Of course there are weak-tight players who can be easily pushed off of their hands. However, I don't think I'm projecting onto this opponent my own TAG/sLAG tendencies. Rather, I was suspicious of your reads and plan since I have rarely come across an opponent for whom all of the following would be true:

1) Accurately described as "very weak-tight, scared money"
2) Playing short-stacked
3) Limp-calls OOP with a hand as weak as QJo
4) Calls the flop with TP, meh kicker, only to fold the brick river for less than a psb after the turn was checked behind.

Maybe the above types of opponents really do exist. However, since I believe they are rare, I would not try to push a short-stacker off a hand as strong as TP with a river bet, even if I thought that she was weak-tight.

In addition, if I thought that she was really afraid of the flush, I would have just bet the turn and then checked behind on the river, especially since even scared fish would usually assume that you would have bet the turn with a flush (except possibly for the nut flush).



The problem with the above is that you are trying to justify the plan of limp-calling OOP against a nitty TAG with a garbage hand in the hopes of either:

1) Floating and bluffing him off his hand;
2) Hitting gin and stacking him.

With respect to #1, it is difficult to imagine that this can be profitable, since unless he is very weak-tight you are going to need for him to have overcards, whiff with them, and either consistently fold his overcards to a donk bet and/or have a scary enough board where he might also fold overpairs to the turn donk bet. If the above is true, then you might as well limp-call OOP with nearly ATC...although I can't imagine this being +EV unless the opponent is very weak-tight.

With respect to #2, have you stopped to consider how often you will hit gin and stack him? I think it's fair to say that you essentially hit gin, yet won probably about as much as you were going to win from this Villain--which was less than 13x what you called PF. Consequently, even with ideal conditions, you ended up receiving less than 13:1 on your PF call, which would seem to suggest that you don't have the implied odds to call unless you believe that you can up your implied odds by pushing him off of his hand a significant portion of the time.

Finally, with respect to answering how I would play this hand, I would not have been in this situation, since preflop I would have either raised initially or open-folded; I would never limp-call with these cards OOP against a nitty TAG.

Because I'm adjusting to the table dynamics. Also, please keep in mind much like TV poker, I'm only posting a small percentage of hands and I'm posting my "significant" hands which will skew my range and play. I'm not posting the 90% of ho-hum hands where I raise preflop, get called, and win with a c-bet or hands where I limp or call a raise and have to fold flop.

I want to comment on this. Firstly, I play 5/Tnl and 10/20nl in Vegas and beat those games. I find Vegas easier than here for the simple fact that players tend to be more ABC.

As for me being "owned" with 3-bets. I want you to picture this. There is a player that raises most of his hands 3bb - 4bb, you are OOP and 3-bet this player 9bb - 14bb, said player calls you, eff stacks 300bb+. Flop is X Y Z. You bet, he calls. Turn is W, you bet, he raises you, now what? You are out of position and you have a ton of money behind and the board is random garbage and your villain has shown down monster "garbage" hands in spots just like this...

I know its easy to say, "yeah dgi, i'd own you if you were at my table..." (you didn't say it but you implied it) when you can see my cards in these hand histories. In fact, 20% of my villains actively read this thread. But it's a much different story when I'm at your table and you don't see my cards and your awesome preflop 3-bets and c-bets don't make me tremble in fear and fold. Not to mention ABC type players or even competent TAGs play their hands face up as far as I'm concerned which is why I can have a high degree of confidence in the atypical lines I take against them. Of course I will make the occasional mistake and I don't mind posting those as well so I can keep this thread "honest". But keep in mind that when I post a mistake, its 1, 2, or 3 misplayed hands out of a 6, 8, or 10 hour session.

I know this will sound arrogant, but what do you think the HHs of Gus Hansen, Phil Ivey, or Durr would look like? I'm not saying I'm on their level by any stretch of the imagination. But when you look at the HHs of a player that is more skilled at TAG/LAG play than you it will often look donkish. FWIW, I'm not some luckbox donk. I have over 20 of these high limit sessions under my belt as well as thousands of hours of 2/5nl under my belt with a 10bb+/hr winrate. So I know all about ABC and TAG play. So I have the expertise to deviate from that play "in the right situations" which is what I do at this game. ANd the reason is because at this level, ABC play is just not enough to beat the game. Period.

