**Before I get started, I'm sorry if this post got a little messy. I don't think I'm articulating very well and just posting this has opened up a can of worms and additional questions.
---
I've learned pretty much everything I know from SSHE, TTOP and HPFAP. In TTOP, Sklansky offers advice on how to make the necessary adjustments to loose and tight games, ie. "In a loose game you must tighten up on your bluffs and semi-bluffs, but loosen up on your legitimate hands." ...But what about starting hand requirements? Is it as simple as, for example, adding a few additional suited connectors to my range from early position in a full ring game, such as 76s, or adding one gappers down to 97s? Is there a standard methodology that good players use?

Going back to what Sklansky said about adjusting to loose and tight games, something he said confused me, and it sounded contradictory, that, "Therefore, in a loose game with several players in the pot, you should play more drawing hands...", but in the following paragraph, that, "In loose games, then, you should tighten up considerably on semi-bluffs"... Aren't drawing hands and semi-bluff hands the same thing?

Sometimes I feel like I'm missing out on action in my soft local game, but I also want to be able to adjust when I'm playing against someone who I feel like may be targeting my ABC/Tight aggressive playstyle.

Anything w/ 'bluff' in it suggests that your opponents might fold. That doesn't happen much at low limits esp in multi-way pots which - being that there's always action - are the reason to play them. I also never liked the 'tighten up in loose games' as I think the reverse is true. Just don't get carried away and add in too many marginal hands esp OOP.

How do you determine how many is too little or too much?

I'd like to know what stakes you play and for how long.

3/6 live local for the past 4 months about 4-5 hours per week.

Play more drawing hands, but don't semibluff them as often (or ever)

First, you're doing the right thing by reading, thinking and asking on here. But nothing beats experience which will give you a feel for the game and you're only going to get that after having played for a while. There are no hard rules besides 'don't be an idiot.' You're also playing in a game where you can't do anything fancy at all, just throw all of that out.

I'd recommend that you play on the tight side and be very positionally aware. Just straight ABC. Even if they notice that you're playing tight they won't care. Don't add marginal hands. Spend your time observing and getting a feel for the game. There's no way to hurry the process so don't get anxious. And, ofc, everyone here will try to be helpful when you post some hands.

GL.

We play drawing hands because they play well multi-way, but drawing isn't the same as a bluff. We turn our draws into (semi-)bluffs when we start playing them aggressively, which isn't advisable in a game full of of calling stations.

That isn't to say you shouldn't raise your strong draws... You should. But you should generally hesitate if you're doing it for the sole purpose of folding out better hands in a loose $3/6 game. Similarly, as a general rule don't bet your busted draws multi-way hoping to see a couple folds.

You mean with the intention of getting another player to fold?

Okay, this is what I figured. People rarely fold in my games anyway, and I'm typically only betting/raising my four flushes for value if I have AXs. Does that sound right, or sound like I'm understanding you?

Haha, I learned very quick that fancy is pointless in my game. I'll check-raise rarely and only do it to get more money in the pot and when I feel highly confident that there will be a raiser behind me.

I get what you're saying about ABC, but I think I'm very ABC, to a fault. I created a post here a few weeks ago that will provide more background on my experiences, "3/6 to 4/8 player skill difference?". I just don't know how to make the necessary adjustments.

Going to be blunt: How do you know your'e playing 'ABC to a fault' w/ so few hours in the game?

That's a good start. As you progress, you'll realize that there are some spots where you can raise if you have a weaker flush draw with one or two overcards, or nut straight draws or straight draws with backdoor flush draws, etc etc... but those spots become more nuanced as you begin to consider position, player tendencies, and board texture.

To get that nuance you need experience. And to get enough experience in a live game without going broke, you'll need a straightforward strategy that won't confuse you or lead you astray. Hence: ABC.

A lot of the more seasoned players here are saying the same thing, more or less: put in a lot of time at the table and get a sense of the flow of the game. Then you'll be able to spot those smaller equity opportunities that will give you a bigger edge overall.

If you're only doing it with the nut flush, you're missing some value in multiway pots.

You probably don't. Not yet. You haven't put in enough time to build the experience to be able to do that.

I'll quote myself.

