Calling down a Loose Aggressive

Let me know if you think I played this hand okay.

From what I observed from this LAG he was in over 60% of all hands, and usually there until the river. He wasnt necessarily aggressive all the time but I had seen him raise if he actually hit something, and sometimes if we were checking it down I caught him throwing in a bet here and there to get me out. (I usually called him with even a hand such as Ace High)

TP was tight and re-raised me in this hand, but I didnt have any reason to believe he had anything on the flop on.

I assumed I had LAG beat as well even on the turn. Did I do the right thing if Im fairly sure this is the case but maybe not nearly 100% sure?

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (9 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx (http://www.zerodivide.cx/converter)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 :#A500AF(TP)/ 3-bets</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, Button :#A500AF(LAG)/ calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, Hero calls.

Flop: (10.50 SB) K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif, T/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, TP checks, <font color="#CC3333">LAG bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, TP folds, <font color="#CC3333">LAG 3-bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero caps</font>, LAG calls.

Turn: (9.25 BB) 6/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">LAG raises</font>, Hero calls.

River: (13.25 BB) A/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">LAG bets</font>, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 15.25 BB

[toss]

I like the flop and how you got the TP out of there. How many bets you decide to go on the flop and turn is all up to you and what you think the LAG will raise with. I'm also showing down no matter what falls with your description of the LAG.

Great check raise on the flop to clear out the TP who could have been 3 betting with a mid PP (88-99) and perhaps even JJ.

Seems to be the right amount of bets I'd like to put in a pot against a complete lag. Your TPGK vs any two cards. Cant really put him on a range of hands. Perhaps KJo. I could see KT and QJ too which would kind of suck. However, I think you are good more often than not.

NH

[olavfo]

[ QUOTE ]
He wasnt necessarily aggressive all the time but I had seen him raise if he actually hit something

[/ QUOTE ]
Given your description of him I would not push as hard as you did. Even a LAG will sometimes show you AK here. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

After the check-raise has accomplished its purpose I'll call the flop 3-bet and bet the turn. If he raises me, I go into check-call mode. Discretion is the better part of valor.

[tetonpete]

i'm not sure if i like the checkraise on the flop. You really don't want to whiff here. You can also enlist the help of the TAG to try to force out the LAG. I think you're either far ahead or far behind the TAG. He's not reraising you with AJ, and probably not AQ, which leaves pairs for you to beat, unless he flopped a set. I think I'd bet into him. I think he raises 90% of the time he has you beat, and if the LAG wants to come along that's fine. Not sure I'd call them both down though. And like someone pointed out, evens fish get AK sometimes. And they don't always cap with it.

Im interested in if anyone else thinks I shouldnt of capped the flop?

At that point I still think I had the best hand. From his patterns he probally hit the flop somewhere, but his 3 bet didnt necessarily mean he had AK because he did those kinds of things with all sorts of hands. If he does have AK it has nothing to do with his actions, that's just a random occurance to me. (and again believe me if you want, but I severely doubted he had AK)

When he raised me on the turn, then I decided to not take a chance any longer so I called him down. (even if he doesnt have AK, maybe he got lucky on the turn) I wonder if anyone would of re-raised him here, or is that too goofy?

But not sure if the flop was the time to do that or not, since there is a cap I have no problem with capping it, and Im kind of hoping it will buy me at least a shot at slowing this guy down.

Let me know if anyone else has an opinion on capping it here, that's actually a good observation.

(if he did have AK good for him. the odds of him having it were very low so Im not sure how it would possibily fit into my game play since he's in almost every single hand and pretty much does the same thing everytime. Correct me if Im wrong but it seems like we are not even talking about reads anymore at this point it's just the odds of him having one hand out of any random hand...)

[olavfo]

[ QUOTE ]
Im interested in if anyone else thinks I shouldnt of capped the flop?
If he does have AK it has nothing to do with his actions, that's just a random occurance to me. (and again believe me if you want, but I severely doubted he had AK)


[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not very afraid of AK in this situation either. However, my point was that he could easily have a hand that beats yours, even if he's a maniac. Giving a maniac excess action those times he has a good hand is not the way to beat him. Sometimes the best strategy is to throw him some rope and let him hang himself. You still win one bet per street when you're ahead and you save money when you're behind.


In this particular hand, when the maniac doesn't surrender to your aggression, I would take a cheap route to showdown. It looks like he will keep betting, so you won't give up much those times you're ahead.

[tetonpete]

you say this guy wasn't necessarily aggressive all the time, but you're describing a maniac. If you're sure he had nothing better than Kx, then obviously you cap the flop if you can get it heads up, and the turn and the river too if you know you have him beat. I'm not sure what the question is, though. I don't know that I've ever had such a good read on someone that I'd go four bets each round with TPGK.

I disagree with the whole "fish sometimes have AK also" saying, at least the concept that it would affect your play. If you think about the "sometimes" part of it, its about equal to as often as when you have AK.

