I just reread my OP and youre right. I did say hes a Euro kid who never limps. My bad.

If someone described a player as a Euro kid, I would assume hes much more aggro than this guy is. Again, my bad.

I played 2 1/2 hrs with the dude. Thats what? 70-80 hands. He raised about 10-11 times. For all I know he couldve card dead and been a 25/25 type player. You cant really expect me to have solid reads on the guy in 2 1/2 hrs.

He raised about 10-11 times. He never seemed to be out of line. He folded a lot post flop. He never got to showdown. There's no much info to go on.

I guess I shouldnt have ever said he was a Euro kid because it influences everything. Hes just a quiet guy who I heard speak one time and he had an accent. That's all.

As for the JTs/ AJs argument. I would absolutely rather defend against a 3 bet with JTs than AJs.

Your first post when you stated that you do not beat anything gave me the idea that you are checking 100% of the time.

I apologise m8, just got a bit impatient.

Just got this one thread of info on you that lead me to believe you do not play aggressive poker. I understand that it's one hand and does not really mean anything but my read comes from your mentality. The mentality of putting villain on hands that have you beat rather than thinking about his entire range and how you can extract value from a large % of that range. J74 is a pretty harmless flop but you automatically assume that you beat nothing. I find this mentality detrimental to a players game. When I have QQ and the flop comes J74, I am thinking about all the Jx, 7x, 56-T9s that V could potentially have in his range and will call my flop bet. When the T peels OTT I think about the gutshots that that now also have a pair or the pairs that now have a gutshot and will probably call another bet. I will also be thrilled as I probably overbluff this spot but happen to have value this time. I will be betting big here. I don't auto-think, OMG T peeled now I lose to TT, 89s, and JTs.

What about implied odds of calling with AK/AQ? What about calling the turn with these hands and bluffing river on a straightening card like 8 or 9? With that much money behind, I'm not folding.

Ok this was a slightly extreme although when a good aggro regular check/raises me on a flop this dry I don't see myself folding the flop. But what you stated is clearly results oriented as maybe you check back the flop and don't allow yourself to get three streets from a dominated Kx in a similar scenario.

I misread the part about limping. I thought you said 16% when he doesn't limp. Sorry. But you are backpedaling about the player's description and arbitrarily thinking he won't open AJs or KJs or QJs or JTs (why??)

I agree a 16/16 player is a TAG. But that's an average and in fact about what I average if we're talking VPIP/PFR. And I open about 10% UTG. There is no contradiction. I don't get how you label him a 16/16 TAG but think he's opening like 3 to 4 percent UTG. That is a nit opening range and what I focused on in my response since we've been talking about what a solid TAG who never limps would open UTG not what his total stats are.

Besides, this stuff is new information. All we know is your initial read. And you seem to be missing the point about your read being accurate. Of course over 80 hands you can't have anywhere close to a perfect read. You make the best guess you can. Your educated guess was presented as this guy being a solid ABC TAG. To me that means you think he's a TAG who wins something like 6+ BB/hr. A pro basically, but not necessarily a crusher. And you form your ranges for this hand based on that, not from information you've gained three days later. Any information gained after the hand is irrelevant to your evaluation of this hand.p Thinking otherwise is being results oriented.

And the open range I gave is very standard UTG TAG opening range. I cited two sources of similar ranges from very credible expert sources, CLP and Janda. Here is another (IMO slightly less credible) from Jonathan Little's Small Stakes Poker Cash Games book

22+, AJs+, KQs, QJs, JTs, T9s, 98s, AQo+ (10.1%)

The composition is a little different and Little describes it as overly tight, but the % is similar. Little focuses on hands that are easy to play.

And another from Ed Miller in The Course

22+, A2s+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, T9s, 98s, 87s, 76s, AQo+ (14.3%)

I think this is a bit too loose except in very tight games, but the point is every single source I have checked written for low stakes cash games has suggested UTG opens of 9 to 14 percent. That's pretty much the definition of "standard".

A solid TAG should indeed be opening *something like* what I posted in a 200BB game, and I haven't seen any logical refutation of this from anyone, just comments about how it's way too loose and absurd hyperbole that I better bring 10 buyins even though I've been using this range (I deviate based on table but it's my average more or less) averaging over 10BB/HR for the 1500 or so hours I've accumulated since moving here.

Raise the river you fish. 😘

Meanwhile just downbet flop and even the bad turn, say, 50/90 to make some money from heroing pairs, then aim to ck back riv.

This example is different. The BB is an aggro player, and checking back to induce is perfectly fine as an exploitative play and to deviate from "standard" play. This hand is not the same. There is literally no valid reason to check flop in this HH.

This would probably be pretty close to what I do most of the time.

I hate when people tell me something wont work because lots of what they tell me wont work, does work for me all the time. But, I dont see any way raising this range is profitable from UTG in a full ring game. It certainly isnt what Id call a TAG. Thats LAGgy as hell. If its working for you, then I applaud you, but if you come to my table, I will 3 bet the living hell out of you. I'll 3 bet you lite constantly, but even with standard players you should be getting 3 bet way too often.

Ive seen guys come and go playing like that but not one has lasted more than a month or 2 in my room. I have to assume its because they aren't winning. Most of them came from the online 6 max games and that amount of preflop aggression just doesnt work live.

If youre raising 14% UTG, what are you raising in LP? 35%?
A player like that must be playing like 30/25 or maybe higher. I only know one guy who plays like that who I think is a winner, but its tough to tell because his stack is up and down so much and he tops up so often that theres no way to know if hes winning or losing. This guy plays very well post flop and is tough to play against so he probably does win but I doubt many people can do it.

When people talk about needing crazy large sample sizes to determine win rates or when they talk about 8-10 buy in downswings being common occurrances, I always laugh. But playing like this Im sure those things are true.

Again, I hate when people say something wont work so maybe I open up even more in EP, but I definitely think youre overdoing it.

I raise a suited small Ace occasionally if the table is tight or something like 86s now and then but I cant see that as standard at all.

Maybe Ill actually read a book and see if it can change my mind. Whats the name of Little's book that you are talking about?

I had KJ. Not AK. How often am I getting 3 streets from a guy and he has KT or less in a raised pot? Just about never. I see people try it and I watch them go down in flames all the time.

Lots of people would say raising KJ from MP at all is -EV because you get called by dominated hands too often. There's no way you can get 3 streets long term.

The better plan is to plan in advance to get 2 streets with TP and then depending on the villain figure out which 2 streets is best. If he chases draws, bet the flop and turn. If he is more likely to have middle pair and think its good if you check the flop, then bet the turn and river.

This particular villain is aggro enough that I know if I check a Kxx flop he will assume I dont have a King and try to barrel me off of QQ-TT for 2 streets.

In sentence 2 you do what you say you hate people doing in sentence 1.

I use Ed Miller's range at lots of tables. I win with this range. It could be I'd win more if I tighten up. idk. Always reassessing.

And yes, if somebody starts abusing me with the 3bets, I adjust. No biggie. It's part of why 3x works so well in the first place, all the options are available.

This same friend just sent me the quote from the book that talks about opening range from EP and it specifically states he is talking about playing a typical 1/2 game. Maybe you think 2/5 isnt different but I think theres a huge difference.

Idk, I have gotten 3 streets of value with KJ quite often and gotten snapped by regs holding Kx. You dominate all Kx apart from some percentage of KQ which is 3bet at a decent frequency, AK i expect to be 3bet close to 100% of the time by regs.

But then again maybe I have a much more aggressive image than you which lets me get paid off. Another important note is that V is in the bb so I expect him to continue with a grand majority if not all of his Kxs, and his KTo. Sure every once in a while I end up value-owning myself but I think I make up for it for the times I get 3 streets or stack a non-believer.

I would use a much weaker king like K9 or weaker to check-back a high % on the flop vs a reg. But thats just my take on the situation.

Vs. a fish I am going to try to get the whole stack in the middle by the river depending on how deep we are.

Its just a difference in styles. Im not saying your way wont work. It also depends on your table. My room is pretty nitty. There are a few donks who call raises with K4s but I honestly cant remember them calling 3 streets with TP. Im sure its happened and they didnt show but it has to be super rare.

Also, dont forget that when you have KJ, there are 2 kickers that beat you and 4 that could pair on the board most times. If the board is K7493, you beat KT, K8, K6, K5 and K2 and lose to AK, KQ, K9, K7, K4 and K3.

