I Fish

    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,084
      Today I'll conduct an experiment.

      Instead of being a fish pretending to be a shark (which is after all just a big fish), I'll try to play like a passive small fish for a few hundred hands.

      This includes limping 50%+ and coldcalling 30%+. The limping will include AA and perhaps KK but not JJ and TT, which I will raise. AXs is a clear limp for all X, AK is a raise., but all other Ax is a limp. On the button. everyting is playable except offsuited non connected small cards.

      Postflop, I'll try to play well (whatever that is). I'll try to find tables with TAGS and find position on them.

      You may wonder why I do this. I want to get to know the enemy.

      /Johan
  • 4 replies
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,084
      Thus, the first session. 100 hands.

      I misjudged a little, my VPIP is 80%. The important things are that my fold to c-bet is small (0 actually). My turn fold to c-bet doesn't even occur as a statistic.

      I don't think that I executed well. there were spots where I was donating, but also won fairly big pots I never would have won playing normally.

      I'll start a new session soon. One thing is clear: Playing fish-style and playing well beyond the flop is not necessarily a losing play.

      Another thing should be clear too. I am not trying to replace my normal game with playing fish-style. What I'm trying to do is to find a way to properly adjust to a particular type of fish in my normal game.

      /Johan = :f_confused:
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,084
      And, yes, the meta-game.

      This part is wonderful because all TAGS will soon start to yell at you in the chat. You have 100% advantage over them in the metagame. I stole a fair amount of pots on the river. [Their rationale: CallinG Stations call, they donät raise.]

      Nobody is going to love you.

      /Johan = :f_confused:
    • taavi1337
      taavi1337
      Bronze
      Joined: 29.05.2009 Posts: 2,920
      Wonderful! I should try this as well. Keep us updated :f_p:
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,084
      I played a few more sessions after I last wrote about this. I have ended the experiment.

      It was well worth doing!

      My conclusions are roughly these:
      • It is possible to screw up big time preflop and still be winning
      • My normal play has not played particularly well versus this type of player

      One obvious point: Valuebet! Don't try to blow them off a hand by c-betting. Bluffing or semibluffing is not going to work. Why even try it? For instance, don't automatically bet your flushdraws. Don't try to "protect" when it's uncertain that you have the best hand. Respect raises on the flop, and on the turn. Don't necessarily respect river raises: These guys go to the river so often that they must steal some pots on the river. If you have a winning or marginally losing (70/3/0,9/45) guy directly to your left, then he is going to be you headache that session, not the 3 regs at the table. Don't try to read the board; they may be floating all the way to the river to take it away from you there. There are probably tens of other things.

      Of course, I "knew" this before the experiment. But "knowing" in theory is not the same thing as putting something to practice. I haven't played anything since my experiment, but I hope I'll handle this particular player type with a little more respect in the future, meaning that they might just know what they are doing (after the flop).

      EDIT: A clarification. The fish I was emulating was loose and very passive until the river. Thin valuebetting in the form of bet-folding on the river would have been a disaster vs me because I bluff-raised (successfully) a lot more than game theory dictates.

      Anybody else tried something like this?

      /Johan = :f_confused: