Being a LAG creates difficult situations all the time

[emil3000]

Standard.

[-Skeme-]

[ QUOTE ]
im sorry but "LAG" does not mean bet-3-betting MPTK with only a runner-runner redraw

[/ QUOTE ]

[Skuzzy]

A little touch of the super systems have we? 38/24 by my autorate rules puts you in the ATM category. If I need to re-evaluate my rules I 'd like to know.

If you were running really hot (like a gazillion degrees!)and these guys have folded away a dozen racks to you in this session, and this was the last hand of poker you got to play before being executed by the state then I guess its standard.

Good luck Mempho.

[Mempho]

OK...so I avoided replying after first reading the comments this morning....but I first have to say a couple of things. Yes, the hand was played poorly. I agree with that. Now, let me give you some of my reasoning in the hand (although my reasoning in the heat of battle sometimes leads to faulty conclusions).

First of all, my preflop stats were way of line with what they normally are because I had a tight table and weak blinds and I had gotten several good starting hands.

I raised with A6 b/c I had picked out that hand at the beginning of the session as a random pfr hand. I pick out several of these at the beginning of each session by basically throwing a dart at a hand chart. If one of the hands makes it to showdown (b/c I make something out of whatever trash I'm playing with), I change it out (like they do with the hurricane name list). That said, A6 was a "rule" at the time, so I raised. I did not really want to raise, however, because my stats were looking very "laggish." At any rate, I had made money at the table, but I had gotten the distinct feeling that the table was "sick" of me.

That said, when I bet the flop, I bet it thinking that I had, in fact, been fortunate enough to flop the best hand with my trash holding. When the villain check-raised to $30, I had the distinct thought that the villain was trying to steal the pot with a lesser hand. Also, the villain had a flop aggression factor of 6.0. Essentially, my raise to $100 was supposed to be a blocking bet since I thought I was ahead, but it would also ensure that I did not lay down the best hand as the villain would have to come over the top all in and this could only mean a superior hand.

Of course, I found out that I was behind and I did the math and I had at best 5 outs, e.g, too little to make a call.

I realize that there is going to be great disagreeement with whatever position I take on this. In a results-oriented way, I know that this was a bad raise.

However, I think the question is this: What is the best way to find out that A6 is either good or no good once I am c/r to $30? Or, have I already found out? It seems to me that there are a lot of draws that could make this check-raise against someone with my stats.

[jonnyUCB]

Take a card off with position if you think you have live outs. In other words, if you think SB will play back with less than the nuts, take a card off. Most players play against LAGs by waiting for a monster to play back though often the best strategy is to play back with more marginal hands. If hes adjusting to your style by doing so, take one off and re-evaluate. If he's a TP who you haven't seen raise in a good 3 orbits, then its an easy fold.

[jonnyUCB]

[ QUOTE ]
I realize that there is going to be great disagreeement with whatever position I take on this. In a results-oriented way, I know that this was a bad raise.

However, I think the question is this: What is the best way to find out that A6 is either good or no good once I am c/r to $30? Or, have I already found out? It seems to me that there are a lot of draws that could make this check-raise against someone with my stats.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you know anything about position?

[crosse91]

i didn't get past the 2nd paragraph b/c you should NEVER plan to play poker by a rigid set of rules-as the games changes you must as well.

adaptation is a characteristic of a good poker player. Following a random self-made rule is not.

[yvesaint]

im sorry but your 'rules' sound like a really bad way to play 'LAG'

when i try to play aggressive, i dont make rules about what to raise. i assess each situation and see if this is a good time to get aggressive. i dont pick out a pre-determined hand to raise, and when that hand is dealt to me, raise it - it's not about the cards you have, it's about position, players, and your image / their tendencies

2-flush board, middle pair, this is not really a good time to 3-bet

[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
im sorry but your 'rules' sound like a really bad way to play 'LAG'



[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I do raise positionally and situationally. My addition of random hands is done only to a small extent. My selection is limited and only serves to supplement my legitamate and situational raises. This small amount of "game theory" is mainly for metagame purposes and not for value.

[ QUOTE ]
2-flush board, middle pair, this is not really a good time to 3-bet

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was really asking about. The preflop raise just somehow became such a big focus that I had to address it. The raise is meaningless except for the possible "read" it could give my opponents. The multiple draws are the primary reason that I tried to block bet/semibluff this hand. I really thought that he was more than likely c/ring with a flush draw and an over, a str8 draw, or 2 overs. I thought this was far more likely than the bettor having TPTK or a set or 2 pair. I also made this decision based on the flop bettor's flop aggression factor of 6.00. Now, I'm not trying to defend this 3-bet to $100, rather, I'm merely trying to give you my heat-of-the-battle reasoning for making such a rash decision. I suspected that the villain was trying to make a play, so I played back, and I, in turn, got played.

By your rational, the fact that I hold middle pair on a 2-flush board is exactly why I should not 3-bet this hand. And yet, that is exactly why I did so. Do you say that simply from a pot equity standpoint? (I know my overall pot equity can't be good if we go to the river. However, if I add fold equity into the equation, does it make the situation any better?

Additionally, if I take the line of not 3-betting, do I simply fold or do I call-fold if I go unimproved on the turn? At this point, do I simply take the chance of making a bad laydown?

[wdeadwyler]

Game Theory like this is used against pros, not moron party poker players. Save the game theory raises for 50/100.