Giving up small pots - theoretical question

[Surfbullet]

Hey MHUSH,

I'm currently LAGing it up at 15/30 and 20/40. You've seen my spew-fest posts recently, i'm certainly no model of weak-tight TAG play.

But something's bothering me, and it's that my play is changing to the point where i give up small pots. Here's why:

70/35/3 lag open-limps on the button. TAGy guy completes, I knock QTo in the BB.

Flop: A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif

Tag checks, I check, LAG bets.

Now, the LAG is betting every single time here, regardless of his holding. I've seen him autobet every time when checked to. I also know he doesn't have an Ace, because he'd raise any ace preflop.

But i can't do anything about it! In this instance, I decided to take a stand. I c/r, he calls. I bet the turn(blank), he raises. I fold. He shows KTo. I tell him he had the best hand, and he continues to gloat over his "bluff."

But if he had 93 he'd call down. If he had K6 he might raise the turn or call down. If he has any draw he's throwing another semibluff raise in there somewhere.

Now it certainly would have been cheaper to just c/f the flop. But how much am I giving up by c/fing every flop I miss? These guys are really starting to mess with my head.

I understand intellectually that if it were a TAG vs TAG battle where neither of us pays off any more than our cards make us, the game would be won and lost in the small pots. But, against these unfoldable megalags, do I make up more than I give away by value-betting when I actually hit a hand? I'm starting to wonder.

Any and all input would be appreciated. Thanks! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Surf

[Zele]

One of the advantages of LAG play is its relative invulnerability to reads. By definition, playing too LAG for a game is not a good strategy overall, but this very irrationality becomes a benefit in particular situations. One of those situations is where neither of you really has a "showdownable" hand. His erratic behavior is practically undefendable. [Much of this thought was inspired by my recent reading of Thomas Schelling's cold war classic _The Strategy of Conflict_. Somewhat long-winded, but highly recommended. Also great for understanding what made Reagan so effective against the USSR, though it was written 2 decades before.]

Anyway, as you said, the big confrontations where you have the goods (little as they might be) more than make up for hands like this. But that doesn't change the fact that in these circumstances, the LAG is indeed outplaying you, whether he knows why or not /images/graemlins/wink.gif.

P.S. [ QUOTE ]
I tell him he had the best hand

[/ QUOTE ] Why?

[sam h]

I understand your frustration completely.

My only suggestion is that if you are going to take a stand, its best to just bet the flop. In my experience superlags are often willing to let one of these little pots go when faced with aggression if they have air and haven't made a move on the pot. But they are completely unwilling to let go if they have already been the aggressor and attempted to claim the pot as theirs. Or at least, when comparing these two situations, the behavior of the maniac tends to skew in this direction. I think its just their nature - everything turns into a pissing contest once they hit the bet or raise button for the first time, so the only way to take down little pots unconstested is for you to piss first.

[disjunction]

Check-folding the flop most of the time and taking a stand occasionally, as you did, seems fine to me. Keep in mind the obsurdity of the play he just made with respect to your possible holdings. There's almost a 50% chance of you having a pair **without any reads at all**.

[rory]

I posted this so you could look at my avatar.

[Surfbullet]

P.S. [ QUOTE ]
I tell him he had the best hand

[/ QUOTE ] Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because i've been at the table for 10 minutes and all he's done is run me over. I haven't won a single showdown, and the last thing I need is him thinking he can push me off a pair.

I solved the problem by getting up from the table and going to eat dinner, though.

Surf

[Surfbullet]

[ QUOTE ]
I posted this so you could look at my avatar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. I'm soooooo guilty of that. Thanks for the illustrative example. I'll confidently return to my scheduled "A-game" now. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Surf

[Zele]

Did you mean to reply with the other account?

[Subfallen]

Being cold-decked against stubborn LAG's is an interesting spot...I'm fairly convinced that patience is the operative virtue.

Yeah, wait and wait and wait and wait some more. Pair-mine, if necessary. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[mscags]

I like to use this against them when you really have the ace. That way you can get in a good amount of bets and it keeps them from bluffing you all of the time.

