So some kid who never folds to a 3bet, flops the nuts in a 3bet pot and suddenly he's isildur after a 50 hand sample.

Yeah, basically assuming 25nl players are smart and powerful lag players when they're just fish who turn their hands face up is levelling yourself into spewing money.

You can't know if he's any good on such a small sample unless you've actually been paying attention to the table (or were when you played those hands). We should have some notes by now, I'd think.

If not, you can look at what you know to make an informed judgement of his likely playing style and level of fishiness.

31/19 is completely consistent with good LAG stats. They should call a lot in position when fish limp or raise. The 19 is a tad low, but the 31 might be high just because they've had aggressive players to their right raising into the top of their standard range. It happens a lot in small samples. I see my 40-50 samples several times a day in STTs and they vary wildly. (My HUD keeps calling me a fish. Or worse, a rock. ).

If open limp % is 0, cbet % 60+ and call raise % is a fair bit lower than their VPIP, then they are probably not a complete fish.

If they 3bet more than 10% from the blinds and less than that from other positions, they are probably educated and quite likely to be using a HUD.

My best (conservative, anti-spew) guess is: not a fish, probably has 52 hands on me, may know my range and cbet% here. Proceed accordingly.

everyone, do yourselves a favor and disregard everything this guy said in this thread

+1 to Chiego. Just ridiculous levels of wrong.

+1

This is why everything you've said in this thread is ridiculous.

You can't know if he's good, but let's just assume that a micros player who doesn't fold to 3bets is a deep thinking LAG player.

And that's implying that his play here would ever be good. I don't really think he should ever be raising the flop, but when he does, I think it's a hand that beats a pair.

You however somehow level yourself into shoving and losing a buy-in because sometimes Durrrr might have similar stats over 50 hands when he plays 20knl.

So, how about one of you guys actually explains how a good LAG plays this game then, because so far all I can see is scoffing without any content.

I am a winning LAG and I don't think you guys have the first clue, but it's hard to tell when all you're doing is writing one-liners in response to detailed explanations of how and why they play the way they do.

If you want to look at players with different stats than you, assume they therefore must be fish, and stack off to them because they're smarter than you are, go ahead. But it's a **** strategy.

wow this thread has it all

labeling players after a tiny sample as sLAGS (this is a new one for me) and using how durr and isi play and bringing it into a uNL thread to help make a point


ymu everything you have said is truly ridiculous

See what you're saying makes no sense because you were basically the only one who wanted to stack off here based on some delusions about a weak micros player making a standard bad play must be the new Dwan.

No one needs to start explaining lag strategy in this thread. The discussion is about this hand, in the context of these stakes and a player with these stats after 50 hands.

Wow, an in-depth strategy post to show me the error of my thought processes. Thanks!

If OP had been paying attention to the 52 hands he has on villain, he'd know a lot more than he has told us. If he went through those 52 hands now, he could get a retrospective read which might help him read small sample villains better in future.

There's just way too much 'oh, his VPIP/PFR' look a bit fishy, therefore he is a fish and 'oh, he called a 3bet and is raising so he has QQ'. If you can't use the limited information you have properly, you will end up stacking off or folding the best hand to better players way too often simply because you haven't given any more thought to it beyond 'stats don't look TAGgy'.

LAG is not the most profitable way to play NL25, but plenty of players practice LAG at NL25, especially those who are planning on moving up one day. You'll lose a lot of money to these players if you assume they are fish based on no justification whatsoever.

Here's a screen shot from my last session:



I only have 4.6k hands (top left), winning over this small sample for 15.7bb/100. I've been playing 29/21 overall, 8% 3bet, 12% resteal. No open limps, call raises 16% of the time, 33% fold to 3bet. cbet 94% on flop and 82% on turn (what can I say, TAGfish fold too much).

The guy to my right is shaping up as a possibly competent LAG on 98 hands. Seems to have a preflop-heavy game and doesn't seem to call much in position. 29/25, 10% 3bet, 23% resteal, 67% fold to 3bet, no open limping, calls raises with 6%, 64% cbet.

The guy to my left is a rock based on 98 hands. 13/11/3 and 0% resteal, calls raises with 6%, cbets 100% (tiny sample for cbet cos he rarely gets any post-flop action). Another rock on the bottom right, 15/15/11 and 0% resteal, have not seen him call a raise, 100% cbet.

The fish is at the bottom left. 78/16 with 70% open limping and calls raises with 67%. Never limp-folds, limp-reraises 27%. 3bets 16% and resteals 15%. cbets 56%, floats a lot of flops and turns, raises and bets a lot post flop.