You are sounding like you've overestimated your ability. You should be focusing on your basics. It's not about making adjustments right now.

Just a feeling in my gut, I guess. I was down $250 bucks and got myself up $150 until I took shots at a 4/8 game in Vegas. It could totally be variance, but its just a thought.

Be as blunt as you're comfortable with. I'm here for the feedback. The only person that has questioned myself up to this point has been my own ego, so I appreciate the criticism. So again, it's just a feeling I suppose. Especially when it seems like the cards will run dry, it seems like I'll play maybe 4-5 hands in an hour, and that feels too tight... But again, this is my ego talking. If that's normal, then i'll need to mentally adjust and just be more patient.

I hear you. I know I definitely need more hours. I guess what I'm just kind of in conflict with is that I don't really know where to go from here. If there were more modern books, I would buy them. But the explanation of what, for example, a semi bluff is - it's almost the same explanation in SSHE as it is in TTOP as it is in King Yao's book. Thus, I figured that experimenting with widening my range would be a fun and potentially profitable experiment.

It's also tough to get hand feedback because I play limit live, so it's not like I can take note of every single player action throughout a hand.

I screwed up the quoting, so I'll just reply line by line per each sentence you've replied.
1) I'm also playing other flushes. I meant only nut flushes as an example. My apologies for not articulating better.
2&4) I completely agree with you. I know I need to spend more time playing. As I commented above, replying to chmuah, I thought it was something to try. I hope I'm not coming across as arrogant or anything like that as it's not my intention. I totally appreciate the feedback as thats what I'm here for.

With your last point, it of course depends. If you mean, "Sparks, what pairs would you raise with in early position?" I'd probably say 'any pair down to Tens or maybe Nines", but of course the questions could get far more technical than that. At my local game, I don't feel like I get too many curve balls from my opponents. Like i've never been check-raised at this game, truthfully, in all of my hours, not a single check raise... except by one guy... and I had to ponder what to do... and I decided to fold... and then it was him versus one other guy and he still lost, so I felt like I made the right play. Sure he got me to fold, but I thought his play to check raise me was dumb because of how our other opponent was playing, and sure enough, that other opponent won.

Am I following you Aaron, or am I going out there a bit?

Edit: One more thing, I've actually been playing about 9 months. I basically studied and played microlimits on ignition for a few months, leading up to a vegas trip in April, where I put in a few sessions at the 2/4 at Flamingo. From there, I continued to play micro online until Ignition changed its format so that you couldn't choose your table which really bummed me out. To have to keep up the hobby, I picked up and studied Terry Borers Limit Hold em: Winning Short Handed and did that for a few weeks/months, then stopped and studied NLHE a bit but got bored since I was only reading and not playing. Decided to get ballsy and play at my local card room. Lost money at first seeing how impactful it was to play with so many calling stations. Studied more, then got profitable a bit and decided that my personal financial situation could manage 3/6, and I've basically been doing that ever since. Hope that helps explain a bit better.

You're sort of there. I'm speculating a bit based on your other thread:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...rence-1693398/

It's possible the bolded is true, but it's also possible that they were just outflopping you. But I find it tough to think that a solid ABC game isn't a winner at 4/8 in Vegas. If you felt like you needed to vary your playing style, it could mean that your basic playing style isn't solid yet.

The underlined is hinting at a weaker ABC game as well. The other players at 4/8 may be smarter than the players in your regular game, but that's a long way from saying that they're smart.

It could be that you're too tight. Or too passive. Or maybe both. I really don't know because you haven't posted enough to get a good sense of how you play.

Starting hand ranges is just the first step of learning to play poker. So that you know how you would play preflop is a great start. But what do you think about on the flop? Are you playing fit-or-fold? Do you know what draws to pump and when to pump them? Do you know about relative and absolute position, and how that impacts your strategic outlook? Again, I can't tell from what you've posted.

"What would you do with X in position Y?"

Extend this question to postflop play, and maybe change the word "position" to "situation." What are the hand categories that you would even use for X? How many situations Y can you come up with?

Maybe try this example:

There are two limpers and you raise preflop with two cards from late position. There are 4 or 5 players to the flop. You flop middle pair. The action is checked to you.