There are several very competent very skilled ABC players that routinely play the game. Their play is 100% text book. Their raising range is JJ+, AK, AQs, KQs. Their limp range in position is SCs, broadways, and Axs, and their limp/calling range to 3-4bb bets is 22-TT, A2s - A5s, ATs-AKs. Their 3-betting range is exclusively QQ+.

These players at best are breakeven players at this level. I've yet to see them walk away from the table a winner even when the deck is smashing them in the face because every other thinking player at the table knows how to avoid them or destroy them when deep.

yeah, that one and my tournament play in general has been horrific. Back before black friday I would have never made that mistake or some of the other mistakes I've made in tournaments which is why I'm revamping my tourney game with books and training vids. But in all honesty, most of my tournament mistakes is due to bleed over from all my cash game play. I've got to put a better dividing line in my head separating cash game play vs tourney play

I want to focus specifically on the bold here as I think it may epitomize the difference between you and me. If I'm out of position vs a very aggro opponent, why on earth do I want to 3-bet and turn my non-value hand face up?

I would rather keep my implied odds high and my range wide by just calling with what I suspect is a much better hand. Remember the Gap Concept. It takes a better hand to call a raise than to make a raise. So I'd rather allow him to raise with a super wide range and then call that raise with a better hand (especially if I'm OOP).

I said V was very aggro, and the mistake players make against very aggro villains is to push them off their bs hands and turn our hand face up against them.

My play in that spot was designed to extract max value and you do that by understanding your villains' tendencies and exploiting it. In fact, if I had 3-bet that hand preflop and V calls, the entire sequence of action would have been different post flop and it would have worked in Villain's favor and he would have been able to successfully bluff me off this hand by shoving river (he definitely has it in him to shove for $5k+ stacks on a bluff) and I probably would have been compelled to fold. I know that sounds results oriented but its not.

Against a very aggro villain in this spot OOP, calling pre with my hand and playing post flop with an underrepped hand is better than 3-betting. You just have to have confidence in your postflop game.

As for the QQ hand. Do you think V had AA or KK in that hand? Otherwise, I'm not sure how I lost a ton of value. Based on the action, V had TT/99 most likely and he would have folded to a 4-bet since my 4-bet frequency at the table was way too low to be called by TT/99 type hands... But a 4-bet in this spot isn't terrible and I probably would have done it if I was OOP and his raise came from the CO or BTN and he would have more incentive to call my 4-bet with a wider range. But since I was in position, flatting is best because now V will be compelled to continue his aggression on 100% of all flops and I will be last to act.

This bet was responding to villain weakness and if called my plan was to fire $1k on the river. Given how wet that board is and the fact I'm playing out of position, no way villain has a real hand on the turn with that weak ass turn bet but he is setting the price for gut shots or binking 2p on river. Also, in terms of my play, I like to mix in a check/raise every so often so that later when I check/raise villains can think its a bit fishy since they've seen me do it before and won't quite know what to make of it.

I know I'm coming off defensive with a lot of my post, but that T8 hand in my mind is the dividing line between winning players and players that CRUSH. I outlined in detail why and how. If you read through my arguments and still think that was a lucky donk play than I guess that is that.

But don't you think its suspect how decent LAGs just always "seem" to get "lucky" over and over and over again??? That T8 hand is the epitome of how we are just so lucky

I wanted to respond to this again as the bold is the key part. With my style of play, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I WANT MY OPPONENTS TO BELIEVE. I want my opponents to feel I can have any random hand when in reality its not as random as it appears. The ability to have "random hands" in these spots translates into a lot of value, fold equity, and deception making me really hard to play against.

It is the image of being hard to play against and hard to range that will multiple the value I can extract from villains in future hands.

Profitable poker at this level means I have to be aggressive. Since a lot of my villains at this level are winning thinking players that are often TAG/LAG hybrids and we are 200bb+ deep this means I will end up being in unusual spots with unusual hands. If I "only" play value hands or monsters than my frequency will be too low such that I'm easy to range and adjust to. Likewise I will miss out on opportunities to extract value.

