I see every thread here about a villian who check raises or shoves on a street and we say just fold. It seems that we as good players should be able to use that line or have a defense against it.

Aa on 954 board and we are crai so we say fold w just 1 pair. I get that its villian and spot dependent but our default is to play nitty poker.

What if we were the ones to always apply pressure non stop. Who cars what our cards are. If we raise pre. Cnet flop. Shove turn. The villian should fold a lot of the time. Not always and we screw outlrselves a lot but if we look into fe calculators and get a 50% fold then this might work.

I just want to see us evolve from nit it up poker and low stakes. Not sure if this is the way but there is a better strategy than abc nitfest.

They just tell you to fold. I bet any money most of the people in this forum still cant fold Aces on a dry board for 300bb. I bet they cant fold QQ for 300bb either. Most of them are morons who pretend there good. Listen being nitty in certain situations is right but when you think I should fold 97cc with 700 in front of me in a 1/2 game for 8 dollars against 3 idoits with 200+ in front of them then keep waiting for your big pocket pairs and have fun grindin out that rent money. +1 CAP217

People play nitABC poker because it simply works in low stakes live + have low swings. Mind that most people who play this games barely have any poker roll (and/or experience). As long as there are loose donk who will pay them out, you will see this nitfest.

You really aren't paying attention if that is what you are reading in every thread.
As for the bolded? Go for it. Keep me posted. Let me know how that works out for you.

No, it is spot dependent for sure but I cant coment on spots I dont know about.

I made this because of 2 reasons. First, I dont think that ABC nit is the way to crush 1/2 or 2/5 NL. Is it profitable? Yes, probably but this is where you grind out the $10-15 an hour at 1/2 and thats good to some people.

I am not saying I am the top 1% of 1/2NL players at all!!!! But I do beat the game for a good amount. In my other posts I have said how much and even with my crazy downswing I am still beating it for over $20/hr. So I must be doing something right.

I just think there is a better way. I know this. During my downswing of 2.5 months I tried to play ABC poker. Maybe I did it wrong but I waited for good hands in position. I played the top 8% and 14% in position. I played them profitable (maybe not the most profitable) and all I did was lose with HUGE hands! Unlucky? Yes... But waiting for the hands and playing them then losing messes with your head. At least it did for me over this stretch.

[QUOTE=cap217;26288579]I see every thread here about a villian who check raises or shoves on a street and we say just fold. It seems that we as good players should be able to use that line or have a defense against it.

Aa on 954 board and we are crai so we say fold w just 1 pair. I get that its villian and spot dependent but our default is to play nitty poker.





You do read what you write before posting right?

At these low stakes, there isn't, IMO.

I'm curious as to (a) why you there is a better strategy than this one at this level and (b) why "abc nitfest" seems to have a negative connotation about it.

Gcurrentlywinning$20/hourusingabcnitstyleovermylolsamplesizeG

LLSNL shouldn't be applying pressure, they should be applying valuetown

2.5 months is a drop in the bucket. Try not to get too results oriented / tilty.

When you said you were losing with huge hands, do you mean huge preflop hands or huge postflop hands? A huge preflop hand isn't worth much postflop if it's still only 1 pair vs big action. On the other hand, if you were getting your money in good with huge hands postflop (i.e. sets+) only to get outdrawn/coolered a lot, then I think it's fair to probably chalk it up to variance.

And with big enough stacks and the proper table conditions, I don't think anyone here is advocating waiting around all day for AA. Obviously we should be getting into the action with speculative hands when the conditions are right.

But getting fancy postflop, especially anything more than a cbet vs people who can't fold, is generally suicide, IMO.

ETA: Is you're $20/hour playing "abc nitfest"? If so, what makes you think this game can be crushed for much more playing any other way? I mean, methinks you are crushing the game and just don't realize it.

Gyou'resucceedingbutyoudon'tknowitG

Here it is. And he DID read it before posting.

Guys, most of the time you are playing ABC players who play "their own" cards for the cards absolute value only.

So when they raise????

I have been beating 1/2 quite easily for some time playing (mostly) ABC poker. Giving tickets to valuetown when I can, and making big calls when the villain's line doesn't make sense and/or I know his/her range is wide enough for the call to be profitable.
ABC poker does include applying pressure in the right spots, and taking advantage of the fit/fold types.

Now ask yourself this - why is going for fat value profitable?
Simple - because most of our villains can't fold. It is their number one mistake, and we take advantage of it whenever we have the opportunity. That is also why applying pressure with any two cards just to be aggressive often won't work at these levels - our villains can't fold.
To crush a game, your best avenue is use your opponents weaknesses against him.
Have a table of weak-tights who cave under pressure on the turn? Then by all means become more aggressive and put them in spots where they will make their "good" lay downs.
Try that against a table of loose passive calling stations and be ready to call for chips.

What great strategy could there be? You're either going to call or fold, and that decision depends on your knowledge of how the villain plays. Can you put him on a range? Does he crai with a set, overpair, draw or 2 pair. Have you seen him bluff in this spot previously and get called. If so what did he have at showdown? What is your image? There's also the metagame to consider. Without decent reads it' a coin flip. If it's a coin flip for my 100 bb stack I fold. I"d rather lose 4 or 5 bb and live to fight another day.

Cap, attempting to "fix" what isn't broken is what you are doing when trying to force your way out of a bad run. Most players attempt it anyway every time. Makes no logical sense though.

And I will agree though, for any 2-5 game (with players who do try and make laydowns and play "good" so to speak), then this is the level where other than ABC starts bringing extra profits. Maybe some 1-2 games could, but I doubt it. First, I feel fairly sure that BigSkip can tell you very accurately how much SAP (super advanced play) can be profitably used in 1-2 games. Second, you can probably count on your hand the number of players capable of well executed SAP plays at the 1-2 level. (It cannot hardly exist since the variables necessary for SAP are usually not there, so please don't anyone chime in and say they run over 1-2 games with elaborate bluffs and semi bluffs etc. It just doesn't happen in the real world that I have seen anyway)

I beg to differ if you can't fold AA or QQ on the flop for 300bbs then you don't need to hang out on 2+2. That shouldn't be a problem.

As for your 97s hand. I think its a horrible hand especially if your not raising with it. Anybody should know we are at the beginner level. So we don't have to get crazy with bluffs.

ABC poker is not waiting for big pairs. ABC poker has hand ranges for each position. Tighter up front looser in the back. ABC poker means you don't raise bottom 2pair. ABC poker uses hand strength according to board texture and what street your on.

The money making hands in LLSNL are pairs, connected broadway's and Axs. With no FE preflop its just not smart to bloat the pot, unless you have 2 cards over 9. Low suited connectors just don't play well with no FE.

I think a fair amount of time when you see people saying to fold stuff like small suited connectors, small suited gaps, and small pocket pairs, its usually because were oop and/or in early position.

Just remember, most of the threads of here and posted because the player has actually called and lost.

I somewhat agree with OP. I think we are too regularly "trying to find a fold". Maybe the reg. posters are trying to work on cutting down on bad calls or more likely the forum should be called "LLS-TAG NL" threads. Taken in that context there is a lot of good info in this room. I do think it would be nice to hear from more LAG posters though

Answer this: do you think most players lose more money from bad folds or bad calls?

Good LAGs make good folds as well.

The reason most people are nitty is that they are in highly raked games such as $5 drops or 10% capped at $8 etc... Its not worth playing around with marginal hands because of this rake preflop.

Decisions on the flop such as the folding AA to a check/raise is all dependent on who you are up against, and there are some people that I will insta fold to in that particular spot.

Oh nodoubt bad calls. that's why i think a lot of Lag players(successful ones) started out playing TAG. I'm not saying Lag is better, They are both profitable styles. I just think to recognize a good fold as a lag you have to have at very least a decent understanding of a TAG players style.

I heard on a podcast that at lower limits its not so much as LAG vs. TAG image as it is Winning vs. Losing image (as pertaining to the current session). I like to play more TAGgish until I cultivate a winning image with the table then start gearing towards LAGgy play until the dynamics change and tell me I'm pushing the table boundries too far (villains start playing back at me more)... Then repeat process.=== highly profitable

The OP is understandable. When we started with NL poker, most of us believed that winning poker was about running roughshod over the table while making sick bluffs. If we progress, we start playing TAG, because it is easier to learn and most beginning authors start there. We learn there is a lot more to NL poker than bluffing. In fact, bluffing is really only a small part of the game.

Yet no matter how much we learn, there still that core noob in us that is convinced that long term success in poker is about running over the table and making sick bluffs. Based on my data of the top winning on-line FR microstakes and low stakes players, almost to a person they play tighter than the average player at their stakes. No consistent winning player is much looser than the average.

I love Venice10's post always well composed. My point is that Tag is profitable if played well. Lag is profitable if played well. I also believe that its not so much about a Tag/Lag running sick bluffs, as it is about putting our opponents to tough, prefferably unwinnable calls, and the situations where those "tough unwinnable calls" are found, are very different depending on if you are viewed as loose/tight, winning/losing, regular/unknown.

I think our goal in this forum is to become tougher opponents to play against, as well as understanding our opponent thus making them easier to play against. To properly balance our learning we have to look at the coin from both sides, and think outside the box enough to realize if the box is correct or not. I personally like it when a poster comes up with a line that is not the norm. It brings up much more useful discussion (as well as some flaming) and that is what should be happening in a strategy & theorythread.

I blame Super System.

Most people who try to play a LAG game end up spewing badly. In theory both can make a lot of money if played well against the right opponents, but consistently playing weaker holdings puts you in a lot of tough/marginal spots. It gives you a lot more room to make bad decision after bad decision. Im also pretty sure you have to bluff a lot more as a LAG because those weak hands will not have enough showdown value. So now you try to bluff people who you should be value towning and end up just taking yourself to value town.