How to bet against passive players?

I am considering how to bet against passive opponents and what modifications you should make to optimize your play. And how you will have to change your betting. I'm looking for other peoples opinions about my ideas. I play hold'em so that's the game my ideas are coming from.

I am thinking about not trying to bluff passive players very much. First of all you tend to bluff in position when your opponent checks, but against a passive opponent he may have a larger range of hands with a check. He could be holding top pair. So you are not gaining as much of an advantage by seeing the check before you bluff. So you might bluff closer to frequency of bluffing out of position?

Here is the next thing: semi bluffing. Why semi bluff when you are likely to see a free turn and river? When you do draw out here is where you make a big pot, because he was sitting with a hand and not betting, but now you have made a very strong hand. Bet hard.

Same with mid/low pair which you might bet on the flop. If you can check it down to the river why not? No need to build a pot. I guess you might be 'protecting' your hand against two overs by betting. I am usually betting with the idea that if I get a call I'm beaten, so it would seem to be a semi bluff of sorts.

Of course when you make a good hand, might as well bet since he probably won't.

[Xhad]

There is a huge difference between tight-passive and loose-passive.

[ QUOTE ]
I am thinking about not trying to bluff passive players very much. First of all you tend to bluff in position when your opponent checks, but against a passive opponent he may have a larger range of hands with a check.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tight-passives, depends on previous action. Loose-passives, you should bet a wide range of hands precisely because their calling range is so huge and your hand, bad as it is, may be beating them.

Once a tight-passive check-calls on a drawless flop, you are better off shutting down. Against people whose range could still be "any two cards" on the turn and are capable of folding the turn you should often bet the turn if you've been the aggressor so far.

[ QUOTE ]
Same with mid/low pair which you might bet on the flop. If you can check it down to the river why not? No need to build a pot. I guess you might be 'protecting' your hand against two overs by betting. I am usually betting with the idea that if I get a call I'm beaten, so it would seem to be a semi bluff of sorts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Against rocks this is probably a good policy. Against people who will go to the end with jack-high and call the river with any pair, you are making a huge mistake if you don't bet second pair every street.

Thanks for the points Xhad. I am playing on the prima network for both .25/.5 and .5/1 no limit hold'em. And I am having some trouble with passive players. I think I am at least breaking even at .25/.5 and I may be losing at .5/1. There are a lot of tight-passive players there. Not tight as in they play only a few hands preflop but tight as in they don't call with middle pair etc. And they seem to get the best of me. I'm trying figure out why. I hear a lot of good things about being aggressive, but I am beginning to second guess the aggression against these tight-passive players. Maybe one shot flop bluffs are the best, and give up on a semi bluff on the turn even. But even when they check ahead me I'm wondering if it is a good idea to bluff often there since they may be holding a hand that beats me and they will call with like top pair.

[winky51]

Don't bluff fish. They don't fall for it. But value bet more with hands that seem lower. If a fish raises you he probably has the goods. Raising for the free card you can repeat over and over and over. They always forget you did it before. In general I just bet if I feel I have the bet hand/draw. Don't try trick plays on them just be straight forward and bet. Now if I have top set and superfish bets out with a tons of callers and I am on the button I might wait till the turn to raise. Depends on the players and the board. Aggression is key to making more money but don't over do it with them. Fish are only aggressive when the feel they are ahead. Also many fish don't read the board right. I have seen fish raise with bottom 2 pair on a 3 flush 3 straight board at times. Just watch out for those. But generally they raise when they make something big. I love fish. With my whole table was fish.

Use drawing hands preflop to raise for equity. with 5+ callers hands like 87s, 98s, T9s, JTs, QJs, KJs, ATs, KQs actually has actually higher equity with 5+ callers than its fair share of the pot. So I raise it up on the button with 5+ callers. This builds a nice pot for these drawing hands. It also gives odds for marginal gut draws or maybe a free card to improve to a nice draw.

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
I hear a lot of good things about being aggressive, but I am beginning to second guess the aggression against these tight-passive players. Maybe one shot flop bluffs are the best, and give up on a semi bluff on the turn even.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, TAGs need to concentrate more than usual against tight-passives; to beat rocks you have to realize that the value of your legitimate hands goes way down because they're check/calling a lot tighter than most people.

[ QUOTE ]
But even when they check ahead me I'm wondering if it is a good idea to bluff often there since they may be holding a hand that beats me and they will call with like top pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

He may also be holding middle pair, A kicker and be willing to fold it. The weak-tight's primary mistakes are folding too much, and not value betting enough. The counter-strategy is to bluff more, but back off with your mediocre legitimate hands so as not to bet their hands for them.

I am would consider myself tight/passive. As you say aggression is the key. I want to see cards cheaply. I want to keep pots with marginal hands small. I don't want to play for my stack with top pair, I want to win a small-mid size pot with it. I want to limit my risk.

A TAG has to the do the opposite - make me pay to see cards, make it too expensive for me to continue, raise preflop, win the hand on the flop. If I miss the flop 95% of the time I'm gone to the first raise.

[ohnonotthat]

A new laptop: $1,000

A state of the art rollerball/mouse: $50

An antique desk to work at: $3,000

*

*

*

Knowing when and where to insert commas, PRICELESS.

- If I miss the flop - COMMA - 95% of the time I'm gone to the first raise. (Assumes you will fold 95% of the time WHEN you miss)

- If I miss the flop 95% of the time I'm gone to the first raise. (Assumes you are running very badly and missing 95% of the flops you see)

*

I am now going out to get a life; upon my return I'm going to wake my GF and beg for sex - if, and only if, I get a good price on the life.

Normally I wouldn't wake her this late but getting a bargain always makes me so horny.

*

"Nice to meet you, Mrs Smith. My name is Bob and I'll be giving you your golf lesson today. I understand this is your first time playing so let's start with your grip. I don't mean to be indelicate, but the best way for me to explain the proper method is, pretend the club is your husband's penis".







"I think we should work on your stance now, Mrs Smith - so if you'd be so kind as to take the club out of your mouth . . ."

[ChuckyB]

[ QUOTE ]
Why semi bluff when you are likely to see a free turn and river?

[/ QUOTE ]

Semi-bluffing can also be building a pot. If you have 5 opponents who will call your bet and you are 3:1 to make your flush, you're no longer semi-bluffing. You're putting in 16% of the cash and getting 25% equity in the pot. That's good poker. Passives can be great for that.

I really like your idea about not playing top pair for a large pot. When the pot gets large and you have top pair you tend to be beat too often where I play. I might consider changing my game to more tight-passive.

[bobman0330]

You seem to have failed to grasp the key difference between betting in position and OOP. If you're betting OOP, there's frequently a defensive element to your bet, i.e., you have to call if he bets, and he'll call more than he'll bet with. Against a passive, you can usually fold if he bets, so there's no need to be marginal hands. In position, bet those hands that you'd check against an aggressive player because you wouldn't know what to do with a c/r. Semibluff more, unless the player is also a calling station.

The primary determinant of your betting strategy should be looseness of the opposition. Passivity/aggroness should only influence the handful of situations where the possibility of an opponent bet or raise is driving your decisions.