Terrible Players vs. Mediocre Players

[adam61]

I'm sure I'll get flamed or called dumb here, but my problems here could just be a personal problem and not an overall one. I know conventional wisdom says that mistakes=opportunities for $$$ and the more your opponent makes the more opportunities you have to exploit for cash.

I know these players are high variance (I'm typically talking about tournament players with 50-100% VPIP at the 22s) but I have never been successful or semi-consistent in beating them. I'm great at bleeding away big stacks against them with TPTK when they would re-raise all-in with A high, or bottom pair, or maybe it's a set or a straight, I can't tell. This isn't a frustration post, It's happened for over a year, and I'm actually on a solid upswing, but this has always been a problem.

Typically I avoid these players early without a great hand. And then late game I try to just push all-in with better hands, using SNG PT suggestions, however, there are much fewer hands to push with against a player with a 60% calling range. So I run into one of two problems typically, either they call my better hand a couple times with nothing and knock me out (I typically have a smaller stack), or they leave me with no opportunities for bubble aggression and I'm just blinded out. Just looking for some general tips to handling bad bad players. I feel I'm best against players who understand the game but just have poor strategy and play maybe 15% more hands than they should. Against maniacs who are either only having fun, don't understand the game, or are just trying to put beats on someone, I'm frustrated confused and lost consistently. I'm embarrassed to say it, but it's always been true. Appreciate any tips, thanks!

[Lori]

Have a much higher ITM and win slightly fewer games.

Lori

[ QUOTE ]
I know conventional wisdom says that mistakes=opportunities for $$$ and the more your opponent makes the more opportunities you have to exploit for cash.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't conventional wisdom, it's a mathematical certainty. You make money when your opponents make mistakes. There are considerations in tourney formats (and probably other rare exceptions) that make it possible for your opponents mistakes to hurt you, but those situations aren't frequent enough to really make a big difference (and I don't feel like digging out TOP to see how exactly Sklansky phrases it).

[ QUOTE ]
I feel I'm best against players who understand the game but just have poor strategy and play maybe 15% more hands than they should. Against maniacs who are either only having fun, don't understand the game, or are just trying to put beats on someone, I'm frustrated confused and lost consistently. I'm embarrassed to say it, but it's always been true. Appreciate any tips, thanks!

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think playing good players is better/easier for you, they're either not that good and/or you're wrong. I'd much prefer not to have even a casual 2+2/internet reading player at any of my tables. That said, you do need to try to separate the complete idiots, the marginal players, and the good ones as best you can. And you have to attack each differently, depending on the situation. In the long run, a lot more of your money will come from the complete idiots than any other group, even if in any given game there always seems to be one moron running well.

[adam61]

Well that's largely the point of my post. I can seperate the players very well. I'm ok against good players, I feel GREAT against marginal players, and I feel confused how to exploit terrible players. I know they are the best source for money. But in a tournament setting I can't find out the best way to attack them at all. My conventional strategies aren't that good against them, and I can't force them to do what I want like I can a marginal player. So like I said it's not a belief they're worse to play against than marginal players, it's my inability to take advantage I have a problem with.

[Melchiades]

The best way to attack them. Play good hands, and value bet them to death when you catch a nice flop.

[Hendricks433]

[ QUOTE ]
Have a much higher ITM and win slightly fewer games.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my problem at the $11's and $22's. I have like over double the 3rds for 1sts and also 2nds. I know small sample size blah blah blah. But I think Lori is right. Seems like thats the way im making money there right now. I play it sorta safe and try to get ITM and go from there at the low buy ins.

I swear, there is no easier opponent than an idiot. What you have to realize is that your perceived "complex" or "fancy" moves aren't going to work...because of the reasons you outlined. They aren't smart enough to recognize them.

Value bet. Value bet. Value bet.

The opportunities will come and if you're saying they won't, then you're playing impatient or you're not quite as good as you need to be.

[microbet]

Be sure your impression is true. People tend to remember losing to a bad player a lot more than they remember beating one.

