt.
MHIG.

thanks for the responses
truth

KidPokerX

09-03-2005, 04:50 AM

what will happen more often?
A lot of times your opponents will not have the Ah. More times than not they will lay it down.

lil feller

09-03-2005, 04:53 AM

[ QUOTE ]
what will happen more often?
A lot of times your opponents will not have the Ah. More times than not they will lay it down.

[/ QUOTE ]

I truly hope you aren't suggesting that after a 3 heart flop that somebody will actually fold the A of hearts? Granted it might not be out, but we can't know that. If it is, its not folding, I don't care how much pressure you put on the person holding it. Nobody folds a nutflush draw in a multiway pot on an unpaired board on the flop. Period. They're calling 4 cold, and in a pot this big, they are correct in doing so.

Am I misundertstanding your point?

lf

vmacosta

09-03-2005, 06:44 AM

Call me crazy, but I always raise this flop. If the bettor is truly passive then he will just call the raise (and go for the c/r on turn with monsters otherwise c/c the rest of the way). After raising the flop, I'll re-evaluate but if I'm heads up with LP, I'll bet the turn and call a raise. Folding the river UI would be an expert play I'd only do if I'd played many hands with the opponent.

KidPokerX

09-03-2005, 05:31 PM

Kinda.
My point is that more often than not nobody will have the Ah.

Nightwish

09-03-2005, 05:41 PM

Raise the flop to clear out aces, other drawing hands (though not a heart, of course), and small made hands. But while we can debate about raising the flop, raising the turn is a no-brainer. It's a must raise. I'm really shocked by some posters claiming that hero's hand is "marginal" on the turn.

haakee

09-03-2005, 05:46 PM

This is a perfect spot to raise the turn.

KidPokerX

09-03-2005, 06:24 PM

This is why raising the flop would have been a good idea.
Not all situations are black and white. All the by-the-book posters have much more to learn.

SoBeDude

09-03-2005, 06:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know the villain has an AF of .4, but that is from playing over half his hands. I don't know if you can exactly correlate that to like the aggression of 25vp$ip/0.8AF but his bets aren't nearly as scary as a 20/0.4 so it might not be such a doom and gloom scenario.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does anybody have a link that helps explain the relation between VPIP and AF? I think I get it, but don't want to bog down the board with repetive discussion. I'll try a search too.

thanks,

lf

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be totally wrong, but there should be no link between the two.

One is all about how often (in percentages) you decide to play. The other is all about after you do decide to play, how hard you bet/raise as opposed to check/call.

So...they should be totally independent.

-Scott

haakee

09-03-2005, 06:58 PM

Wrong. People who see lots of flops end up with crappier hands on average postflop. I don't believe the correlation is exactly linear though, so 50/0.4 is still probably more passive than 25/0.8, but I bet it's close.

SoBeDude

09-03-2005, 07:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. People who see lots of flops end up with crappier hands on average postflop. I don't believe the correlation is exactly linear though, so 50/0.4 is still probably more passive than 25/0.8, but I bet it's close.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. sure people who see more flops are playing more bad hands, but that is irrelevant to HOW they play them postflop.

Aggression calculation is simply a function of the equation behind the number in the PT software. I'm fairly certain that VP$P isn't in the equation for factoring the Agg number, so the two are essentially independent.

If you raise the flop exactly 5% of the time, it is really irrelevant (from an aggression factor standpoint) if you see 10% of the flops or 50%. passive is passive. And if you raise the flop 90% of the time, your aggression factor will be quite high, regardless of if you see 5% of the flops or all of them.

-Scott

adspar

09-03-2005, 08:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you raise the flop exactly 5% of the time, it is really irrelevant (from an aggression factor standpoint) if you see 10% of the flops or 50%. passive is passive. And if you raise the flop 90% of the time, your aggression factor will be quite high, regardless of if you see 5% of the flops or all of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

But which is more scary:

-A bet from someone who sees 100% of the flops and bets 5% of them
or
-A bet from someone who sees 15% of the flops and bets 5% of them

adspar

09-03-2005, 08:20 PM

The point of knowing these statistics for your opponent is to help you put him on a hand range and react accordingly.

If 2 players have the same AF, the player with the higher VPIP is doing more postflop betting and raising, so you put him on a wider range of hands when he bets.

Everyone was looking at the guy's 0.4 AF and figuring he must have a monster. My point is just that with a 50% VPIP, his aggression doesn't mean as much as a 25% VPIP with 0.4AF.

I also suggest that maybe you could put him on a similar range of hands as someone with a 25% VPIP and 0.8 AF. I don't think its an exact comparison, but worth thinking about.

imashyboi

09-04-2005, 10:36 AM

Here's my thoughts prior to viewing the disclosed hands. Upon sitting down the table you have to size everyone up, not just by numbers but by how they play and their starting hands. Just cause a loose passive player limps doesn't mean he has something very good. Most of the time they either have medicore hand or a real strong hand. A loose player could also limp and have a small pair or a hand like QJ, QT, T9 and hoping to get callers. A raise with KQ is definitely a must if you want to play, calling here would be the biggest mistake. They also give you some type of information since they'll usually make it 3bets if they do have a big pair.

Flop: Betting here is standard.

Turn: I will raise here as a semi-bluff and hope I can make someone who might have a two pair or a bigger flush to fold. Calling a 3bet, I'm going to have a real hard time folding the river here though cause the pot will be pretty big. If it's checked back to me I'm betting again.

River: Call no matter what unless someone shows real aggression.

surfdoc

09-04-2005, 01:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. People who see lots of flops end up with crappier hands on average postflop. I don't believe the correlation is exactly linear though, so 50/0.4 is still probably more passive than 25/0.8, but I bet it's close.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. sure people who see more flops are playing more bad hands, but that is irrelevant to HOW they play them postflop.

Aggression calculation is simply a function of the equation behind the number in the PT software. I'm fairly certain that VP$P isn't in the equation for factoring the Agg number, so the two are essentially independent.

If you raise the flop exactly 5% of the time, it is really irrelevant (from an aggression factor standpoint) if you see 10% of the flops or 50%. passive is passive. And if you raise the flop 90% of the time, your aggression factor will be quite high, regardless of if you see 5% of the flops or all of them.

-Scott

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Scott. I think you are very wrong here. It has been discussed many times but is also discussed in this current thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=3313892&page=0&view=c ollapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1) .

PokerBob

09-04-2005, 01:37 PM

i like a turn raise. sb sure is acting like he has a big'ol /images/graemlins/heart.gif, and i want him to pay to see that river.