You lose to more hands than you beat and you are much much more likely to get called 3 streets (or raised) by the hands that beat you than the K4, K3 type hands. AK, might 3 bet you preflop, but the same donks that call raises with K4s also just call with AK most of the time.

Do yourself a favor and keep accurate records and results of all of your KJ/QT/JT/KT type hands. You might be surprised by the results you see.

I agree that 2-5 typically plays quite different from 1-3 or 1-2. We seem to be in the minority in that opinion around here.

I know we've gotten way off topic of the hand but this conversation has actually turned interesting.

Lets talk about TAG and "standard"

Standard is what most people would do
TAG is obviously Tight Aggressive.

Tight implies playing less hands than the avg player or in this case raising less hands than the avg player since we are talking about raising.

What do we think the avg persons raise percentage is UTG? How about a raising percentage in general?

Forget about what some book says. That book is written buy a guy who doesnt even play poker anymore. Id much rather pick the brain of a good LAG who is beating my games with lines that confuse me or lines I want to get better at using, than some guy who wrote a book years ago, doesnt play anymore and who knows how long its been since he played in low stakes games.

There's no way the avg player in a 2/5 game is raising anywhere near 14% so if you're raising UTG 12-14% you aren't tight. You are looser than avg which makes you loose. That's a LAG raising range in a 2/5 game. In a 1/2 game its insanity.

Do I raise that much in EP when I play 1/2? Yes I do, and people think Im insane. They certainly don't think Im "tight" because Im crazy loose compared to what they are used to seeing.

Obviously the avg person is way too passive, but when we say tight or loose we are comparing to the avg person.

End of rant.

I don't think I'm nitty at all,
most of the time I'm accused of being a Maniac playing any two cards

to me TAG stands for tight , opening from UTG with K10 or Q10 is not tight

maybe its the fact I play mostly noon to 5 Monday thru Friday and you guys play nights and weekends

but I can tell you with an open UTG range like you posted you would be an ATM machine to these guys

In all honesty, Id rather sit down with Shai and pick his brain about poker, than Ed Miller. He and I play differently and have had plenty of disagreements in the past about playing styles but hes been right about some of them and I think he could teach me more than Ed Miller ever could.

I disagree with him about his raising range from UTG being optimal but that doesnt make it -EV, and I like to contemplate anything that may be able to make me better. Regardless of what it may seem like to people here.

Yeah i like this line a lot.

Yeah when I bet three streets and get snapped off I just assume they have a weaker king or a middling pocket pair, as they just muck when they are beat.

If I get raised that is an entirely different situation. Also there are many instances where one of the low-cards pair giving V less combos that have me beat.

As I said sometimes I value-own myself but IMO i profit more by betting three streets when I raise and get called by the BB who will have a lot of those dominated Kxs combos. And when betting 3 streets you can also look at the suits of the low cards to discount certain combos of Kxs. If you start doing this you will find that there are in fact a lot more combos that you have beat than have you beat. So the way you are adding up combos is flawed.

Lastly, KT, QT, JT I probably won't be betting for three streets all the time when you pair the top card (QT/JT probably never) but if the board is T-high I will definitely be betting KT for 3 streets on clean runouts and QT to some frequency on clean runouts.

If a donk happens to have AK or KQ then so be it. I don't really see it happening with AK that often as when donks calls pre instead of 3betting it, they tend to massively overplay their hand and let me get away cheap. (atleast the donks where I play)

I advocate this specifically to a BB's range btw... not a CO flat range or sb flat range...

^
There's a difference between getting "3 streets" in a single raised pot and getting "3 streets" in a bloated 3bet UTG vs UTG+1 pot with QQ. Sometimes 3 streets will cause you to go broke in a huge pot with a medium strength hand.

An overpair on a dry board is a medium strength hand?
Sometimes 3 streets will double you up in a huge pot.

He provided no explanation at all, except to make the obviously false statement that were near the top of your range. In reality this is probably the worst hand we'd consider calling with.

By the way there's no preaching there. Preaching requires exposition, which is conspicuously absent. Why don't you, or him, explain?

No?

In addition to poker in general, he can talk to you about books to read.

Don't assume it's Little's which you mentioned picking up. IIRC that wouldn't be his first choice.

The more I think about it, I really dont care to read any poker books at all.

There is much better and more relevant info to be had by watching good players and discussing hands with them.