Not all players that see 75% of flops are the same. Some are aggressive and some are passive. Some people, and I've heard several say this at live games, think it hardly matters what their whole cards are because everything changes on the flop. They may not be super loose or aggressive post-flop. I know it's hard to get this deep of a read, but it is a bit easier against someone who is playing most hands.

I think there are some good players that play a lot of hands in these games who are doing a good job of giving the impression they will get all their chips in whenever you want them to, but they are just throwing a few chips around to make sure they get paid off when they hit a big hand.

Things you might try:

Try the play money games to see what it is like against a bunch of people who want to see every flop.

Try playing a lot of hands yourself in a real money game.

I haven't done this, but I've been thinking about playing some lower buyin games and playing every hand I can reasonably play. I'll have to wait until Irie's experiment is over unless I get a special exemption for these games. I guess I could just do it in a cash game.

[Hendricks433]

also though doesnt playing for 1st make up for more ootm finishes by getting more 1sts?

please do not take offense to this, I am only quoting from something I once read

"If you can't spot the worst player at the table in the first 30 minutes, then most likely it is you"

I'm thinking you are being too results oriented thinking and therefore concentrating more on receiving bad beats than when you dish em out.

The other thing to consider is that in general, you only know when a hand is played badly by another player because it has been showndown. Bad play happens frequently. Bad play is not necessarily characterized by those players who push money foolishly into the pot on a bluff, but moreso by those who call off their stacks with marginal holdings or against pot odds. Hands that are not shown down, we have no idea what the other player was holding.

[ QUOTE ]

Try playing a lot of hands yourself in a real money game.

I haven't done this, but I've been thinking about playing some lower buyin games and playing every hand I can reasonably play. I'll have to wait until Irie's experiment is over unless I get a special exemption for these games. I guess I could just do it in a cash game.

[/ QUOTE ]

One piece of advice for anyone going to try this, make sure you're doing tournaments where you start with at least 1000 chips, and preferrably where blinds go up with time rather than the number of hands. The party structure isn't the best for this as playing a larger number of hands early on can lead to you still not having a very large stack when you double up. However, in order to get semi-free practice I go play the mini-steps, it's pretty easy to get 5th and get another freeroll, and more practice. Cash games are just more fun playing looser, but I don't like the swings as much.

[microbet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Try playing a lot of hands yourself in a real money game.

I haven't done this, but I've been thinking about playing some lower buyin games and playing every hand I can reasonably play. I'll have to wait until Irie's experiment is over unless I get a special exemption for these games. I guess I could just do it in a cash game.

[/ QUOTE ]

One piece of advice for anyone going to try this, make sure you're doing tournaments where you start with at least 1000 chips, and preferrably where blinds go up with time rather than the number of hands. The party structure isn't the best for this as playing a larger number of hands early on can lead to you still not having a very large stack when you double up. However, in order to get semi-free practice I go play the mini-steps, it's pretty easy to get 5th and get another freeroll, and more practice. Cash games are just more fun playing looser, but I don't like the swings as much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure you understand this, but I just want to make sure: I just mean this as an educational exercise. If I do it, my most important criteria for game selection will be that it is very low buyin.

[reecelights]

I used to feel I had the same problem. What I eventually realized is that I was trying to be the table Enforcer, and show the very loose, aggressive players what kinds of hands they should be playing: I would go out of my way to take them on and I would, as you said, try to "attack" them to keep them in line, or take their supposed dead money.

I am now content to let them build a huge stack early, read their patterns and pick a choice spot or two with my very strong, tight hand selection to try to get SOME of the chips back from them. You have to avoid bluffing them or making moves on them. Play your good hands solidly, let go of the hands you miss, even if you're "sure" they are bluffing. They will usually give those chips back. If they don't I find they tend to tighten up significantly near the bubble or in the money, especially after a big loss of half their stack, and I can then change gears on them.

Worry about playing your game, not how to exploit them. If they are truly bad players, they will find their own way to give chips away.

[microbet]

Very good post.

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]

This isn't conventional wisdom, it's a mathematical certainty. You make money when your opponents make mistakes.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's not precisely true. Say it's the bubble. I move in from the SB with something. For the sake of argument, say it's a hand like QJo. My opponent calls with K5s. He is making a mistake that is costing him money, but it also is costing ME money. That $ equity is getting transferred to the other two players.