[Catt]

I know the frustration. But I've strated taking the approach that I can't fight these fights without a reasonable draw that could give me the best hand, especially OOP. I'm more inclined to take stands when I have position, and growing more comfortable day by day with an ungodly amount of check-folding against ridiculous LAGs in small pots even when I think their range is wide open. There are chips to be won out in the center of the table; and there's a chance that I actually have the best hand; but I'm not in position to make the most / lose the least and I have no clue as to how to play the hand well (in a TOP sense) whereas my opponent has a lot of options to play better than me (in a TOP sense) even if he's not as good a player.

[jba]

is it crazy to want to raise preflop in the situation I described? it just seems like LAG and TAG would both be raising if they had any sort of hand at all?

[Surfbullet]

I'll raise preflop with alot of hands there, but due to my "runoverable" image I was really looking to see a flop and try and win a hand to do something to recover that...I think my FE is greatly reduced by this and the action i'll get if I hit a hand (top-mid pair?) will more than make up for it.

Surf

[Lurker4]

if this LAG will give you so much action when he doesn't even have a pair, why not just pair-mine as Subfallen said and just do this when flop any kind of reasonable made hand? if you can get 4BB in postflop (1 on flop, 2 on turn, 1 on river) with something as weak as 98 here, then don't worry about the small pots you are potentially giving up by check/folding what may be the best hand but where it will be expensive to find out in a small pot.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
I knock QTo in the BB.

[/ QUOTE ]
I commented on this the other day. You are making moves and you don't even know what color your cards are. Now maybe you actually did know, but your write up suggests that you are attaching no importance to it.

I've just gone through a horrible session where a 70/20 complete idiot ran up over 100 BB doing exactly this nonsense and a huge piece of that came off of me /images/graemlins/mad.gif. I feel your pain. I don't know what to say except it is going to happen and it totally sucks and you must keep your cool.

If you are really sure he doesn't have an ace you can call the flop, especially if you have a diamond. This is a marginal showdown hand in context and the ideas are:

1) Try to make a pair out of your de facto overcards. You have really good implied odds on making a hand versus this opponent. Stretch preflop and on the flop to make a few extra hands.

2) If you pick up a straight or flush draw you can use it as a bridge across the turn. Now it only costs you 1 BB to show down Q-high after you miss. If the turn totally fails you give up. This technique helps you cheaply show down enough hands to prevent his constant bluffing from being profitable.

3) Keeping yourself in the game. You can't make it too easy for the maniac to read when you hit a hand. Calling zero EV flops is an investment in getting paid when you flop something good. It also sends a message to the bystanders that you cannot be swept out of the way everytime they want to go heads up with the idiot. If you fold too much in this spot the SB can start calling more loose flops secure in the knowledge that you will probably disappear.

As for checkraising this flop with junk, never do that. This player is not only almost unbluffable, he often bluff reraises. That's a devastating answer to your bluff and it comes naturally to him.

With a reasonable king in this situation you should just call him down. You have a bluff catcher and you should let him bluff.

With a pair in this situation you should checkraise the flop. No reason to ever bet when he will always do it for you. Some might say that they would prefer to be raised so that SB faces two, but this overlooks that SB has eyes and a brain. Once he sees what you are doing he will realize that he calls the flop at his peril. Fear of being checkraised will help you with a lot of hands where you don't even want to raise. He can never call the flop without risking it coming back 3-bets.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I knock QTo in the BB.

[/ QUOTE ]
I commented on this the other day. You are making moves and you don't even know what color your cards are. Now maybe you actually did know, but your write up suggests that you are attaching no importance to it.

I've just gone through a horrible session where a 70/20 complete idiot ran up over 100 BB doing exactly this nonsense and a huge piece of that came off of me /images/graemlins/mad.gif. I feel your pain. I don't know what to say except it is going to happen and it totally sucks and you must keep your cool.

If you are really sure he doesn't have an ace you can call the flop, especially if you have a diamond. This is a marginal showdown hand in context and the ideas are:

1) Try to make a pair out of your de facto overcards. You have really good implied odds on making a hand versus this opponent. Stretch preflop and on the flop to make a few extra hands.

