OK thanks folks. Just wanted to be sure I wasn't getting too out of line/spewing with these two hands. I ran into it both times (limped AK and AA). Hadn't been at table long enough to even think these hands were possible.

I've mentioned this before, but poker strat is kinda like a pendulum that slowly moves back and forth over time. At one time it was "raise to punish the limpers". I now believe the pendulum has swung towards "limp to punish the raisers" (and a large part of my preflop strategy revolves around this idea).

Git'satarp,imoG

wow

I am supremely grateful I have not run whatever way that gg has over his poker career to make him think the way that he does about the game.

GG, The more I play, the more I tend to agree with you.
I don't understand all the antagonistic responses your ideas get sometimes. I see it all the time. A guy is playing by the book, raising every hand he's in, making the usual cbets. A very predictable TA strategy.
Guys are just waiting to trap him, and a lot of times, it happens.
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about but one th I thing I do know, I'm with GG!

In a game where everyone and their grandmother now "knows" aggression wins (lol) and what dominated hands not to call with preflop, a pretty decent counter-strategy is limp-to-punish-the-raisers. All DR did in these hands is get stacks in hugely badly thanks to their play (although I don't agree with the villain who just limp/called in the AK case). Not saying DRs play was horrible in these cases (although I still fold KQo preflop here and don't believe completing ATs is horrible especially in this kind of environment), but his opponents play was likely better (especially if they are playing in a run-of-the-mill typical loose raisey game).

Gdisagree?G

This discussion is very definitely not a low-stress strategy question.

I think it is worth pointing out that limp-and-punish-the-raisers is effective if and only if the raisers are not playing a balanced game. And it is so terribly difficult to balance that the people who practice it are leaving their asses uncovered. Maybe the overall level of play at these stakes is so bad that this isn't an issue. Maybe.

An ancient, now supposedly obsolete, poker guru(Doyle Brunson), once said, and I'm paraphrasing, "you have to change gears". Nobody is advocating that always limping and never raising is the new GTO. Just thoughts from a fishy brain.

This isn't trolling due to reasons.

I'm not sure what this means / what you're getting at?

What I mean is that most opponents simply open way too wide from way too early under the terribly misguided reasoning of "aggression wins".

GcluelessaggressionnoobG

Do you feel like most of your player pool are maniacs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a very good point. I think even the best players also forget sometimes, and I'm definitely not suggesting I'm in that category, not by far, that an important part of poker is also deception.
Fish(food)forthought.
Sorry GG for plagiarizing your style

Ok. A low stress hand submittal that possibly highlights and exposes my lack of poker skill(donkey). And, also to push this back in the right direction.

I open in late position to 18(or 16?), after several limpers, with Jacks at a 1/2 table.
Get a call from a LAG in the BB. All others fold.

Flop comes 8 6 2. BB checks, I cbet to 20.
Lag check raised to 40. I'm confused(I'm a donkey after all).
Looks like a perfect board for a flopped small set for him. Of course, I can't fold to a LAG, to a min check raise.
I call.
Turn king . I check call 25. My thinking, King shouldn't have changed anything. I was either way ahead/ way behind on Flop.
River a blank, I check call 25 again.
This River bet by villain stinks of a value bet.
I can't fold now and make i crying call.
Villain turns over K T o and leaves me questioning my whole existence.
lol. Ok. Maybe not the whole!
I shortly contemplated 3 betting villain after his check raise on flop.
I smelled a bluff but decided to take the more passive line because I've been over aggressive in these type situations lately, and it hasn't been working out for me.
Should I have check folded Turn.
How badly did I play this hand?

Please try to include stack sizes in the hh and dont put results into the hand, they bias comments. Overall I think you mostly played fine and I would mark this villain as a bad player. I am definitely not folding an overpair to his min checkraise on the flop so I like the call there, I'm generally calling and letting him continue to barrel with his bluffs.

On the turn he bets 25 into a pot of around 120, so no way I'm folding going to continue to call and evaluate. At this point he is clearly a nooby player taking weird lines with poor betsizing so I'm just going to call given the good price and evaluate the river.

The river is an interesting spot. Betting the same size is usually a common low stakes leak that says a player has a relatively mediocre hand. You can go for a bluffraise here but I think JJ is too strong to do that. I'm calling and expecting to be good the approximately 10% we need given pot odds when he shows up with some random FOS bluff.

Sometimes you're gonna run into people who play hands in a nonsensical way and win (a hand).

But realistically what he did is button clicking. The flop clickback is awful, the river sizing is awful, the call pre is marginal at best (gotta be pretty deep to defend that hand). The only thing I don't absolutely hate about how he played his hand is the turn bet that gets you to call with pretty much your entire range that called the flop raise.

Hand is well played.

Never fold the flop. And lol V for ck/rs air, getting there with 3 outs and not getting value.

He played bad, got there, and still lost long term EV.

Thanks to everyone for the quick responses. Yes, I posted this hand differently, not paying attention to the normal protocol for this thread. Note taken.
Yeah. After hand, I couldn't help thinking that maybe a big raise over the top from me, would have possibly taken the pot down right there.
A confidant told me, I'm thinking about the game the wrong way, it's not about taking down pots but about getting value. I guess he's right.

Interesting thing about villain. He ended up going all in and losing his whole stack on a, as best as I can remember, 8 Q 4 Q blank board.
Other guy has him beat but I forget exact holding, I think TT.
Villain gets up, turns over 8 4, and announces 2 pair!!!
Dealer pushes chips over to other guy, villain walks away.
I was thinking to my self, " wow, this guy is worse than
I could have imagined ". I was sort of dumbfounded.
I know .I'm a donkey, but how can I lose in these games,lol.

Calling my self a donkey constantly is not reverse sarcasim.
A poor attempt to pretend I'm good. I have some skill i think but for the most part, I'm a 52 year old who's been playing for 20 years recreationally and still has major knowledge gaps!
I'm truly a donkey(a reg who's still not very good).
But I'm constantly trying.
For anyone who cares.

This is simply not true. People still call with dominated A and K hands all the time and most of llsnl player pool doesn't "know" aggression wins



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

At my local cardroom I see some seemingly good winning players who often open limp or overlimp in a lot of pots. It really makes me reconsider if they are actually a good player or a marginal looser in the games. Post flop seems just OK but serious question: Is it possible to be a winning player in live poker when you're limping a large % of marginal hands?

Yes. Overlimping is often optimal in loose passive games.

i can't answer if limping a % of your hands is profitable or not. I'm certainly in no position to advocate one or the other(limping opposed to raising).
I did see a rather interesting hand play out my last session.
1/2, with UTG straddle. YWG raises it to 21. Gets a few callers.
He bets turn a good chunk. Sorry, wasn't in hand. Forgot exact bet sizes.
The short and the long of it is, it was a sizeable pot and he turned over pocket Kings and the other YWG, who seemed to be a buddy of his, showed T 8s.
T 8s made a flush and took down a sizeable pot. I'm in no way advocating not raising Kings. But, the moral of the story is, depending on table dynamics, raises don't always get us the results we would expect or have been taught to expect.

FYP

In this case I meant optimal in its standard meaning of "best", not its game theory meaning of "unexploitable." It is definitely not GTO, but it is often the best way too exploit.

You damn math people and your changing the meaning of words


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk