If you can make the presumption that someone is tight with a small sample size you can make a presumption that someone is a nit with a small sample size but w/e I don't won't to derail the thread on this.

I think the hand is an interesting one and I think that there is more to think about then just shoving chips in as fast as possible

No to derail but,

A nit is a tight passive player who plays only nut/near nuted hands. They do not like confrontaions and avoid big pots with less than the nuts/near nuts. They hate to gamble and have an immortal fear of the nuts. If you assign a pre flop raising range of KK+ (aggressive nits add QQ/AKss to that range ) you are playing against a nit.
If you see somone called a raise on the BUT, called a c bet on the flop/ checked back the turn/ and called a river bet and showed AK on an A or K high and safe board, you are playing against a nit. Abuse their passive nature by relentlessly pushing them off the pot/ stay out of their way when they start betting/raisning unless you have nuts/near nuts. Generally speaking, they are of older age, but I have seen a few younger nits mostly becasue they are on scare money.

A TAG, on the other hand, plays more hand especially IP, and you will see more raises in LP/ especially on BUT and squeeze plays from them. If they enter a pot, you can expect them to play the few hands they play very aggressively

OK, now back to our regularly scheduled hand, PAHWM Add1d from SB

Pair plus an oesd? I see people raise this. My assumptions are different than yours.

I don't think this card changed anything. I expect villain to bet if checked to most of the time. I also don't think leading out or c/r will garner any fold equity because if villain raised us on the flop he's continuing with this blank on the turn. This is because what do we really represent as help with the 5h?

As for implied odds I don't see villain paying off too much if a diamond hits because our hand looks like a draw (if we c/c on the turn). Based upon my assumptions I put villain on two pair type hands, pair + draw and rarely a set.

It really does not matter what you call players. To sum it up, you can pretty much put low stakes players in 2 categories. That's tight/passive and loose passive. You will rarely see a 24/19 LAG or a 18/15 TAG,etc. Most people stats including this forum are 25/10, 18/8 or 12/6 etc. You will rarely see aggressive players. A lot of people advocate they are TAG/LAG, Which is false.

In a nut shell its no difference between a NIT or tight passive. All the arguing is just bickering.

That is one reason you are terrible.

Do you judge people at the table as categories or individually?

The answer is individually, so why wouldn't I do the same. Categories are just like politics. You still have to pay attention and adjust individually.

I advised those categories because low stakes are passive players and you can't argue that. People limp too much and are rarely aggressive without the nuts or near nuts. Anyone who assess someone's poker skill off a post is terrible. Poker is so complex if you think on a high level that you can't put into words. Why you think ivey never wrote a book? Or never thought he could teach poker? Ill tell you why because cpu jockey's like you will take his words and misinterpret them.

Tight old mem raise qj on this board?you're right my assumptions are diff than yours

Given the line you took so far, c/c would be the default play here. the villain will bet most of the time when checked to him. What I think happened is, the villain connected on the flop but not big, maybe with hands like KT, AK, AQ, so he's trying to charge you to draw and since no draw got there on the turn he'll most likely continue to barrel. This is just an assumption, it's really hard to tell what is going on when you only have 15 hands history with him.

I like the cold-call OTF personally. I'm calling a turn bet that isn't massive.

TBH at loose passive small stakes games playing somehting like a 22/13 is probably optimal. It is pointless to raise to $15 in position with 89suited in the CO if you automatically bloat the pot up 4-5 ways. Sometimes you are forced to whack-a-mole postflop (in position of course) and play a LITTLE bit of fit or fold. anyone agree with this? I know this style is between tight passive than "TAG", but we have to adapt accordingly if we simply cant iso

TOM raise "for information" a lot on these boards with hands like qj, then shut down if they don't hit.

Do you think a tight old man is going to pay you on any of your outs? If you hit a flush he's likely to shutdown. If you hit a straight there is 4 to a straight so he is likely to shut down. If you hit two pair there is four to a straight he is likely to shut down(if you aren't beat already).

With him limping UTG and then raising this flop I would put him on nothing under two pair so I wouldn't give him much fold equity if any.

This is a really tough spot.

Maybe c/r flop was the correct play on this board texture.

Tight old men DO pay off when the draws hit - IF they have a big hand themselves. If he's got a straight or a set or even top two, he is more likely to pay you off because, well, he can't fold, can he??? Look at this hand!!!

He'll stare at his cards, mutter, show them to his neighbor, but he will more than likely call.

I think so, that or check/ call if a nit bets.

I really dislike bet/call out of position as it kind of turns your hand abit face up. If I'm going to lead out I will also b/3b3t even vs nit, you will be surprised you can get alot of credit for a low straight here b/c your in the blind. I think two barrels would even fold out top two if you followed through on turn.

I don't think it is pointless to raise in the CO with 89 suited. You bloat the pot up in position and have the initiative because you raised preflop. The point ANL made and which I agree with, is that when you limp preflop, you are playing just like everyone else that limps in. You are looking to make a hand.

+1


I think Venice needs to bring back the "Lottery Poker" post and sticky it on the main page. That post was gold and quite frankly changed my whole way of thinking. But that was when I was a lurker and not a poster. So maybe he didn't think it was optimal for a sticky.

If the lottery hit 1/20 times and payed 100x the price of a ticket, would you play?

Lottery poker can be very profitable in the right circumstances. It shouldn't be all you know how to do, but if the table is selling tickets for less than their EV, buy a couple.

This. As always it is making the correct (most EV) decision based on every single factor, which can easily making limping 89 good. It is stupid to play a hand a certain way based on some over arching philosophy.

Not only is lottery poker -EV. But it also give's you less options and less cards to make a hand. Before I get flamed, ill give you guys a hint for postflop play. Ever heard the term 4card flops? You can't get that vs loose passives in a limp pot. Every LP Donk(90% of Low stakes) says "I has toppest pair OTF, I need to bet, its a limped pot". So it makes limping difficult postflop with no aggression pre.

Tell me how it is negative EV to call in position with a small PP 150BBs deep with 5 limpers, 2 of whom will stack off with any TP? And this circumstance is not rare, IME.

No more hints please.

Yes, that was a very good thread, but you did post in that thread. Remember?

link

Who is CaliDonks? Because that post makes no sense.