** What are you thinking about? What influences your decision for how you will play this hand? (Do this within the context of the patterns that you see at the games you normally play. Don't try to imagine some game that you don't play.)

This is intentionally vague. There are intentionally lots of possibilities. The reason is that I want there to be holes for you to fill in with information from inside your head and not because I've led you to reach some sort of conclusion.

The purpose is to get some insight into your depth of thinking. Solid ABC may be more nuanced than you think.

Less than a year of experience, especially if there's a lot of live experience, doesn't really indicate that much experience. This is even more true if you're just casually playing once a week or something like that. (You also mentioned that you only play sessions that are a couple hours long.)

You're ignoring the option of checking and or calling bets with draws. This is the extra value gained by drawing hands in loose games. Immediate and implied odds are magnified due to the number of loose players in the pot; bluff value goes way down here.

I'd recommend just ignoring whatever's in HPFAP. It doesn't really apply to the games you are playing. You're still trying to get down the basics, having 10 people (or authors) try to tell you what you need to do is going to be more confusing than helpful.

I agree with the captain

Arron, I want to continue our dialogue, but I’m not sure how to do so. I’ve literally been typing and correcting my response for the last half hour because I don’t want it to seem unappreciative that I’m not responding line by line. I do think of all the stuff that you’ve mentioned – is that all you’re trying to gauge?

With regards to my comments about players attacking me, yet you think they were potentially just out flopping me – no, these individuals were involved in more hands. My apologies for not making that clear. There was one specific individual that was verbally mocking me and raising me every time I was in the blinds (he was two seats to my right (absolute position?) and I felt myself folding more often than not. It felt like the problem was more about the player (me), than it was about the cards I held. What is your suggestion for dealing with that?

About the nuances of ABC – I honestly thought “ABC Poker” was a term with a negative connotation. I have no idea where I fall on the ABC Poker spectrum. All I know is that I’m someone who has gathered all of his knowledge from the books I’ve listed.

I just want to know how folks make starting hand adjustments and how people generally adjust to loose and tight games. I feel like I should be involved in more hands. Whether I’m right or wrong, I have no idea, and I don’t mean to imply that I do know if this is something that I should be focusing on. It’s just something worth trying, like anything else. Aren’t players always experimenting with little things? I of course will still continue to try to play foundational, or ABC poker, or whatever it is. This is something I’ve yet to try. Harrington in his books has mentioned that some folks play tight, and some play loose by nature. I want to try to play loose, I guess.

To Bob148: I don’t understand. I will sometimes check/call bets with draws. I’m not sure what “[I’m] ignoring”.

Captain R:. I’ve incorporated very little of that book into my play. It’s been mostly about just learning about poker and the thought processes that smarter players go through. It hasn’t been hard to see that it isn’t applicable to my own game.

I think that it's safe to say that every poker playing poster on 2p2 has paid to learn and I don't mean books. Every.single.player has paid to learn. At least you're thinking about things but we can't transfer our knowledge directly into your head. Now it's your turn to pay to learn.

I just meant that you didn't mention checking and calling as an option here:

Don't worry about it. As I said, it was intentionally vague. I was supposef to be challenging because there are probably a dozen things that you could be thinking about, and each of those has sub-possibilities.

But here's the thing: If you were actually playing this hand, you would probably act within the first 5 seconds or so from the start of your action. How is it possible that you end up with paragraphs of stuff when you're typing it out, but you can still make a decision in those first few seconds?

So at a certain level, you probably *don't* think about all those things. At least, not at the table. Away from the table, you might go back and reassess things. But in that moment at the table, you don't have time for that.

And I think that's the type of gap you're looking at. You may know all the things you *could* be thinking about, but maybe you don't know what you're *actually* thinking about.

What I would say about that position is that I would probably bet most of my hands. It matters a bit what my second pair is and what the board is. For example, I'm less likely to bet second pair on a wet board because my equity is lowered by all the draws. If my second pair is smaller, I'm less inclined to bet it. And that's probably the types of things I actually think about in those few seconds.

Is he open-raising a lot from late position? Then you might have found your way into a terrible nitty game. At 4/8, there shouldn't be that many hands folded around to late position. This would be an example of the higher level games being better for you than the lowest game.

