^ just answering the OP, where reads are given, and a range is asked for.

If you have posts that say the same thing, then I am not arguing with you at all.

Somehow a KJ fold argument came up... I guess with a bunch of dependancies that make it not in the premise of the thread titled "deep passive" - ok, I missed all the qualifiers... (that are off topic BTW)

I took a bunch of shortcuts for the sake of demonstrating the pot-spread effect... it is certainly not exact science. But I am comfortable with those estimates and shortcuts from experience. Anyone is welcome to improve or correct them - but it does become unwieldy quick.

You aren't just looking for the nuts - just 80% value (which is not thin, but not very nitty either given the opponents loose tendencies.. top 2 pair is probably good enough)

I am confident there are > 4% of boards in which I would stack off 300bbs on (*as the aggressor in a loose game)... agreed I will not always have a caller, so figuring this exact conversion ratio requires some advanced software - again, I am making am educated guess at it.

We can assume villains are playing the same style as the average villain. While this read wont be perfect obv, it should have at least a 60% success rate. Add in other immediate reads (stereotypes are generally true) and you should have at least a 65% success rate in profiling players right away. and that's before you play a single hand.
Exactly. They're limping almost ATC (and raising JJ+ pre and sometimes TT, AQ+), which means we are way less likely to be dominated and they are likely to be dominated when we both flop top pair. You can always overbet the pot post flop in limped pots as needed to narrow the field. It's only 5% to flop two pairs+ with a SC. even against that many people, when you flop top pair on a safe flop, you will have the best made hand a huge % of the time (like 75%) and can extract value.
[QUOTE=Richard Parker;44081374]That's "after" we have developed "valuable" reads.
We have position, and that's it. "Big" skill edge would require our knowledge of other players, and again, the focus here is that we don't have reads.

but we do have reads. an old man is likely to be tighter nit and a young kid in his 20s is likely to be aggressive. while these reads aren't always true, it generally is. if it has a success rate of say 65%, that's good enough for me.
a big skill edge doesnt require knowledge of other players. at llsnl, players in generally play way too loose passive and face up. the obvious adjustment is to assume everyone is a loose passive fish until proven otherwise, and take them to value town
no, i will be able to turn at least a small profit. most villains play too many hands, make too many bad calls, etc. i wont be making as many mistakes and i have position on my side

pre flop equity doesnt matter as much since its about showing the best hand at showdown. we cant play ATC however, because some hands will rarely ever flop well enough. KJo on the other hand, only has to flop top pair on most boards and you will have the best hand even against the field (even more so if they raise AQ+, JJ+ always pre).
it's a limped pot, you have very little RIO against passive players. you have position and can build the pot when you want to and get out cheap when you need to. it might be hard to put villains on an exact range, but you beat both draws and most TPs when you flop top pair with KJ against wide ranges. so just bet fold bet fold

well, we can't play crappy hands like 84o because when they flop one pair, we're still behind, they can't flop a flush, and only way we flop a straight is 567 flop. there are some hands that are just unprofitable no matter what at a limp fest. if phil ivey was playing llsnl in a limp fest, he cant really just limp 82o and expect to turn a profit limping that hand.

heres some interesting stats: against 9 VILLAINS, AK has a 4.4% chance of being dominated, AQ has 16.8%, AJ has 27.8%, KJ has 34.5%, KT has 43.5% chance.
it's even less than that because almost everyone raises QQ+ pre, and a lot of people raise AQ+, TT+ pre. whereas KJ dominates alot of hands

I think that many people would question whether the above stereotypes count as "reads" when we know nothing else about these players.

And, lol at your "60%" and "65%" percentages. Aside from these numbers being pulled out of thin air, there is a difference between getting our money in as a presumed "60%" favorite when our opponent has a predictable range and our formulating general strategies based on a supposed "60%" accuracy in our reads about one's alleged playing style based solely on demographics.

I'm not talking about deep stacked poker in general. I'm talking specifically about the optimal game plan at this table:

At this table, what are you doing with A7s UTG? 44 in MP after 2 loose/stationy limpers?

Some of this was mentioned earlier, but the non-existence of 3-betting gives us some concrete information we don't usually have when making a pre-flop decision:

-We'll always have initiative otf
-We'll never get blown off of our equity pre
-With 200 BB stacks, the SPR will always be between roughly 4 (family pot) and 20 (heads up.)

I don't think the first two require much explanation. At this particular table, the value of initiative has a lot more to do with getting strong hands paid than it does with creating profitable c-bet spots on whiffs.

The ability to dictate the flop SPR with our set and nut flush mining type hands seems really powerful to me. 4 and 20 are the extremes, but most of the time our raise will lead to a flop SPR in the 7 - 13 range, depending on how many callers we get. That's big enough to give us strong implied odds against TPTK, overpairs, and 2 pair, but not so big we're going to have to overbet or get raised to get it in by the river. 1/2 - 3/4 pot bets will do the trick.

There's a lot of misguided talk about "%-against-range" and specific hands (e.g. A7s), ITT, IMO.

Deep-passive games are all going to come down to how well you can exploit your villain's tendencies OTT and OTR.

You must be able to win pots with value and with many bluffs. Perhaps you don't need a super red line. But you'll simply never hit enough nuttish hands in a poker environment where rake and BBJ-rake are so big. If the rake is $5+1 per hand, then the house is literally taking $150/hr off the table. Good luck trying to win with if you're constantly trying to see flops trying to hit 2p+ or a 13+ out draw.

That's not to say we shouldn't play our value hands well. I'm not at all saying we rely on our red line. Indeed, you need to figure out how to win the biggest pot possible those times when you do have-it.

So how are we winning hands in these games if (my thesis is that) we really cannot count on enough value cards to pull us through?

Are you willing to raise pre solely so that you can represent a premium holding later in the hand? Does this have value against your villains, or are they going to call you down with any piece? Is anyone at the table paying enough attention to notice?

Are they going to continue on a flushing or obviously straightening board w/o the draw? Will you be able to get value from them when your draw hits? Or will you be able to bluff them off their weak-made hands by taking an obvious draw line when the draw hits?

Will your villains let you draw cheap enough? Or are they going to put in >= 3/4 pot sized bets OTF and OTT?

If you lose your stack, can you rebuy to the average stack size? Or are you in a small max-buy game (100 or 150bb)?

These are the questions I want answers too before I go mixing it up in a deepish, yet, passive table.

If you cannot exploit your villains, then you're just going to pay rake while you try to flop the nuts. Hopefully there's a huge BBJ where you play.

I don't see much value in spliting hairs over the difference between KJo vs AJo, or 84s vs. 85o. Starting hand range is almost completely meaningless when you have to deal with 6 players to a flop, and 200bb deep.