Tight and aggressive preflop is not enough - Page 5

DcifrThs · #41 02-27-2005, 07:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Learn that raising light preflop feels naughty at first but vastly increases your chances of taking the pot down with a flop or turn bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

A problem I have run into with this playing style is that after the first time I am called by a pair of 5s and everyone sees I have been betting with K- or A-high on every street, this kind of flop and turn aggression loses its teeth. I raise PF with KJs, and hit a flop of T63, the guy with A6o check-calls the flop and turn, the river checks through, and now I'm the guy who bet with king-high the whole hand. No more taking pots down on the turn.

What do you do in this situation -- change tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

how about not spewing chips [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

-Barron

DcifrThs · #42 02-27-2005, 07:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is a great post.

I think it's also a funny post, because if I had made the exact same post I would have been flamed like hell for it.

Either way, it had to be said. Many of you on here think that having a VPIP of 15 and a PFR % of 10 means you're good. It does not.

[/ QUOTE ]

at a full table mine is pretty damn low ...17%...overall its 20.xy.

bottom line, if you're vpip is low, it often correlates to other SIGNIFICANT problems.

1) not releasing the 10% of hands you voluntarily play.
2) folding too often on the flop/ not folding often enough on the turn. folding too much on the river.

-Barron

PS- utilizing information for its sake is dangerous. my most significant advance while using PT stats came when i could correlate VPIP%, pfr%, and agg factor postflop with many other parts of peoples' games.

DcifrThs · #43 02-27-2005, 07:38 PM

mason and him had a, shall we say, falling out. he avoids 2+2 like the plague.

if you follow abdul's advice to a T you will be missing MANY MANY bets with AA/KK AKs etc. because in today's games his limp reraise standards are simply not good. no need to balance out. get the $ in there.

-Barron

Elizabeth · #44 02-27-2005, 07:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]

A problem I have run into with this playing style [raising light] is that after the first time I am called by a pair of 5s and everyone sees I have been betting with K- or A-high on every street, this kind of flop and turn aggression loses its teeth. I raise PF with KJs, and hit a flop of T63, the guy with A6o check-calls the flop and turn, the river checks through, and now I'm the guy who bet with king-high the whole hand. No more taking pots down on the turn.

What do you do in this situation -- change tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

You stop getting aggressive with marginal holdings out of position. Loose aggressive players out of position get killed in poker.

Really, there's not much else that's a problem. Stop making stupid semibluffs (especially on the turn) that have no hope of working, and start checking when you don't have a hand.

You can start checkraising more often to protect yourself in these situations.

Your opponents are still playing badly, but the way you can take advantage of it is when you have top pair. You're going to get paid off all the way. This is huge at small stakes because your decent holdings just got very profitable and very easy to play.

Wired Jokers · #45 02-27-2005, 07:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
if you follow abdul's advice to a T you will be missing MANY MANY bets with AA/KK AKs etc. because in today's games his limp reraise standards are simply not good. no need to balance out. get the $ in there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree 100%. I think I have limped with AA, KK, QQ, AKs about 0% of the time over the last 2 years. My point was simply that reading his pre-flop strategies is incredible "food for thought" and really helped my overall game.

NOTE: I don't have his pre-flop guide in front of me, but I am almost positive Abdul states that in a loose-passive game, you should eschew any and all limp-reraise strategies.

Wired Jokers · #46 02-27-2005, 07:51 PM

Go here for a reprint of Abdul's Shorthanded Strategy:

Abdul's Shorthanded Strategy Guide

I'm pretty sure this is the one that used to be on posev.com. At least, it's the one I've been using.

einbert · #47 02-27-2005, 08:04 PM

Thanks! That was what I was looking for! Greatly appreciated!

motorholdem · #48 05-14-2005, 01:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of people have been fretting lately about the increasing tightness (as measured by VPIP) on Party. At various levels, this appears to be the case. One reason for this is the increase in the number of tight, aggressive players playing multiple tables.

However, I've also seen a lot of people fretting that the games are drying up and are no longer as profitable as they once were, or profitable at all.

While tracking the statistical trends of the various levels on Party is somewhat interesting and marginally useful, I'd just like to point out that the games continue to be very, very good, even if they aren't as good as they were in the past. Egregiously bad players (I hate calling them "fish"--I prefer "donkeys," "donks," or "producers) are still playing in droves, but more importantly there are vast numbers of players who are tight and aggressive preflop but just suck postflop.

I understand the stage these players are in, because that was me when I first started playing hold'em seriously. I thought that being tight and (somewhat) aggressive preflop and playing fit or fold postflop should be enough to make me a substantial winner in small stakes game. It isn't.

Improving your postflop play is absolutely the most important thing you can do. Stop worrying about statistics. Stop worrying about your winrate. Start worrying about not sucking postflop. It's what keeps me up at night.

Here's a hand I played against a player who is excessively tight and reasonbly aggressive preflop. I think he took a horrible postflop line. He had TT in this hand (what I had doesn't really matter.) He essentially took a line that wins him the least when he's ahead and loses the most when he's behind:

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (9 handed) converter

Preflop:
UTG raises, bdk3clash 3-bets, 7 folds, UTG calls.

Flop: (7.33 SB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG checks, bdk3clash bets, UTG raises, bdk3clash 3-bets, UTG calls.

Turn: (6.66 BB) 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG checks, bdk3clash bets, UTG calls.

River: (8.66 BB) 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG checks, bdk3clash bets, UTG calls.

Final Pot: 10.66 BB

What's the point? The point is that you should not fret if you're playing against tight opponents. Most of them are pretty bad postflop. Just don't be one of them.

Learn blind stealing and blind defense.

Learn that raising light preflop feels naughty at first but vastly increases your chances of taking the pot down with a flop or turn bet. The notion that aggression on any street essentially buys you outs and makes you money (by getting your opponents to check when they should bet, call when they should raise, or fold when they should call) isn't discussed very often on this forum, but I think it's important (and something I struggle with.) Abdul Jalib discusses this on his site quite well.

Learn that raising preflop and on the flop allows you to make folds on the turn and river with a better conscinece because an opponent betting or raising someone who has shown strength on that or a previous street means a stronger hand than betting or raising someone who has played a hand passively.

Learn that even though not all of your opponents are braindead fucktards who you can nut-peddle against and value-bet the shit out of, many of them are still bad postflop and very profitable to play against.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is/was a great post. One thing I don't get, if you folks can humour my ignorance, is the quote in the text

"He essentially took a line that wins him the least when he's ahead and loses the most when he's behind:"

I've heard and seen this lots, but help me out here folks.

UTG had TT - we know that for sure. If was behind (to say a QQ), then there are ways he could played this and lost MORE money. For example, capping post-flop and leading with a bet on the turn and river.

If he was ahead (let's say to 99), there are ways he could have played this and made LESS money. Not Checkraising post-flop, for example.

So, I don't get the quote.

If I was in UTG, I would figure after the two 3 bets that I was about 50/50 chance of being ahead.(this is very much read dependent, and depending on my opponent I could fold, re-raise, or slowdown and call down). I could be ahead to 99, AKs, AKo and AQs. I would be behind to JJ - AA. With the two 3 bets, the board is just noise (unless he hit trip 8s) - it's probably going to come down to the pocket cards.

So, how does the quote ring true.

If UTG is unsure if he's ahead or behind, but is committed to a showdown, then it is IMPOSSIBLE for him or anyone to play the hand in such a way that maximizes the pot if he is ahead, and minimizes his loss if he is behind..

Is the original poster suggesting that UTG should have decided if he was behind and folded to the post-flop 3 bet, OR decided he was ahead and pumped the action through to the river? If so, this seems a little like the raise or fold argument - as others noted, it's not a sin to hit the call button!!!

Now if this player was avoiding obvious info that he was beat, then he should have folded. But, we dont have that info when looking at this example...

HELP

cold_cash · #49 05-14-2005, 02:28 AM

I think the point is that raising "for information" is useless if you're going to turn a deaf ear when your opponent starts giving it out. Basically the guy w/ TT should have either found a fold somewhere or tried to get to showdown as quickly as possible; instead, he did neither.

Also, the chances of our opponent (bdk) having AK or AQ drop significantly once he bets the turn. I'm not sure where you came up with the 50/50 thing, but I think believing we're ahead half the time is being very, very optimistic.

motorholdem · #50 05-14-2005, 02:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think the point is that raising "for information" is useless if you're going to turn a deaf ear when your opponent starts giving it out. Basically the guy w/ TT should have either found a fold somewhere or tried to get to showdown as quickly as possible; instead, he did neither.

Also, the chances of our opponent (bdk) having AK or AQ drop significantly once he bets the turn. I'm not sure where you came up with the 50/50 thing, but I think believing we're ahead half the time is being very, very optimistic.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree it's optomistic.....but why didn't the OP just say the guy should have folded. period.

The quote "lose the most; win the least", is outcome dependent, and I'm not sure this was a good example of what the point was if there is a clear fold.