Yes and no. The meaning has probably changed a bit over the years. ABC used to be more synonymous with "fit-or-fold" (weak-tight play). But I view it more about straightforward fundamental play.

What hands do you normally play?

Yes and no. When a good player is experimenting with something, it's because he thinks it's a better way of doing it. It's usually not about making random adjustments to see what happens. The problem is that the feedback loop is SLOW.

Let's say you want to try opening up your game, so you decide to start raising 76s UTG to see what happens. How many hands do you think it will be before you figure out whether this is helping or hurting your game?

Even if you change that to a range of hands (all suited connectors down to 76s) it will still take you hundreds of hands before you are likely to get your first opportunity.

So nobody can draw useful conclusions about these types of adjustments without tons of hands. There needs to be a different way of assessing it.

I don't know if it makes sense to "want to play loose [by nature]." I don't know if you're going down the right type of path here.

You continue to make solid points, and after tonight's session... the humbling continues unfortunately. I played for about 3 hours tonight and the cards just didn't seem to come and the odds weren't there to continue.

Considering my "bankroll", if it can even be called that, is in so much of a negative now, I'm going to pull back my playing a little bit so that I allow myself time to focus on the details that you've mentioned (also to start getting more into NLHE, since micro-stakes wont hurt me as much financially.)

Going back to the points mentioned, youre absolutely right. There's a lot going on in my head, and while I'm trying to remember a lot of various things, its not at the point of muscle memory yet. It's kind of analgous to the golf swing in a way. You should only try to focus on learning one or two small details at a time. Any more than that, and you're just going to botch the swing. Thankfully, I dont think the botching happens so much at the poker table - I just end up slowing things down and find myself just getting tunnel vision and getting emotionally swept away. Obviously, still not a good thing, but I'm sure you get my point.

Back to the case with dealing with the aggressor, it probably just takes practice like anything else. I'm sure I can search twoplustwo or go through my books on how to handle that. It's just such an uncommon problem that I was probably thrown by it. Another thing to add to my study to-do list I suppose. Question: Why would a nitty game be more common at lower stakes? Because some players might be so cheap that they're afraid to play, for example?

In regards to hands that I normally play, I just play whats recommended in SSHE unless it gets really short handed, and then, I follow the guidelines from Terry Borer's, Winning Short Handed... And even then, I don't have that stuff memorize, or the concepts down pat, like I'd assume you recommend I do. Or at least an understanding of them. Like in SSHE, they categorize hands based on high card strength, suitedness or connectedness. While I get that idea on a basic level, its, again, not somethign I have on muscle memory. I'll count the pot and see who's in with me, and who has/hasn't raised and will then act accordingly, but it can be a bit cumbersome. I end up so focused on that sort of thing, that its a challenge to try to remember it, on top of trying to read hands.

I did think that loosening up would be something beneficial, but I think all you've really been telling me now is to slow down and get everything else solid before going down that path. I also understand what you mean about that feedback loop being so slow. Again, a good argument for trying to learn ABC first before trying other things.

This has been great discourse dude. You've shown me that I need to just slow down and be more patient. Get the fundamentals down more second nature before trying to experiment. I will have more faith in ABC from here!

All good stuff. It still surprises me how fun this game is. It's incredible and I love how deep it is and the thinking required. I don't see myself getting bored with it anytime soon.

Thanks again.

I'm not going to respond to the whole thread point by point, but rather address the core issue.

When people start off, they generally play too many hands. Everyone gets that AA is good and KK is not as good but still good. But then you go down the line and somewhere around TT and it's not so clear that it's good. And when dealing with unpaired cards it's hard to tell how good AK is or whether AJ is better than TT or AJo is better than ATs.

(As a side note, the first time I played, I stumbled ass backwards into decent strategy because I lost a bunch of money at blackjack earlier but my friends really wanted me to fill up the table so I sat down and just played good pai gow poker two card hands - AJ+, 22+.)

You can go through a lot of math and figure out exactly which hands are how good, but you can also take the "someone's done this before" shortcut and read a book. Every book has starting charts, and each one is slightly different (that's fine, pick any one, I recommend SSHE). This is a lot like a golf drive that lands on the fairway, it doesn't guarantee success but it puts you in good shape.

