Passive Play for metagame purposes. [Archive]

View Full Version : Passive Play for metagame purposes.

Pepsquad

11-26-2005, 07:47 AM

Two days ago - UB - $2/$4 - 4 handed.

I'm on the button and pick up A /images/graemlins/spade.gifQ /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. MP raises and I 3-bet. MP calls.

FLOP Q95 rainbow.

MP proceeds to check-call EVERY SINGLE STREET to the river and tables AA for the winner.

I proceed to tilt off 26BB's before quitting and following the session I trace the spiral back to this hand as having started it all.

I never realized how bad that hand tilted me at the time. It wasn't the fact that I lost, but the fact that villian had the audacity to just sit back and let me fire every single street for him and never proclaiming the strength of his hand.

I'm thinking about adding this play once in awhile purely for metagame purposes short-handed. I'm curious if anyone on this forum ever uses this. PURPOSELY not making as much as you could with very strong holdings/flops to set-up future hands or tilt opponents? Interesting concept which I'd like to explore more.

11-26-2005, 08:01 AM

So you are saying that you would have folded TPTK heads-up if he raised at any point? Thank him for not making you lose more on that particular hand. And DON'T tilt.

Edit: I think he played very poorly and that worrying about meta-game stuff at 2/4 against opponents you likely won't see a lot of is almost useless.

Cancuk

11-26-2005, 08:13 AM

It would have made me happy that he played his hand so weak and I lost pretty close to the minium considering the board.
I wouldn't play my hands weak for meta-game purposes, I might over play my hands at the beg. of a session, but not play them weak. Acutally, I wouldn't even think about it at 2/4.

cheers.

PokerSparky

11-26-2005, 08:27 AM

Wow, this hand would have never tilted me. (And I think I tilt too easily.) I would have been pretty happy with the fact I didn't lose a lot more money than I should have.

I am fish

11-26-2005, 08:30 AM

I agree with the posters above. He played it poorly. You should be happy to play with him/her.

kapw7

11-26-2005, 08:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Edit: I think he played very poorly and that worrying about meta-game stuff at 2/4 against opponents you likely won't see a lot of is almost useless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meta-game stuff is not useless, maybe less important at 2/4 but still important. Look at what happened to OP.

11-26-2005, 08:47 AM

I agree with the posters that said villain played his hand very poorly- -especially 4-handed, where preflop raises deserve less respect.

The one time I consider playing AA anything close to this is in specific blind-steal/defense situations. Even then, I need a read. Otherwise, just fire away.

11-26-2005, 08:56 AM

Note the "almost" qualifier. But I do think that if playing a good hand weakly like the OP's villain can make you tilt away that many big bets... then playing normally against you can probably make you tilt too.

The OP can probably earn more by concentrating on NOT tilting than trying to induce tilt in others.

Pepsquad

11-26-2005, 08:57 AM

Thank you everyone for the input. It's a concensus - all in all, just a very bad idea.

Pepsquad

11-26-2005, 09:02 AM

kapw7

11-26-2005, 09:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Note the "almost" qualifier. But I do think that if playing a good hand weakly like the OP's villain can make you tilt away that many big bets... then playing normally against you can probably make you tilt too.

The OP can probably earn more by concentrating on NOT tilting than trying to induce tilt in others.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was not focusing on that particular hand. The guy was a real fish. I would never tilt against him but I would actually be happy to play against him. However it is an example of metagame. A (very bad) play that causes a certain aftergame effect against a certain type of opponent.

My point was that I'm tired of all the posts I see that "metagame play is useless at small stakes". It's not.