I don't like this train of thought at all. the only reason I would/could 4bet/get QQ all-in pre for 200bb is if my 4-bet frequency was high enough such that my villains at the table would feel that it's profitable to call or 5-bet me with JJ/TT/99 type hands. Otherwise, when I 4-bet I end up folding out all the hands I crush and only getting called by AK and maybe JJ and when I get 5-bet it will exclusively be AA/KK/AK with most of the weight on AA/KK. Stacking off 200bb+ at this level with QQ preflop isn't smart and I would only do it against the aggro whale fish

Sorry my comments and responses seem arrogant and defensive. Not my intent, just trying to put my "thought process" out there because I know the reason a lot of people are following this thread is so they can "get inside the mind" of a midstakes/highstakes player.

I will end this post by saying that I am still making mistakes at this level and I still have lots to learn before I can officially say I'm crushing the 10/25nl. If I had to rate myself against the players I've been playing against I would say that out of the player pool of about 60 players, there are 5 players that are better than me and about 5 players who I think are equivalent in skill to me. So I'm in the top 16% which isn't good enough by any stretch to "crush" the game and I have to get better.

yeah, I was sitting at home and the table was calling to me....

I couldn't resist

If I raise river in that spot V is never calling, he folds or jams on me, and I don't think I want to bluff catch $3k with Q high. I like the maxim "Big hand big pot small hand small pot" and I think that applies here.

I'm fine just taking a bluff catch call down line here rather than trying to induce so I can bluff catch for $3k.

But this makes an interesting point, if I'm confident my Q high is good, why not try to get max value out of it by inducing a bluff by raising river.

The answer is






I made this point upthread in the beginning. The way you own aggro players is not to raise them off their bs hands, but rather to allow them to keep firing and call them down.

Why would I want to raise him on turn when the majority of his range is tilting airballs??? My plan is to 100% just call him down because if he had an Ace or King preflop he would have 3-bet me. So odds are my Q high is the best hand and he is just tilt firing. If I raise, then I get him to fold all of his air but only continue with hands that have equity....

So my plan was to just call him down no matter how the board ran out.

Dgi I love the thread and the analysis. Have you run into any scenarios at the 10/25 game where you find yourself in a leveling war with your opponents and plays start getting somewhat fancy. For example 3bet/fold the river to a nit who has been raising river for thin value. I'd imagine most of the leveling wars occur preflop. 3betting and 4betting light, as most hands avoid showdown. Obviously I play llsnl and these types of fancy plays are complete spew for 95% of villains.

I would just like to point out how bias may be impacting your ability to spot these types of players.

Since you believe they are rare, its no wonder you have trouble identifying them.

I would say they are not rare, I spot them all the time. I feel I'm very sensitive and adept at identifying player types. Some players may even start out normal stack then become short stack and their entire demeanor changes. Some players go on "Send me home" tilt while some players turn into weak-tight players because they don't want to bust out...

So I'd invite you to think about those points. If you think they are rare, then is it any wonder you fail to accurately profile them and spot them?

Problem is though that if she has a kicker she will call X% of the time and if she calls she may feel pot committed. However, we can still exploit her fear on river if a brick hits.

I know i know, checking turn and then betting river doesn't make sense and a part of us "feels" like villain will sniff that out and call right? Hence why you want to bet turn to better rep the flush.

the key here though is that "if" you recognize her for being weak-tight then you can exploit that with an obvious line that is low risk to you. We can just wait for a brick river, bet, and she will fold even though our hand is face up as not being a flush...

I want to focus on this. This is my bread and butter. I limp call ABC players all the time for the expressed purpose of bluffing them when they whiff since they are going to whiff 2/3rd of the time AND they give off sizing tells on the flop with their c-bets.

So yes, it is very profitable limp/calling ABC players whose raising range is easily defined BECAUSE they will miss 2/3rd of the time. We check, they c-bet, we call. Turn is a brick, we donk bet into them, they almost always fold their overcard air because they put us on hitting our hand or even a set. And again, I think you may be letting your bias influence how you see ABC players. Most ABC players WILL FOLD overcards when they whiff the flop, c-bet flop, get called, and then get led into on the turn...

Why? Because they aren't LAGs or TAGs but ABC players. And they aren't going to call chasing a 6 outer because they "pride" themselves on not drawing or chasing and likewise they just don't have it in them to bluff in these sorts of spots. So they fold like almost always.

