I have trouble OOP against LAGs

[EgoSlasher]

I'm not sure how many hands you have on villian but his pfr stats aren't completely out of line, 9% is about what you should raise with preflop. But, for the sake of argument we'll take the line that villian is a maniac since you asked for help in this general siutation. You can't really play vs low limit maniacs like you do vs an average players, they raise too much and go too far with their hands, which means your holdings are ususally stronger than they appear.

Preflop you can either go with a call or cap vs him depending on whether or not you have a read telling you what he's 3 betting with. If no read I would just call.

Your flop play is FPS, you have middle pair on a coodinated board, even if villian raises with crap(which there's been no indication yet that he does) it's still possible he hit this board. I'd lead out and call a raise here, you don't want to be in a 3 bet situation on that board with your holding.

Turn I would check/call

The river is a harder decision, if you've decided that this player is a maniac capable of bluffing at you with a lower PP, bottom pair, or a busted straight draw then you must call. Although I would likely fold that river since there isn't a very large hand range that you're beating at that point, and villian has shown nothing but strength.

[Bill C]

Bet-call the flop; bet-fold the turn if UI.
You have too much against you: easily dominated hand, OOP, highly coordinated flop with an over card to your Jack.

Pick another hand to fight this guy.

Just my $.02 worth...
bc

[dblgutshot]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure how many hands you have on villian but his pfr stats aren't completely out of line, 9% is about what you should raise with preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah I was wondering where that came from. 9% is actually kinda low.

[SeaEagle]

Excellent thread. Lots of good discussion in this one.

It appears to me that we're talking about two different situations. How do we play a hand like this against a standard lag (as villian's stats represent)? And how do we play a hand like this against a total maniac?

In the first case, I like your line and I don't mind the river fold (hands you're beating start at K9 and below) and I, personally, would have folded at the turn. I think the back to back 3-bets from a normal lag (9% PFR/2 PFA) is going to mean a hand that beats 2nd pair.

Against a true maniac who is always raising the flop and always betting the big streets then, as already mentioned, getting your mediocre hand to showdown as cheaply as possible is generally the best course, which means checking and calling.

[TheHammer24]

[ QUOTE ]
By definition you have a problem. No one suggested the obvious, seat change or table change to get better position.

But once you are in this situation, IF you are going to stay at that table, this is where I find that online play and stats fall short of live reads. Some other people asked some good questions, particularly about villian's prior behavior in 3 bet situations compared to his regular bet or raise pattern. Poker tracker stats don't help you there, you have to be observant. In general, there is less BS on a 3 bet or cap, but does that apply to THIS villian at THIS time?

I feel that I do not have the information to answer your question about this being a good fold or not without having you look back on your experience with this player in this session. If you lack observations about the villian, and your hand is not that strong, once you are re-raised, choosing a time to fold is OK. UNLESS you are planning to stay at that table and seat a while. Then, is it worthwhile to pay the last bet to: a) put him on a range of hands, b) tell him through your call that aggression alone won't win hands. (Be careful, your position to do that still sucks.)

I also look to the theme of the table. Are there other players cooperating to bring this moderate maniac under control? Many times I have seen a table "tag team" maniacs or near maniacs successfully. Is this hand part of such an effort? If each other player takes 1 shot at the moderate maniac, the pressure on you is 1 hand, the pressure on him is 9 hands. Sooner or later, playing bad hands under these conditions will cost him and it takes some luck get your share of his money if everyone else is tacitly committed to not let him run the table.

These are ways to gain control and the ability to read a moderate maniac's cards over a session.

I hope these thoughts help.

[/ QUOTE ]

C'mon man, seating arrangements prior to me sitting down make it impossible to sit to the right of every aggressive player. In this specific case, I was already sitting when he sat down.

The player is not a maniac, and if he was, I would not worry about settling him down. I think it's beneficial to have a maniac against you sitting across the table. Especially if he's tilting others.

Everything else you said can be summed up by saying it is important to have reads on your opponent.

[TheHammer24]

[ QUOTE ]
Bet-call the flop; bet-fold the turn if UI.
You have too much against you: easily dominated hand, OOP, highly coordinated flop with an over card to your Jack.