Great post. Not only that, I think it's very important for players who think they have a very solid understanding of the game to realize that those players don't OWE you anything. You're not a superstar who just gets to have all the chips because you're better than them, especially in your own mind.

A common mistake that a lot of new-ish players who have a pretty good understanding of the game make is that they think by virtue of their better understanding of the game or their more selective hands that they automatically get the chips.

That's totally untrue and if you're thinking like that, whether you realize it or not, you're going to end up REALLY pissed off when a "bad" player beats you like you're describing.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This isn't conventional wisdom, it's a mathematical certainty. You make money when your opponents make mistakes.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's not precisely true. Say it's the bubble. I move in from the SB with something. For the sake of argument, say it's a hand like QJo. My opponent calls with K5s. He is making a mistake that is costing him money, but it also is costing ME money. That $ equity is getting transferred to the other two players.

[/ QUOTE ]

These are exceptions to the rule and not really speaking to his specific problem.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This isn't conventional wisdom, it's a mathematical certainty. You make money when your opponents make mistakes.


[/ QUOTE ]

That's not precisely true. Say it's the bubble. I move in from the SB with something. For the sake of argument, say it's a hand like QJo. My opponent calls with K5s. He is making a mistake that is costing him money, but it also is costing ME money. That $ equity is getting transferred to the other two players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I did qualify my statement for tournament conditions, and you're right, I just don't know how often this sort of situation really occurs (in such a fashion that it is actually costing hero money), and it probably balances out with the times they do it versus someone else and give you money indirectly, anyway.

Perhaps it would be better to say that whenever your "maniac" opponents make mistakes they are giving money away, and it's far better to worry about figuring out how to get that money than it is to look for opponents that are easier to figure out but who make fewer mistakes.

[ QUOTE ]
I used to feel I had the same problem. What I eventually realized is that I was trying to be the table Enforcer, and show the very loose, aggressive players what kinds of hands they should be playing: I would go out of my way to take them on and I would, as you said, try to "attack" them to keep them in line, or take their supposed dead money.

I am now content to let them build a huge stack early, read their patterns and pick a choice spot or two with my very strong, tight hand selection to try to get SOME of the chips back from them. You have to avoid bluffing them or making moves on them. Play your good hands solidly, let go of the hands you miss, even if you're "sure" they are bluffing. They will usually give those chips back. If they don't I find they tend to tighten up significantly near the bubble or in the money, especially after a big loss of half their stack, and I can then change gears on them.

Worry about playing your game, not how to exploit them. If they are truly bad players, they will find their own way to give chips away.

[/ QUOTE ]


A kneel down to reecelights! Excellent answer!!!

i think the first 2 reponses were great and on the money. i was having this same problem as well made a post got some advice( thanks smellkid) and went back to beating up the games the last few days. ive found that i really dont mind the bad players picking up big pots early tends to just loosen up their bad calls later with bottem pair or whatever horrible hand they feel they have to play. just kick back play your game wait until you get closer to the bubble and start picking up the blinds. other thing ive noticed is that at these lower levels people dont really tend to notice your tight playing early and will still pay you off. oh the thing about the value bets crazy how often you will get paid off, also noticed that your average player at the lower levels ( i play the 5.50 and 11's at UB) tend to call big bets on the river with inadequte hands, seem to always think your bluffing.

Racelight hit it on the head.

Picture the loose maniacs as two-bit hustlers running around mugging old ladies and piling up the cash. Don't be another hustler trying to mug the same old ladies faster -- be the hitman that one day knocks on the hustler's door and takes the whole stack.

Maniacs just consolidate the chips from the weaker players and hold them for you until you get your cards.

Some very good posts. Like the OP when I see a wild tard table unfolding early I am already saying to myself "Oh great another third..LOL". I tend to avoid early battles and big hands that I know are going to involve all my chips. I like the advice that a small surgical strike is better than trying to napalm the table early. However sometimes its hard to make good value bets when Donks keep pushing behind you on their 10 6 suited flush draws. But in the long run the odds do pay off..Eventually.. I hope.. LOL