I want to address the bold. If the ABC player's raising range was exclusively AK, AQ, AJ, KQ then we could absolutely limp call OOP with ATC. However, the ABC player's raising range also includes JJ, QQ, KK, AA therefore imo, we can only limp call with playable hands that can flop, turn, or river gin. So we target boards that likely missed their range (which will be 2/3rds of all flops) and we target boards in which we have some equity (pairs, SDs, FDs, pair + SD + FD combos, etc)

One thing I'd like to mention is that a lot of villains are weak-tight once you throw them off their game. A lot of players are so used to raising pre, c-betting, and taking it down that when you throw a monkey wrench into all that, a large percentage of players will turn into weak-tight players and fold.

Take for instance, the c/r. Ever notice how a lot of players will make an awesome c/r on a wet board and then when they are called they will check the next street? Those players were expecting to win with their awesome check/raise and then when it doesn't work they don't know what to do.

Same thing with a lot of ABC players who raise preflop and c-bet flop and then they get led into on the turn. What????

Those players were often expecting to take it down with a c-bet and then expecting action to check to them on the turn and then they can double barrel or just check back... but you lead into them on turn and they will almost always fold their airballs.

Then if you can couple the above line to reads and sizing tells and it becomes profitable to play a wider range against them.

You are absolutely right that if we are playing "solely" to hit gin and stack him we don't have the odds and it is -EV. Absolutely.

However, it becomes +EV when you include our ability to play back at him on boards we are sure he whiffed and the fact he's going to fold the majority of the time in those spots.

I say this all the time. The ability to profitably play SCs and S1Gs is dependant on your post flop ability. If you are trying to flop, turn, river gin then yes, you are right it is -EV to play those hands vs an ABC raiser. However, if you can play post flop and target boards that likely missed their range or you can target boards that are "scary" then it becomes profitable.

Fair enough.

The closest I've come to a leveling war was bluff catching the aggro with Q high. I've also been in the "middle" of a leveling war between two other players in the other session where I had Q6s and called a $1k on the river when the board went 4-to-a-flush...

but to date, I haven't been an any real leveling wars at 10/25nl yet. though I suspect next time I see the aggro villain from the other day we will get into a one .

I was joking about the Q7s hand...

Question: how often do you think about how you're playing your range in these hands?

I don't like a c/r in this spot because I lose all ability to control the pot if I c/r and am called. Plus I don't want to inflate the pot too much while out of position. I can achieve the same level of fold equity and stealing the initiative by simply leading out on bricked turns.

Also, I would rarely check raise this spot if I had flopped a set heads up vs an ABC player so not quite sure what I'd rep c/r'ing a dry board heads up. that sort of move feels more like "I put you on AK therefore I'm going to bet you out with my 7x hand..." which is awesome all the times we fold out AK but not so awesome the other times he has a value hand and calls. Then, I'm out of position in an inflated pot in a spot where I will feel compelled to continue my aggression and to rep a strong hand when in fact I would never take this line with a strong hand (set or overpair) heads up...

So I like a donk bet in turn much better. It serves to take the initiative, will fold out overcard airballs that are ahead of me, and serves as a blocking bet for my draws...

thanks for the kind words and hope this thread helps you with your game...

Actually, your "joke" is actually a good question and to me a litmus test of where I would like to be vs where I am at now.

Phil Ivey and Durr would have purposefully raised to induce V to bluff shove if they were confident in their reads and villain's tendency so they could call and extract more value.

I however, was just happy with my meager $700-ish line instead of having big enough balls to go for more value... HOpefully, I will get to the level where I can make that sort of play. I think being well rolled would have helped since I am not rolled for this game. I guess "technically" I am if you go by the 20 BI rule of thumb, but in my mind, I think I need 50BIs to be considered "well rolled" for this game and I'm not there yet.

probably 75% of the time. What I'm finding though is that I'm starting to autopilot this game and a lot of my moves/plays are automatic which I kinda don't like. But its hard "not" to engage that autopilot when you are playing 6, 8, or 10 hours sessions. I need to take more breaks and also think more about my range during hands vs various villain types.

But when I'm on my A-game, I'm definitely thinking about my range during the hand in question and what line I'm trying to rep, etc. etc.

