Aggression and Collusion

[FredJones888]

People who have read WLLH might remember the mention of "Implied Collusion". This is when many players all bet a lot before the flop, which increases pot odds for their crap hands and then they hit their flush/straight/whatever and beat you. For a long time I suspected collusion online and now I know that the same effect can happen even by accident. Some have called it "fish schooling" on this web site.

Whether its happening by accident or on purpose, I need a way to beat it, I think this phenomenon is the main cash leak for me. I have tried playing super tight, and this results in lots of bordom and the occasional very small winning session. I have tried being super aggressive and this results in huge swings but a net loss over hudreds of hands.

[pudley4]

The schooling effect is not why you (or any other player) loses long-term at low-limit holdem. The players are so bad that the positives they get from schooling are far outweighed by their poor play.

You can also use this schooling to your benefit - play more drawing hands in late positions. Now when the flop comes and gives you a marginal hand/draw, all the players who call before you increase your pot and implied odds enough to call. You can also play more drawing hands up front (all pairs, Axs, suited connectors) because so many players will call behind you (both preflop and on the flop), giving you the correct odds.

Finally, be more careful about playing big, unsuited connectors (especially be more leery about raising in early position).

[OrangeHeat]

Hi Fred,

The best way to win in an uber-aggressive tight game is to play premium hands, big pairs, etc.. - however you play here there isn't much ev.

I believe your talking about a game that is loose and aggressive. Premium hands still work here and higher suited connectors can pay off big time. The key is to play tight and be willing to drop the premium hands when your beat and not pay off the multiple bets by the aggressive players. With multiple players in the pots you should raise for value when you flop a good draw and there are enough players to exceed the odds of hitting your hand.

No matter what you do - you will have large swings in uber-aggressive games. To come out a winner you have to not pay off with AA and the like when you know your beat. But as said before do not make big folds where you are not sure you are beat - this will cost you more money than paying off a little extra.

Orange

[spamuell]

Read The Complete Book of Hold'em Poker by Gary Carson, he talks about this in detail.

Also, search the archives of RGP for Morton's Theorem.

[pudley4]

The "schooling" effect is more commonly used to describe the poor post-flop calls players make when they don't have the correct odds to call (i.e you bet the flop, the next player calls with his gutshot but he's only getting 6-1 on his call. However, when the next 6 players also call, his call suddenly turns correct). It's not normally used to describe a super-aggressive/maniacal preflop game. In these types of games, you just have to play extremely tight. Play big pairs and big suited connectors and wait to hit your hands.

[pudley4]

Still valid advice for passive games [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Louie Landale]

I am not a fan of the idea lots of bad and loose callers is BAD for the solid player: if your hand is the favorite you are better off in a BIG pot justifying long-shot draws than you are in a small pot denying long-shot draws.

I believe that while the combined "outs" of the opponents can and often DOES drastically reduce the value of small and medium pairs (since they draw to overcards), it rarely adds up when you have the big pair: there just are NOT that many hands, in holdem, the multiple opponents CAN wield to beat you: at best there are 2 small pairs, maybe 2 kickers, maybe two straight draws, and one flush draw. The more callers just means they have each other's cards and your chances are BETTER: [a] if one flush draw calls surely you want the 2nd player with a flush draw to also call [b] if there are 4 gut draws out surely each has only 2 or 3 outs, not 4 [c] compared to one player drawing to a small pair with 5 outs, if 3 players draw to that pair at best they have 9 outs; and if one of them has the same kicker as you do then they have only 6 outs: the additional 2 callers combined reduce your chances of winning by 1 out; which is a good thing for you.

Anyway, you have to adjust your play for hyper aggressive games. To illustrate, lets invent a silly impossible betting structure for a moment:

Lets play in a game where you [1] cannot raise [2] cannot check [3] the betting limit is a straight 8-chips [4] the blinds are 1 and 2 chips. These rules mean that even if you are first to act you must either bet 8 chips or fold, and others can only fold or call. The opponents are real loose and 3-5 players regularly get to the show down.

Tactically there is no "raising to get a free card", clever check-raises to narrow the field, betting marginal but good pairs for value on the river, none of that good stuff. Never-the-less this game is easy to beat: play selectivly before and on the flop figuring to show-down a high percentage of winners when you DO play. You cannot take their money but they are willing to give it to you.

Disciplined and unimaginative beats this game.

NEWSFLASH: the game I just described is almost exactly like a maniac game where you can expect it to be routinely capped before and on the flop, but the raising slow downs to one raise on the turn and river. Putting in all 4 bets at once (where one bet is 2 chips) rather than calling two and then having to call 2 more, doesn't change anything.

The only real difference between my pretend game and your real life maniac game is your ATTITUDE towards it.

- Louie

[SoBeDude]

I believe "Implied Collusion" has a different meaning than what you think.

Implied collusion is simply the effect of having multiple opponents in the hand, and for you to get the pot you have to beat them ALL.

So if you have 5 opponents, it's essentially four against 1 (you being the one). If any of the other 4 win, you lose.

Not that is not the same as regular collusion, where players are intentionally playing together against you.

What you seem to be discussing is simply a loose-aggressive preflop game.

-Scott

[FredJones888]

this thread is about loose aggressive tables exclusively.

[LetsRock]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not a fan of the idea lots of bad and loose callers is BAD for the solid player

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not necessarily BAD, but it is different than a game that is typically refered to in most books as the "norm". Most "lessons" are not geared toward the game having a family pot on nearly every hand. This effect obviously forces the better player to adjust his game and play differently than if there were say 5 limpers to every flop instead of 8 or 9.

It is harder to make good starters hold up when there is a good chance that a less than perfect flop for you is likely going to be very good for someone else. I find that they all have different crap hands; they don't all share the same cards. Therefore the odds go up that someone other than you is going to benefit from a marginally good flop.

Say you hold AA and the flop comes A67. In a "normal" game you're going to generally like this flop. But odds are increased that someone hold the 89 and someone else holds a 45. Yes, it's true, that each of these players is holding the other's outs which reduces their odds. But your odds of getting drawn out are increased because "normally" only one of these hands would be out against you giving them 4 outs against you; in this situation there are 6 outs against you. When you add the possibility of a 2 tone flop and you can now add all of the Q4s type holders which could include a couple more players. Now add the guy who's holding 66.

It can get to the point where half the deck is an out for someone else; none of them have a real good chance to beat you individually, but your 85% favorite is now only about a 65% favorite because there are so many draws against you.

It's beatable, but it takes much more patience and very solid post flop play than the traditional "soft table" and somewhat solid players sometimes fail to make the adjustment.

I really don't prefer these games. Give me a couple of maniacs and a couple of passive idiots and a couple of other solid players and I can get around pretty good; give me 6 or 7 of any of the above group and the game gets much tougher. Frankly, I'd rather have 6 or 7 of the solid players than the other two groups - I may not make as much money, but at least I have a clue what the solid players are up to and can play accordingly. It's difficult to adjust to the truly random cards that the other groups will play - it's really not natural to put an UTG (or anyone outside the blinds) on a 94. But you have to consider it. You have to consider ANY 2 cards, so it's very difficult to have a feel if your hand is any good.