players drawing out

[albie]

I hope either Malmuth or Sklansky reads this but i have read their books hold'em poker for the advanced player and the book on poker theory and have studied them very carefully. i feel that i am a tight aggressive (very aggressive player) but still have players draw out on my premium hands about 85% of the time, but when i do lay back i seem to have a little more luck winning the hands. Is their style of play stated in these books out dated or what am i doing wrong. I am very tired of loosing money.

[Dynasty]

If you are losing money at poker, it is much more likely that you are playing poorly rather than getting unlucky.

My reccomendation to you is the same I've given to hundreds of others: Start posting hands you play in the Small Stakes forum and comment on the other hands posted. Do this for sixth months and you'll be amazed how much you've learned.

[Leo Bello]

Players cannot draw on you indefinitely. Math is in your favor. Do what was told, post your hands for analysis.
It happened me a lot when I was in the beggining. The interesting thing is now I know where were my leaks, and the most interesting is that I tought I rocked when I begin playing, where I was actually very naive, not getting enough money for the hands I won and sometimes losing a bit more than I should in hands I should have dropped.

[Louie Landale]

Dynasty is probably right.

If you are losing 85% if your good flopped hands then you are getting VERY unlikely. But that figure is probably just how you feel about it.

What's more likely is that you don't yet have much of a feel for what the opponents have and you are investing extra raises in pots where you are clearly beat, and should be just calling or even folding.

And I'd like to point something out. This might not apply to the real low limit games, but in the mid-limits most everyone notices who the tight-passive folks are. When these folks get RAISED its almost always because they are beat real bad; but these tight-passive folks don't understand that and keep raising when they are clearly beat. Thus, these folks only play big pots when they make big flushes, top set, or their big pair is beat. Thus, even though they are playing tight they still lose most of the big pots.

That's the main problem with real tight play in No Limit; but I digress.

- Louie

[dogmeat]

The old saying is: At 18, I was amazed at how little my father knew. After I returned home from college, I was amazed at how much he had learned in just four years. The same is true here.

Six months ago I was amazed at how much some of the mega-posters like Dynasty, Clarkmeister, GOT, Tommy Angelo - Vehn etc. etc. knew about "real" poker. Now, six months later I am amazed at how much I have improved, and these same SOB's are still Ten Times smarter than me. Startin to really piss me off.
{this means listen to these guys - post your hands, take your lumps and improve)

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[Kirkrrr]

Amen.

Albie, Tight Aggressive is a term that can easily be misconstrued. I recall a really painful session where I decided to be tight aggressive... which translated for me to raising from UTG with KJo, ATo, 99, etc. I thought I was doing the right thing and just getting really unlucky, while the guy with 66 to my left was a maniac to call me all the way down... and win.

Post your hands. In the short run, it may be painful to your ego. In the long run, it's the most profitable thing you can do poker-wise.

Kirk R.

[dr_venkman]

[ QUOTE ]
but still have players draw out on my premium hands about 85% of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

Early on in learning the game I think people tend to hang on to "premium" hands way too long. There's another thread somewhere on this forum I just read about the feeling of PF "entitlement". The feeling of seeing a nice pair of hole cards and naturally assuming they are going to win. Which causes alot of people to get angry when another player draws out with a weaker hand. But it happens, and you have to learn to see it coming without losing significant portions of your bankroll.

It's just my opinion, but I've often heard that the most profitable move in poker is to FOLD -- and I agree.

For what it's worth.

~Venk

[donkeyradish]

In games where nobody will fold no matter what, I think drawing hands are often much better to have, and these can (and should) be frequently played aggressively.

Yet dealt an overpair against many players who will often wait to see a river card at any cost, thats a much more awkward proposition. I can't help thinking caution is needed there and aggression isn't always the best option. But I'm definitely guilty of overplaying AA and KK in such situations.

[SA125]

I'd bet every player considers themselves to be good and T/A. I don't know if you're playing online or in B&M's, the cards are the same but game is different.

You probably consider small-mid PP's to be good multi-way hands and usually won't coldcall with them unless there's a few players in. Or might try to isolate a loose raiser and 3 bet them to play h/u.

Online PP's are gold and played that way. They're routinely coldcalled with, no matter who the player or how many callers. This sounds like a good thing for you. Online it's not. I just raised UTG w/AK and got coldcalled by 1 player. Flop K23. Turn 5 and river 6. I lose to 44. You and I ask "What more can I do here playing AK? How can he coldcall pre-flop, then call that flop in a 10-20 game?" They all do and win h/u much, much more than the odds say they should. Why? Who knows.

Pokertracker is a good way to take a detailed look at your hand selection online. It also shows how you fair against other players. Here's an interesting thing. I'm beating tight players but losing to almost every maniac I face. Every guy I've played who calls 1 out of every 2 or 3 hands is beating me. How? Simple. He calls my UTG AQ raise with his J8s and wins. He makes it 3 BETS COLD with 9To and wins. Yet I'm losing long term online with JJ and JTs. KK is a small winner, KQo a big winner but KQs a loser. Go figure.

Just remember what Bobby Baldwin said about suck outs. He said it's the good player who'll be sucked out on much more often. Because the good player usually plays with the odds and is ahead much more often than the bad player, who's behind more often to catch up.