I disagree that Durr or Ivey would have raised to induce purely because I doubt the strength of your read. I guess if we ignore its absolute hand strength and instead consider it on a scale of 1-10 (let's give it a value of 4), we might gain from an unbalanced 3bet range (like 10 combos of 1, 2, and 3 of 10, because presumably he's going to want a stronger value hand to 3b against our perceived nittier tendencies) and also fold out slightly better hands (any 6, 7 he might raise - I doubt this kind of player is well balanced in a river raising range though) from time to time due to our image.

I can't speak for anyone else but I certainly don't follow dgi to refresh myself on the 'fundamentals of poker.' I'm sure there are some great threads that speak to playing rock solid, ABC poker, but this is not one. I appreciate the aggressive creativity that successful LAGs employ and am diggin dgi's progression.

You want fundamentals? Go check out Harrington on Cash Games, Vol's I & II. I'm sure you can grind out a profit as a mechanical Harringbot but if you want to be one of the great ones and weren't born with a supercomputer for a brain as a Chris Ferguson, you must embrace all of the grey area that exists in poker.

GL dgi and here's looking forward to the eventual 'prison rapings' at 10/25!

I agree with Sobo. I really enjoy this thread and the thought process that is explained in enough detail to both learn directly from as well as to get my 'older' rec fish brain to think of much more than just the obvious. I dont play that often anymore, but when I do I have already picked up a few pots that I would have normally just folded by being selectively aggressive at the proper times.

So he's three betting hands like k3o 100%? Obviously I understand you want to not just blow him off his air. The problem is your equity is so poor against even air that you are literally behind a range of atc.

+2

This thread is the nuts. Ty all esp dgi

Funny how calling suited trash/semi-trash OOP and religiously chasing gunshots = creative LAG.

You have some bad, and at the same time funny logic behind a lot of your decision making. It definitely shows some lack in poker theory. What makes this even worse for you is that you say a lot of the regs you play against, read this thread. If you want to become the 10/25 crusher you're talking about, you should probably stop sharing your (oftentimes faulty) logic behind your decision making, and work on some game theory. The regs will hate me now, but when they read this thread, they're probably going to laugh all the way to the bank. It's not like you can own good regs at 10/25 with some made up style where "no one can put you on a range" or whatever you're thinking. This isn't 2004 anymore, so regs' game theory fundamentals should be expected to be high enough that employing some weird style probably isn't the way to go to become a crusher in your games.

This probably came off a bit harsh, but so be it. Take it for what it's worth. I've enjoyed reading this thread a lot, and still do. It's amazing how much you're contributing to the community by doing this, and it is greatly appreciated. Thanks for a good thread. I hope you keep it up and do all you can to keep improving to reach your goals.

it was a serious question.


WR and hourly in LV vs norcal? which casinos were you playing these games? a player that is "abc" will still reduce your winrate as they are probably making money in the game. it sounds like your games will often have like 3-4 fish in them.

picture this: you open 3bb, get 3bet to 9bb, call and fold the flop. this is what usually happens. idk what normal fold to 3b in cbet pot is for a reg but its probably like 80%. cards that will hit the 3bettors range like ace/king will come off like 30% of the time and usually you won't flop much equity.


i'm sure you're a winning player but you def make some unjustifable plays.


i've watched those people play live FR. they don't limp-call garbage. some recent online HHs i've seen with durrrr just looked like he was lighting money on fire tho. you are seriously deluded if you're comparing your play to theirs. their thought process is also insanely advanced and they aren't regularly having to drop down to the lowest stake available.

but seriously i'd be willing to bet most winning HSNL/MSNL regs on FTP or party lose money in pots where they call a 3b in a ring game. can check on PTR.


yea this sounds infinitely softer than vegas/LA/borg/foxwoods lol.

ok wtf. first of all how is 3betting turning your hand face-up? it's just a resteal. you still have JJ++/AQ+ in your range. it's a mega standard play with a blocker against someone who will open insanely wide. it'll take the pot down most of the time and if he calls he'll usually fold when you cbet.

how does a hand like A8o have any implied odds? A8s sure. but how are you going to win a bunch of money with A8o? call down 2 streets on 8hi or ahi board? actually the hand is the opposite of an implied odds hand...it has RIO as when money's going into the pot you will have the worse 2pr/1pair.

lol can you explain how that not the definition of results oriented thinking?


so you were check folding the river if you hadn't binked?

i mean i just see ppl getting it in pre in your games in the thread with AJ/AQ etc. could be wrong tho. queens is a fold 200bb deep at the 5/T i play usually.

lol smd. i'm sure i play way higher than you and have infinitely more poker experience and success. i am also a pretty LAGgy player when i play live.

look, open limping utg a suited-ace 6 handed at any limit is bad. it's just not profitable. limp calling garbage OOP against a decent player is also burning money. not shoving aces with 15bb over a few limpers is bad. there is no grey are about this. nl4 and 2.50$ MTT players know this stuff.

hard to put them on that gutter tho.