2) If you pick up a straight or flush draw you can use it as a bridge across the turn. Now it only costs you 1 BB to show down Q-high after you miss. If the turn totally fails you give up. This technique helps you cheaply show down enough hands to prevent his constant bluffing from being profitable.

3) Keeping yourself in the game. You can't make it too easy for the maniac to read when you hit a hand. Calling zero EV flops is an investment in getting paid when you flop something good. It also sends a message to the bystanders that you cannot be swept out of the way everytime they want to go heads up with the idiot. If you fold too much in this spot the SB can start calling more loose flops secure in the knowledge that you will probably disappear.

As for checkraising this flop with junk, never do that. This player is not only almost unbluffable, he often bluff reraises. That's a devastating answer to your bluff and it comes naturally to him.

With a reasonable king in this situation you should just call him down. You have a bluff catcher and you should let him bluff.

With a pair in this situation you should checkraise the flop. No reason to ever bet when he will always do it for you. Some might say that they would prefer to be raised so that SB faces two, but this overlooks that SB has eyes and a brain. Once he sees what you are doing he will realize that he calls the flop at his peril. Fear of being checkraised will help you with a lot of hands where you don't even want to raise. He can never call the flop without risking it coming back 3-bets.

[/ QUOTE ]


i cant remember if i wrote this yesterday or not, but i am really happy you got some credit for your great posts by being made a mod

[Surfbullet]

Thanks Stellar, that was a great post. I am confident in how I handle made hands vs this type of player, and now I really feel like I have some tools when it comes to playing unmade hands.

[ QUOTE ]
I commented on this the other day. You are making moves and you don't even know what color your cards are. Now maybe you actually did know, but your write up suggests that you are attaching no importance to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

As for this...

That hand the other day I felt the move was good regardless of the color of my cards. I suppose that implies i deemed it +EV with any2, which isn't the case...just that at that particular moment given the previous hands and the way they had been reacting to my bets+c/r's that I thought I could pull it off. Having some backdoors is a great way too regulate this type of stuff.

This hand is fictional. My hole cards, and the board, are both different from an actual hand that happened in a similar fashion - the gist remains the same while protecting my identity, I suspect there was a 2p2er or two at that table. The TAG player base in the 20/40 game is pretty constant, and in a post the other day one 2+2er figured out who I am.

Again, excellent post. Thanks for the insight - and congrats on being made a mod.

Surf

[kiddo]

[ QUOTE ]
everything turns into a pissing contest once they hit the bet or raise button for the first time, so the only way to take down little pots unconstested is for you to piss first.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, this is true. Bet this flop (or checkfold). Checkraising is meaningsless because he will never fold and u got no idea where u are and he is good at using this.

Also I would start with raising this preflop because they would raise preflop with Ax so now any Axx, Qxx and Jxx flop will be yours and megaLAG will pretty often fold Axx if he isnt hit, but not Qxx and Jxx, which is perfect.

The upside of playing every pot aggressivley until showdown (of being a megaLAG) is that u will win a lot small pots when noone got a hand and u will win a lot more then others when u actually hit a good hand against another good but not so good hand, because noone gives u credit for it.

Downside is that u will lose much more then u should every time u come to showdown with a worse hand, and that is most of the time, at least as long as it isnt HU.

If a megaLAG was a good player we could say to ourselfs: "Ok, I got to call/attack a little when I got nothing at all because otherwise he will not give me action when I attack." (This is how we play agains a good LAG)

But this is how we would think. We would think that if a guy only bet against us with a real hand he would be easy to read and we would stop betting nothing.

But this is not how the megaLAG thinks. He is betting/raising because people fold when u do that. In his mind he will adapt to us calling/attacking a little more (like in this QJo hand) with betting/raising a little less, because now people suddenly folds less. And then he starts to play better, not worse.

If u play against a megaLAG u must let him win if u want him to keep playing like an idiot. If u call him down every time u think its +-0 u will not only get much higer swings, u will also get him to think u are boring, never folding when he bets. His style suddenly has less effect.