Pick another hand to fight this guy.

Just my $.02 worth...
bc

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the worst line. Villian will raise flop 95% of the time here. It tells us nothing. Considering his aggressiveness he will often raise the turn too so bet folding cannot be correct. At least how I feel. If you could describe your reasoning behind that line, I would appreciate it.

[ QUOTE ]
you're not "taking away all his poweres". if you check and call the whole way you are giving him the option to take free cards when he pleases. but this isn't so bad because he won't take them - he'll bet way too much even when he's behind.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your statement is exactly why I check and call all the way vs a maniac. And what I mean by "checking and calling takes away all the aggressors powers" is that you can never get outplayed when you check and call. And many super aggressive people can only make money when they pressure their opponents off better hands since most of the time a super aggressive player wont have much. When ever you have a marginal hand, in a heads up situation, that you think has a good chance of being best, it should be routine to just check and call all the way vs these type of players. Not only does this strategy encompass the lowest risk, it actually makes the most money too.

[deception5]

I think I agree with the way you played this hand. He limps too much preflop, but his pfr% is definitely lower than many tags, so his vp$ip isn't really relevant to this hand. He's not crazy and he doesn't raise a lot preflop. He's not 3-betting here with much you beat on the river. I like planning to call down on the turn with your outs and the fact that you're ahead of AK/AT/TT/maybe a lower pocket pair or something crazy like JT. The river though kills your hand against 95% of his range and I don't think you're good even 10% of the time here. I'd probably check/call any other card that didn't improve your hand.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he has manical tendancies - i think your river fold sucks.

You can't play a maniac hard on the flop or PF, and then back down when you have a hand worth a showdown.

Sarge[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I think playing the hand as I did, I have to call the river.

This kind of hand plauges me. First, is the flop c/r standard against this aggressive of a player? Do I call down unless the board goes to hell if he three bets it?

Secondly, let's assume that villian will 3-bet any c/r and raise any donk bet. Playing the same board, what becomes the correct line?

[/ QUOTE ]
Headsup against a superaggressive opponent your best strategy is to just check and call the whole way. By checking and calling you induce him to bluff or bet weaker hands then you, and you can never get outplayed if you just check and call. And when you do have the best hand, you never miss out on a bet anyways since the villain will always bet your hand for you. Against an aggressive opponent like this, checking and calling takes away all his powers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand this logic, but I'm apprehensive to agree with it in this case, because it is not WA/WB, we both a fair about of out if the other is ahead. Does it still apply?

[/ QUOTE ]
yes this still applies even though you are not in a WA/WB scenario. The key to this problem is that you have a somewhat marginal hand(middle pair) that you think might be best and your against a super aggressive opponent. Since you think you may be best you want to get to the showdown as cheaply as possible, and youre not worried about free cards since the super aggressive player will always bet when checked to. By checking and calling you induce your aggressive opponent to bluff or bet a weaker hand than you, and you never allow him the chance to push you off a better hand. This concept is very import especially when it comes to online play where you will encounter these type of opponents at .50-1.00 and 100-200. Heres an good example of a hand I played. I openraised preflop in the 8 seat with 77, a super aggressive player just called on the button and both blinds folded. The flop came out K66. I bet and he called. The turn was a T making the board K66T, I checked, he bet, I called. The river was a Queen making the board K66TQ, I checked he bet I called. He showed A2o and my hand was good. Do you see why I check called the turn? It was becuz I had a marginal hand that may be best so I wanted to see a showdown, and I didnt care about giving him a free card with my vulnerable holding cuz I knew he would bet if i checked. Lastly by checking, he could never bluff raise me on the turn and put me in a tough spot where I could possibly make a pot size mistake. These situations come up all the time vs tricky aggressive opponents online, and it is vital for your bankroll to recognize them.

[ellipse_87]

Because his pfr% is actually reasonable, I put him on the normal range of 3-bet hands. Therefore, your K outs are heavily dominated and the return on your straight is significantly diminished. For those reasons I don't see a strong enough draw to raise the flop, and I would check-call, check-fold UI.