Help playing in extremely loose games.

[DOTTT]

I played in one of the loosest $1-$2 tables a couple nights ago, and got completely cleaned out. 6 players seeing the flop for a $10 bet was very common. There was also a maniac who would always raise utg or in ep, no matter what he had. I would try and isolate, but no such luck.

Here’s an example:
Hand 1:
Utg (maniac) makes it $10 to go, 4 callers. I’m in the sb with QQ I raise to $45, maniac and 3 other call. Flop comes AK7: I check maniac checks, and a good player goes all in for $130, I’m of course forced to fold.

Hand 2: I’m utg with AKd, I make it 12 to go, utg+2 calls, co calls, button, and bb call.
Flop comes A78 rainbow.
Bb checks, I bet $30, ep folds, co raises to $60, button re raises to $120, bb folds, and I fold.
Co had AQ, and button had A7.

Should I just be playing very passively in these type of game, and not building a pot since most of the players will call anyway? Does this type of game make limping with AK a correct play?
Should I loosen up my hand selection as well, calling more bets with suited connectors?

Thanks. DOTTT.

[tewall]

If you just play tighter than every one else in this type of game you should have a significant advantage. The tighter the better, as your hands will get paid off. No matter what you do the variance will be high.

[DerrekL]

I play in these types of games a lot and they can be very problematic because they don't fit nicely with typical literature/advice.

Some of my ideas:
1. If they are not folding pre-flop to big raises, make the raises bigger and bigger all the way to moving all-in. When you latch onto a big pocket pair raise it huge like you did with Q-Q. These games require you push your starting hand strength. If you get 3 callers all-in when you hold queens you're going to win huge over time. I suggest getting more aggressive as oppossed to passive. However, you must watch out for the weak tight opponents when doing this. If some guy who's been folding over and over suddenly calls pay attention. A popular strategy in these games is to be weak tight, and these guys just wait around check calling with big hands like aces. Also, at some point you might find a point at which no one is calling you. If that happens adjust your opening raise back down a bit. Ideally you want 1 or maybe 2 callers.

2. Given you raised pre-flop the pot is liable to be big going into the flop. Sooooo, either bet or slightly overbet the pot ( which is liable to be close to all-in), re-raise anothers bet all-in, or fold on the flop. I'd move all in with TPTK, flush draw + 1 over, straight draw with two overs, straight flush draw, inside straight draw + 2 overs, and two pair. Only flopped trips, straights, and flushes can justify a flat call in these types of games.

I suppose in some ways this sounds like a simple strategy but it's worked fairly well for me at Commerce. I play the 2/3 blind $100 NL game and raise pre-flop and then move all-in or fold on the flop.

These are highly beatable games, especially so if the table plays tight on the flop. Tight flop plays means you must raise higher and more often pre-flop and attempt many steals on the flop.

On a side note, many claim TPTK to be a suckers hand, and at times I understand, however, in a game where you buy in for 20-30X the big blind and the pot on the flop is 1/3 or more the size of your stack TPTK can't be folding. Only if your stack is HUGE and so is your opponents should you re-evaluate what to do with your TPTK.

[DerrekL]

[ QUOTE ]
Should I just be playing very passively in these type of game, and not building a pot since most of the players will call anyway?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. Play very aggressively, especially pre-flop and on the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
limping with AK a correct play?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's best to raise with it. It'll help pay off your big pocket pairs. You'll hit top pair top kicker on about 30% of the flops so if you're always getting 2 or more callers on your raise you're going to profit.

[ QUOTE ]
Should I loosen up my hand selection as well, calling more bets with suited connectors?

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the size of peoples stacks. If everyones stack is 100X the big blind then the value of suited connectors is greater and you should loosen up with them. However, in a game where the opening raise is 5X the big blind and each person only has 20-30 big blinds in front of them suited connectors aren't as valuable, especially with tight flop play.

[DOTTT]

Derek, thank you for your comments you certainly have helped shed some light on my problem. I have sone questions/comments I hope you can answer.

[ QUOTE ]
Some of my ideas:
1. If they are not folding pre-flop to big raises, make the raises bigger and bigger all the way to moving all-in. When you latch onto a big pocket pair raise it huge like you did with Q-Q. These games require you push your starting hand strength. If you get 3 callers all-in when you hold queens you're going to win huge over time. I suggest getting more aggressive as oppossed to passive.