A normal player can be put on a specific range of hands so the hands that beat you are sometimes enough of a possibility that you have to account for them as you play.

But this guy plays almost every hand (even if it's 3 bet). He also plays the entire hand in about the same manner whether he has a hand or not. Even if you limit it to suited hands and hands with an Ace (which fish love to even call raises with), the odds of having AK are so small that it's not even worth worrying about. (not to mention I didnt think he had it)

I didnt bet into the TP because he 3bet me preflop which means he could of had AA, KK, QQ, AK and might of even had AQ. (just because PT says he's tight doesnt mean he understands what to do with AQ this is a 2/4 game)

And actually judging from the way he tended to play if he was to bet, I actually think I was beat, and since he didnt bet, I found myself to be ahead of him. (he wasnt the type who would check raise after 3 betting pre-flop)

It could be as well that he wasnt that observant about the LAG so the fact that his 3bet called cold-called might of needlessly concerned him. Who knows?

Im not sure how I could bet into this guy here, that doesnt seem right. My hand isnt that strong to bet it OOP like that, is it? Id think about betting into him with a lot of other hands (with better implied odds) but if he's got any of the couple hands you would 3 bet with Im in trouble.

(and I wasnt going to call two people down, I might of considered just letting them fight it out if he would of bet. But like I said, I think if he bets Im dominated anyway)

Good. It sounds like we are using the same strategy, it's just a matter of when to use the cautious one or the better one.

I'd say on average if I only have a pair I see the showdown for as cheap as possible (once I have the guy isolated).

If I have two pair or better, I dont mind going nuts (as long as there arent too many cards that have me beat) since he's pay me off.

I think this was one of those rare times when I only had a pair and I felt it was strong enough to pump up.

But as you can see on the turn I had to take the "better be safe than sorry" approach anyway even though I felt I was still ahead, since who's to say the turn card didnt help him somehow.

As it turns out he had A4, so he hit two pair on the river. I was actually right about my hand on the turn but not sure that matters since my hand isnt really that great anyway.

(in fact when Im dealing with these people I worry more about two pair than I do TPBK since they can hit all sorts of goofy two pairs)

[Yako]

Opponents like this guy get a note from me that says that I should cap every street with TP or better...

[olavfo]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree with the whole "fish sometimes have AK also" saying, at least the concept that it would affect your play. If you think about the "sometimes" part of it, its about equal to as often as when you have AK.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is not about whether he has AK or not. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

You may be missing the most important point here, which is that going to war against a maniac can be risky with a hand as weak as top pair.

With this hand this there is nothing wrong with letting the maniac control the betting. Since he is near impossible to read, you need to be careful with your marginal hands and let him give you his money little by little. Those times you're behind this strategy will save you some bets.

Wait for a better hand before you start a raising war. You'll still get his money.

That was my question, whether there was anything wrong with capping the flop. It's capped so it's only going to cost me .5 BB.

As you can see on the turn I felt I was still ahead but choose to take the "better safe than sorry" approach anyway once he raised me. It seemed goofy to go beyond that.

I totally agree with your strategy and that's what I actually do in most cases.

However it's still not a matter of worrying about AK, it's a matter of worrying about all sorts of goofy other hands that he might have (that make two pair or better).

That is why I capped it on the flop where I felt I was ahead, but then on the turn I choose to take the safe approach (after he raised), there's no way to know if the turn card helped him or not.

And for the same reason I certainly wouldnt of been the aggressor on the river where yet another card can help this guy. (which it did not that it matters)

It's better to do that with 2 pair or better. with just top pair (if it's not TPTK) you'd be better of just calling him down for as cheap as possible because you dont want to pay him off those times when he gets lucky.

At least your varience will be lower.

Ive been putting these guys on my buddy list on Party. It's getting pretty full...

Im winning so much money from players such as this that Im almost afraid it's going to screw up my stats as to make it hard to ever move up to a higher level. (unless 3/6 and 5/10 has these types of players as well...)

[tetonpete]

i see nothing really wrong with capping the flop. I might have gone for a CR on the turn, but that's just me.

My point is that you are now describing a maniac, which is not what you seemed to saying in your initial post. Regardless, let's say that, as you believed, this guy is going to cap all rounds, with anything better than ace high. You also know that you are ahead of him, and that he is at best a 5-1 shot. Your biggest problem here is that there is a cap. If he will bet the max no matter what his hand is, then his bets are meaningless as a source of information. All you know is that you were ahead, and by a lot, and so you want to put as much money in the pot as possible. It's essentially the same as being able to bet the max amount for all rounds, but doing it at once, on the flop. It's a great bet if he's a 5-1 dog.

The problem is most maniacs don't fit this desciption. They may raise or reraise when they sense weakness, or when they are convinced someone is bluffing, but they don't automatically cap every round with bottom pair. And so their bets mean something. At some point you need to worry about your read. At least I do. And so you don't know really know if you are ahead on the flop. Hands that this guy could easily have that beat you: 44, KT, K4, T4. Likely? No, but becoming more likely with every raise and reraise.