Avatars91

Originally posted by Avatars91

Once you hit big you can still get value from the fish, no need to use 3bb raise. Especially if the fish doesn't even have a full stack. If you don't want to use 2bb then use 2,5bb.

May we raise it to 3BB's with our whole wide range vs a fish if he is folding a lot postflop, i.e., is playing pretty much fit/fold? He then keeps folding in bigger pots and we don't have to worry about saving any money because the weakness of our range is not that big an issue vs a frequent folder.

If he plays fit/Fold then it's even more likely to raise to 3bb, isn't it? Cause you clearly got more money from his fit/folds.

Originally posted by Avatars91

Yeah, any suited hands can be raised vs a fish and a bad player. Vs smaller stacks we might adjust to the range which also has decent equity cause it will be difficult to overplay him postflop.

Even hands such as 95s, 72s, and, God forbid, 23s vs full-stacked calling stations?

Of course, with the EV of these hands lying in our huge implied odds when we hit big, since we can overbet on a lot of streets with our monsters and expect to still get paid off pretty well and often? + there would be nothing wrong in giving up on such flops as KsTs2h, 3hTd9d or even 2c7s9d with 8h3h vs such guys since the EV in the openraise comes mainly from our vBets and we don't necessarily have to overexaggerate the profitability of cBetting somewhat coordinated and wet flops with rather weak backdoors?

Am I rationalizing correctly?
If you are raising that loose then doesn't really make sense to do it always 3bb, then should also adjust to very small raise size cause clearly this range is way too wide for doing it 3bb and in long run most likely going to waste money.

The next one is a biggie, focused more @ play vs regs, but also relevant to play vs loose fish as well.
If it is too much, we can leave it also for a private theory coaching, if you please. Would only be fair

But the others are more than welcome to dig in this topic as well!

Constant adapting to opponents as the sample size/history grows

So let us say that we have just sat down at a SH NL25 table with 2 non-fullstacked and 3 fullstacked players. We know nothing about them and they don't know anything about us either. We start playing the game and, obviously, the more hands we play, the more information we get on our opponents and, logically, the more our opponents get to know about our game. And for that reason, of course, our play must change vs each opponent over time. As history/sample size grows, we must gradually switch from some sort of a standard and generalized approach that we use during the first few hands with these unknown opponents (e.g. – when we treat all completely unknown fullstacks in the same way on a certain limit and/or site) to a more specialized approach towards each individual opponent according to the information that we have acquired on him.
At least I assume that this is how it is supposed to happen.

My questions regarding this context:

1) In general, what is a good approach for playing vs unknown TAGs/LAGs?

Should we:

a) play relatively carefully and preferably tight, testing the waters out very slowly and throwing in some moves for information + some smaller benefits such as an active/aggressive image, e.g. in the form of some lighter 3Bets from the BU vs CO or MP until we get more information that would enable us to develop a more optimal strategy?

Or should we

b) play ambitiously and try to put our opponents under serious pressure so that we can gain information ASAP + so that we can exploit their inability to adapt well enough vs our pressure + so that they start tilting and making desperate adaptions that we can predict, provided we are competent enough?

Personally so far I feel that for a player of my level I have been basically using approach B way too much and way too unprofessionally (not taking it to some sort of an extreme point but still). And it hasn't been all that great. I keep doing rather badly + it even makes me tilt a bit when this approach results in a lost pot because I constantly have to doubt whether I am leveling myself or not. And I actually believe that I am. Constantly.

2) Do very good players use the approach I mentioned in 1. b?

For example, I remember TwiceT mentioning in one of his episodes of Pink Performance an idea about BBvsSB play – he suggested to play very aggressively as the BB in the first BBvsSB situation vs any fullstacked unknown's SB openraise on NL25 for a various number of reasons – one of which was the creation of an active image which may be used the next time we pick up, for example, a small pair – we 3Bet, he 4Bets, and then we push vs his potential adaption creating fold equity + somewhat decent equity vs his calling range.

Now, I myself am not competent enough to assess whether this approach is indeed correct, but there is definitely some logic behind it. I personally am having a lot of trouble with active 3Betting - both as a 3betor and when facing 3Bets. So I often level myself into making questionable 4Bets or 3bet/pushes.

If leveling oneself is the problem regarding this context, then how does one not level himself and play poker using that approach?

3) How important is the limits/poker site we're playing on in the designing of our default playing style vs unknown TAGs/LAGs?

I mean, should we assume that, e.g., the average NL10 reg on Pokerstars today @2012 doesn't fold a lot to 3Bets and thus, depending on our approach, we either tighten up our 3Betting range or start 3Betting a lot IP to try and punish that wide range?

And should we similarly assume that the average NL25 reg on the Partypoker network doesn't call 3Bets OOP as often as the NL10 reg does and even 4Bet/bluffs more instead? Should we also then, influenced by this assumption, make adaptions to our default play vs unknown TAGs/LAGs?

I got the feeling when you 3b UTG light in 6m zoom utg was always flatting and played so straightforward postflop, so I started to 3b super light with hands that play great in 3b pots JTs KTs TQs, I don't like to 3b KQs or KQo tho as it plays very well in a single raised pot. The great thing is that people only continue with 4b or flatting pockets cause they think a setmine is going to make a profit.

1) In general, what is a good approach for playing vs unknown TAGs/LAGs?

You kind of answered yourself the part already. It's very good that you make such thoughts about your game and make some plans. Those things help you more understand how to approach. As you see the more and standard line would be picking the a) situation instead of b). As vs unknown we rather pick safer approach.

There are always going to be different players and different styles which may approach differently. For example I can talk from my game experience. I am playing very loose-aggressive game and I and adept really fast, I know around what I am doing preflop/postflop. That also allows me to do more moves cause I also realize when I am doing it profitable and not. Obviously I am not talking about that I do it always, I also have plays where I practically just underestimate opponents range, overvalue my hand strength etc. Therefore it also depends on your own skills and according to that we adjust. Some are just able to adept faster, some take longer time, some need more sample size.

That should also answer your 2nd part that crushing regs may use the other approach, especially for higher limits as NL200/400 etc. Cause we also expect to get 3bet/4bet looser and therefore we also are more aggressive there.

If leveling oneself is the problem regarding this problem, then how does one not level himself and play poker using that approach?

Usually the common mistakes I see on the forum is that some guy has seen some other coach doing some specific move and they do the same. Though the problem is that they don't really understand why they doing it, if they are doing it in correct spot. They losing a stack and then it affects their game, aka they gonna be playing more spewy, lose more money. Do you want that? Are you able to take such shots? If you having trouble with it then clearly playing LAG style ain't best approach for you and not your style.

Originally posted by Avatars91
3) How important is the limits/poker site we're playing on in the designing of our default playing style vs unknown TAGs/LAGs?

I mean, should we assume that, e.g., the average NL10 reg on Pokerstars today @2012 doesn't fold a lot to 3Bets and thus, depending on our approach, we either tighten up our 3Betting range or start 3Betting a lot IP to try and punish that wide range?

And should we similarly assume that the average NL25 reg on the Partypoker network doesn't call 3Bets OOP as often as the NL10 reg does and even 4Bet/bluffs more instead? Should we also then, influenced by this assumption, make adaptions to our default play vs unknown TAGs/LAGs?

Even on old days people didn't fold much to 3bets. People clearly play looser on NL10. There are just persons who play super nitty and fold a lot to 3bets, there are person who call a lot whilst they may just want to overplay you. 3betting is very important topic as you shouldn't look for hands being dominated by their calling range.

About NL25 and party poker it's hard to say, again depends on the opponent. You can always try out that with decent blocker-type of holding how he reacts to 3bet and then adjust accordingly. How else you gonna get to know his play-style if not by 3betting him?

Hey Avatars91,

Just wanted to say that I m thank full that you ask this question. We can really learn a lot of staff from your questions and Veriz answers and in some sort of way bringing us to think more about the game overall. Guess this thread is gonna become a ''Veriz Q&A thread'' ♦ ♠_cool:.

Even on old days people didn't fold much to 3bets. People clearly play looser on NL10. There are just persons who play super nitty and fold a lot to 3bets, there are person who call a lot whilst they may just want to overplay you. 3betting is very important topic as you shouldn't look for hands being dominated by their calling range. About NL25 and party poker it's hard to say, again depends on the opponent. You can always try out that with decent blocker-type of holding how he reacts to 3bet and then adjust accordingly. How else you gonna get to know his play-style if not by 3betting him?

But we can make assumptions about the average player pool (and thus adaptions to our standard style vs this player pool based on the site/limit when we start playing, right? In fact it is somewhat essential?

Hey Avatars91, Just wanted to say that I m thank full that you ask this question. We can really learn a lot of staff from your questions and Veriz answers and in some sort of way bringing us to think more about the game overall. Guess this thread is gonna become a ''Veriz Q&A thread'' .

I'm glad you're enjoying my activity here + that you're benefiting from it as well will do my best to keep that up and let's hope that we're able to survive here while Veriz is moving on with his life and being replaced by someone else.

Hello,

My name is Bogdan and I am the coach that will be taking over this section (from Veriz).

Before the end of the week I will be able to come in this thread and respond to you. Please stay tuned

Best regards.

Originally posted by Avatars91

Even on old days people didn't fold much to 3bets. People clearly play looser on NL10. There are just persons who play super nitty and fold a lot to 3bets, there are person who call a lot whilst they may just want to overplay you. 3betting is very important topic as you shouldn't look for hands being dominated by their calling range. About NL25 and party poker it's hard to say, again depends on the opponent. You can always try out that with decent blocker-type of holding how he reacts to 3bet and then adjust accordingly. How else you gonna get to know his play-style if not by 3betting him?

But we can make assumptions about the average player pool (and thus adaptions to our standard style vs this player pool based on the site/limit when we start playing, right? In fact it is somewhat essential?

Poker is a game of information. The more we have the better we can play.

Making assumptions about our opponents is key because we can then create a plan. So yes, I agree 100% with you that making assumptions about the player pool is key.

Example: we face an unknown player that doesn't look fishy. How do we play?
We make assumptions on how a "standard" player at these limits play and then create a game plan.

As we find more information about villain we change our game plan (thus using information to improve our decision making process).