[/ QUOTE ]

The $1-$2 game I play has a max buy in of 125x the big blind, and when this hand came up I had close to 90x the bb. How aggressive should I be, should I be making it $60-$75 to go?


[ QUOTE ]
2. Given you raised pre-flop the pot is liable to be big going into the flop. Sooooo, either bet or slightly overbet the pot ( which is liable to be close to all-in), re-raise anothers bet all-in, or fold on the flop. I'd move all in with TPTK, flush draw + 1 over, straight draw with two overs, straight flush draw, inside straight draw + 2 overs, and two pair. Only flopped trips, straights, and flushes can justify a flat call in these types of games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since my opponents are extremely loose, would it be correct for me to go for a check raise on this flop, and then lay it down to a re raise?

Thanks.

[pilamsolo]

I play a pretty live game regularly, and I would agree with Derrek that you need to stay agressive. One thing I really like to do is limp-reraise all-in with big pairs. You'll almost always get at least one caller (although sometimes you'll get 5 and lose). Another moneymaker is small pairs. They go way up in value in a game like this because you can get multiple people to pay you off when they hit. I tend to shy away from suited connectors because they can get really expensive post-flop.

[DerrekL]

[ QUOTE ]
The $1-$2 game I play has a max buy in of 125x the big blind, and when this hand came up I had close to 90x the bb. How aggressive should I be, should I be making it $60-$75 to go?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm...it does change things knowing each player is so deep. 125X the big blind is quite deep. Because your game is so deep I'd ignore the advice I just gave /images/graemlins/wink.gif

In the specific case of your Q-Q I think you made a good raise, however, if this were to happen consistantly, you raise the pot and everyone calls, I would start raising more. You want 1 or maybe two players in against your queens. The key is to figure out just what type of raise will get 1 or 2 callers.

[ QUOTE ]
Since my opponents are extremely loose, would it be correct for me to go for a check raise on this flop, and then lay it down to a re raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, again knowing how deep the blinds are it would seem your fold is correct...that is assuming you just sat down and didn't know how INSANE everyone was playing. That aside when the stacks are deep and people are playing insanely, but not too insanely, you have yourself a tough game. You'll have to start calling with TPTK when you're in against a player who is pushing it too far too often. Had you been sitting in this game for a while and seen the kind of play you describe I think a check-raise here might be right, but still a toughy.

Deep money games aren't my specialty yet /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[gergery]

The literature and conventional wisdom say 1) tighten up and you get paid off, 2) expect higher variance, 3) bet your decent hands more for value, while bluffing and semibluffing less, and 4) change preflop standards to play more hands that can hit big but fewer big cards (ie. play the bigger suited connectors and medium pocket pairs but fold AJo, KQo).

My experience would add that a maniac often seems to loosen up the rest of the table, as they see that their cards were best in a situation where they folded.

In your above examples:
Hand 1: You did not raise nearly enough. Ideally you want one and only one caller. Ask yourself what raise would get the next limpers to fold if the maniac calls? The pot has ~$45 in it and people who like their hand only have to pay $35 for a chance to win $95. With the maniac utg and leading the charge, the next guy only risks $35 to win $130. So $45 doesn’t come close. Maybe $100, since they’ll have to risk $90 to win $240 then, Or they all fold and you walk away with 20xBB which would make you very happy. You need to charge them a “Maniac Table” premium and overbet.


Hand 2:
I like the big bet utg. You have a great hand and at a loose table you will get paid off, as you did with 5 seeing the flop. The pot is now $48. Why only bet $30, which looks a bit weak at only 2/3 of pot? What did you think they had? AA is unlikely as you have one ace and they would be likely to reraise. 88, 77 are possible but only dealt ~2% of the time, so call that ~9% with 5 players. Whereas, statistically, the odds someone else has an ace is ~62%. And the odds that bad players will play their ace in a loose game is ~100%. Or, I put them on a semi-bluff straightdraw. I would probably have checkraised all-in on this. In a loose aggressive game, which you knew this was, why fold when you hit your hand on a pretty tame board?

Looks to me like you need to 1) bet bigger when you are betting, and 2) adjust your play to the fact that your opponents are playing worse cards than you are used to

Hope this helps,

Greg

[DOTTT]

Thanks Greg, I think you pointed to one of my problems, not being aggressive enough with my big hands. I'll try to keep that in mind, next time I get a table like this.