You need to know your starting hands very well, and have the discipline to stick to whatever you decide. If you're supposed to fold 77, don't convince yourself that one time is okay or the jerk to your right plays everything and wins so you might as well.

In that context - that is, once you have that all down - it's time to start thinking about adjustments.

1. The adjustments should be minor. Don't jump from raising TT+, AK to raising 66+, A7s+, ATo+ - that's a lot of hands you're suddenly adding. Take the best hand you'd fold and play it, or the worst hand you'd play and fold it.

2. The adjustments should be in line with broader context. So don't play 76s one hand because you're feeling it and then fold 87s the next because you're not. I typically adjust by pretending I'm one position better or worse. So if I think I should adjust by playing more hands, MP3 becomes CO, or UTG becomes UTG+1. If I think I should adjust by playing fewer hands, BTN becomes CO or MP2 becomes MP1.

---

In general, people overvalue adjustments. The long run is very long in poker - a typical standard deviation is 15 BB/hr, meaning for a 4 hour session, a swing of sqrt(4)*15 = 30 BB (up or down) is going to happen with 83% probability and you're going to be within 60 BB (up or down) 95% of the time. If you are a +1 BB/hr winner (which is a good goal), you can have breakeven stretches of hundreds of hours, which is several months of play for a recreational player.

So looking at a single session or even a month's worth of play and trying to make adjustments is chasing ghosts.

---

As for your money situation, let me just start with if you can't afford to lose what's on the table, you shouldn't be gambling. Pay your rent/mortgage and bills and stock your kitchen, etc. Also have enough liquid assets to cover like 6 months of living expenses. Fully fund whatever retirement plans are offered to you and if you have kids fill a 529 or 530 plan. And whatever is left can be for hookers and blow (and gambling).

To that end, you don't need a gambling bankroll for 3/6, you need a gambling budget. Take $100 per session and whatever you don't lose put into a shoebox. By the time you want to play seriously, the shoebox should have a bankroll in it.

Nice Cali.

I'd like to expand on this part:

Definitely. There are much more important things to think about and discuss imo unless you have an online sample >100k tracked hands imo. Live? Even some lifetime samples, such as mine, are laughably small in comparison to any decent online player's graph.

----

So let's talk ranges:

You have hands that are definitely profitable, slightly profitable, slightly unprofitable, and definitely unprofitable.

The more poker you play and the harder you study postflop play, the better you will be at choosing to play the slightly profitable hands, while you will also get better at choosing to fold the slightly unprofitable hands. If you do play a lot more in the future, and if you study postflop play well, then more hands will become profitable for you.

This is why I recommend that beginners play a tight range compared to the range that I would recommend for players with more experience.

In a good loose passive game, I recommend that when it folds to you two seats from the button, you should raise a range like this:

66+, ATo+, A4s+, KJo+, KTs+, QJo, QTs+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, 87s.

The least profitable hands will be those that are listed, as they are all at or near the margin that separates profitable/unprofitable. While stronger hands, like 77, AJo, A5s, etc, will be slightly more profitable.

From earlier positions, I think you should be much tighter as your position gets worse.

Button ranges often get dismissed as unimportant in good loose passive games, but sometimes it does fold to you on the button at a small stakes table. I think this is a very profitable spot to be in because winrates are higher in short handed games compared to games with more players.

To illustrate this point, think about a 3 handed poker game. If the button is smart and is only choosing to play games that he can beat or breakeven in, then that means he expects to win an average from the button that exceeds his loss from the blind positions. Let's say he loses .75 small bets on average when he plays the blinds. If he's correctly estimating his ev, then he will win >.75 small bets on the button per hand. on average.

Of course, some hands win more than that, and some win less. If you go too far with widening your opening range, you will find that you reach the point of unprofitability. If you play enough hands that show a long term loss, you may find yourself unable to overcome the loss that everyone experiences in the blinds in the long run.

Honestly, you guys are writing so much, even I'm getting confused. Way TMI.

The guy has trouble figuring out how much money is in the pot, don't need a wall of text to help him out. In poker, you have to figure out what your opponent is thinking and adjust appropriately. Maybe you guys can use those skills wrt OP.