The easy way to play a megaLAG is to fold when u got nothing, call with little and bet/attack with ok hands. Dont go into a mindwar with him, dont try to outthink him. Just play your cards like you did when u started out at $.50/1, u need best hand to win and they are so bad that u can forget about handreading, u just have to put them on a range of hands and play against that (if that range is "any2", thats just fine).

[Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
P.S. [ QUOTE ]
I tell him he had the best hand

[/ QUOTE ] Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because i've been at the table for 10 minutes and all he's done is run me over.

[/ QUOTE ]
I sometimes do this too but I think it is a mistake EV wise and that as soon as I stop completely I will have become a better poker player.

The psychological consititution of a LAG just gets to me for some reason. Probably outside life related.

When I am clear headed I can take advantage of it and then I let him think he can dominate me. Let him think he is king. Let him think I am weak tight and then take advantage of it later when I have something or with marginal holdings in bigger pots. Usually he still thinks I'm weak tight and push way more than he should.

When I'm less clear headed, or have taken some beats, I have a tendency to engage in a struggle for domination with LAGs, usually only on a psychological level, i.e. in the chat, but every once in a while even in pots against the non-folding LAG type, in other words play bad poker. This happens less and less frequently, but it still creeps up once in a while and is a leak that needs to be plugged on the impossible road to perfection.

The higher the limit, the more important to have this leak plugged. There are few passives as they get slaughtered so fast so the LAGs start becoming the only exploitable fish available.

I know this is a note to self kind of post. Maybe some can relate to it though.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
He shows KTo. I tell him he had the best hand, and he continues to gloat over his "bluff."

[/ QUOTE ]
Do you want to be a good person or do you want to make more money?

Trick question because you can have both.

Let him be happy in his triumph. He loses a lot of money at this game and the thrill of bluffing someone off the best hand is his reward. Be the bigger person and swallow your frustration. You know you are the better player and you don't have anything to prove to him. Say nothing or better yet compliment him on his bluff*. Let him be happy and he play longer and he'll play looser. It's very good for business.

* Um, I haven't managed the compliment part yet. Sometimes my intelligence outstrips my maturity /images/graemlins/blush.gif. Maybe this post will help me with that.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
i cant remember if i wrote this yesterday or not, but i am really happy you got some credit for your great posts by being made a mod

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks, I really appreciate you and Surfbullet saying this.

[Nietzsche]

[ QUOTE ]
Say nothing or better yet compliment him on his bluff*.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think the first option is best (though it is tough to implement in practise /images/graemlins/smirk.gif). Let him think his bluff crushed you so bad that you are now speechless /images/graemlins/grin.gif
Bigger chance he will continue to "dominate" you than if you acknowledge his play IMO.

If he is a predictable LAG anything that has a chance to make him change his play is bad as your read will then be inaccurate. Maybe he will start becoming a valuebetting machine against you, in which case he will have the edge if you still have him down as a LAG.

If you mean complimenting is cursing I agree. He doesnt want to hear something like nh or nice play. This guy wants to know you are angry. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[cartman]

These psychos are going to win the small pots. Why, because they never fold and you do sometimes. That means that if you offer resistance, the pot will grow beyond its current small stature. But they pay an immense price in the long run when the pot grows because you have something or at least good potential and he has a nearly random hand. I assure you of two things:

1) He WILL win the most pots in the long run

2) You WILL win the most money in the long run


Cartman

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
With a pair in this situation you should checkraise the flop. No reason to ever bet when he will always do it for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the part of your approach I've been struggling with recently. A true LAG will keep betting if you just call, won't he? So I've been essentially c/c with any pair on the flop, at least if the pair is 10s or better, perhaps planning to go for a river donk or raise.

Sometimes this bites me in the ass because I'm giving the villain a lot of chances to improve. But doesn't the totally passive call-down approach discourage the LAG as much as a flop c/r?

Oh, one more thing Stellar: I must express my appreciation that you are posting more recently, at both SHUSH and MHUSH. It is a real pleasure and I hope you keep it up.