I appreciate you taking the time to comment and I will take it to heart. I am currently "rebuilding my game" starting with tournament poker and then I will be going through the Mathematics of Poker which I hope to have finished by Jan 2014. And FWIW, I like to make computer simulations of various poker situations/spots I encounter. I have a couple of those swimming around in the Poker Theory forum...

Fair enough. I kinda feel there are two possibilities. #1) I'm just a luckbox donk on a heater or #2) there is a method to my madness. I feel that if I am a luckbox donk on a heater the math will eventually catch up to me. But for the sake of argument if it really is #1) then I hope I'm able to plug all my leaks before my heater runs out of rungood juice.

And I do appreciate fellow 2+2ers taking the time to comment and I do take it to heart. My goal is to get better which is why I am posting my thought processes as well as being brutally honest posting my mistakes for everyone to see and rip apart. I know I can come off as arrogant and defensive but its not my intent and again I do gain a lot of value in the opinions of others even if I do disagree.

Yeah. I was planning to check fold river given the way he called my turn bet. Below is how I see that situation.

56% of the time he folds to my turn lead and I win the pot
38% of the time he calls. In the event that he calls
--A) 19% of the time I hit one of my 8 outs and can extract $1k of value so I win pot + $1k
--B) 81% of the time I whiff river and check/fold losing the pot
6% of the time he raises me on turn with a set of Jacks and I lose pot

So, once he calls me on the turn, we are now in the 38% realm in which I will win 19% of the time and check/fold 81% of the time.

that is how I see that situation.

Going forward I'm sure we are going to have plenty of other interesting spots to argue and debate and it is helpful to me to have my feet put to the fire by posters like you. So I am grateful and apologize in advance if I come off as too argumentative. Not my intent.

if that is what you see, that is what you see and there is nothing I can do to change your perception of how you think I play. So I guess this thread will provide you tons of entertainment as I luckbox my way through this adventure by religiously chasing gutshots and calling with trash.

fair enough.

sit back and enjoy the show...

Why all the hate on OP? I doubt he believes that every play he makes is spot on and the is no doubt he makes mistakes, but at least he is thinking outside the box and taking different lines, adjusting, and picking spots where he believes he can push his edge and then shares them with us. He posts 5-6 hands out of a 8-10 hr session that he believes are interesting and unique, I doubt any of us would be reading this if he talked about all the times he folded T8 or Q7 etc.

GL OP. Keep the updates coming!

+1 to this. OP lays out a thought process to individual hands throughout a session like no one else on these boards. Granted, there are some bright poker minds on these pages, but OP is probably one of the posters on these boards that I have learned the most from. Take that for what it's worth. Sign'd a LLSNL grinder

^^^Same here. I really like the insight into OPs thought process behind decisions, candour and also fact that he is willing to admit/post about hands where mistakes were made (despite the haters).

Definitely helping me with critical analysis of my own game, and quite inspiring to read about his grind through the live low and medium stakes games, battling through many of the same issues many live grinders go through.

Keep up the good work OP, and hope to read about you crushing the mid to higher stakes in the not too distant future.

I love this thread. OP brings a tremendous amount of thought and creativity to the table when he played.

I do have a question though. I've seen references in this thread about 10-20 pros with small hand ranges. Can I infer from this that a solid TAG can beat these games? Not crush maybe, but beat for 5+BB/hr?

LOL

i think most comments about dgi's playing style is because it's pretty unconventional to certain players. i believe that this is the a big part why it actually works -> people won't expect it or have trouble adjusting.

ofcourse he makes mistakes but who doesn't? i learn a lot from this thread (how to think in certain spots for example) and i'm thankful that dgi is taking his time to educate us.

thank you and keep crushing