That's how I size up a table. VPIP/PFR tell you very little. You'll be making some huge errors if you base your reads on these stats without applying a bit of thought to it. And massive errors if you don't study how and why players with a different style from you play the game.

I said that QQ/JJ/T9 were in his range, but so were many other hands because the OP bet so weak with an overpair. As played, I 3bet shove this flop.

If the OP had bet pot and been raised, then I would advise folding.

I would give this advice based on a conservative read that a player with these stats is likely to try and pounce on weakness post-flop, but will not be messing around if hero's betting pattern screams strength.

I'd be happy with smaller (but not this small) bet-sizing against fish and TAGs, but not against a possible LAG. They'll try to take advantage and you'll be playing guessing games.

You need to use your HUD properly if you want to avoid tricky spots like this. Bet-sizing depends on the opponents range and their post-flop tendencies.

Against an unknown, you should be betting pot every time on this flop. However competent this particular villain is, there is absolutely nothing about playing a loose player that says you should adjust your bet-sizing downwards, unless you want to provoke a raise.

Ymu, your HUD sucks.

More valuable strat advice! So much attention to detail, so much thought applied, so much time wasted. This forum rocks!

Sorry, I didn't read your strat, I'm sure other will though. I just find it hard to believe that that HUD is optimal. Do you honestly use all of those stats regularly?

Both of these look really bad, and with AQ you probably have the best hand.

Almost everything you have posted ITT is stupid or wrong.

All the time. How they play post-flop affects what cards I play against them preflop and what lines I take post-flop. Broad categorisations are useful to simplify pre-flop decisions, but if it gets to post-flop, I'm using everything I've ever seen them do to help me find the optimal line against them.

It's not at all difficult to use - and looks better in game than in HEM2. There's no overlap with stacks or table animations. The colour coding helps me find the stats I want quickly. The colours don't change, I know what the numbers mean.

It's not for everyone, but I'm a statistician by trade, and I single table whilst studying opponents quite carefully. I feel blind when I multi-table unless I have thousands of hands on all villains, so my goal is working up to buy-ins where I can make a living on one table. That means making the right reads. Not hard to do multi-tabling once you know what stats are helpful. I developed that by adding stats that I find myself wanting to know in-game. I'm constantly adjusting it when new things come up.

Are you aware of the pop-up system?

Here ya go. Just played this against a 50 hand probable LAG, 27/22/12. I would not be playing this way against a rock or a TAG or a fish. He knows what I am up to and I know what he is up to and that he knows what I am up to.


EZ game.

Yea you are so good playing t7s oop like a monkey and being lucky that your opponent is even worse. And you brag with your microstakes hands seriously...

It is horrible against most opponents. Against this one, with our history, it is fine.

I donk this flop with any A that I call preflop with. I have to do it with air/draws also or I'm never getting paid off. If I get called, I have to work out villain's range and lines with different bits of it, and proceed from there. A halfpot 3rd barrel doesn't have to work very often to be very profitable here and it will work a lot against this guy.

But it doesn't really matter what you think of my play. I'm happy with it and it makes me money. If you want to lose money to players like me, ignore everything I say. Please!

Yes, and I use it to drill down on some of the main stats, but it's the relationship between different stats that is the most interesting. I can see at a glance what a player is like this way. I hand read every hand and update my opinion of their stats every time they do something interesting or unexpected.

There's a limit to what you can do multitabling, but I'd never have less than this information available however many tables I had open. Pop-ups are too time-consuming, especially when you often want to know post-flop stats before you make a decision pre-flop.

You certainly seem to be analysing hands in a lot of depth. I would recommend at some point adding in more tables though. If you can translate your style over to even 4 tables you may be onto a winner. Gl.

When I settle at a level where I can be financially comfortable with one table and have built up a decent database on the regs, I'll take it up to 4 tables max. I two table tourneys and cash sometimes because I know the tourney regs so well, and there's less post-flop play in tourneys.

I set myself the Chris Ferguson Challenge a couple of years before he invented it and completed it before he did, mostly playing tourneys and full ring cash. Been playing a lot of 6MAX tourneys recently and they play a lot like cash, so I'm using NL25 to develop my cash game. STTs have been **** since BF.

Cheers, and GL.

I can see what you're getting at YMU, probably because I play a somewhat similar style, but earlier in this thread you were advocating OP not to bet so small on the turn because it opens yourself up for cheap raises. Yet on the hand you just posted you bet less than half pot on the turn with nothing but a FD...

Now I know you weren't looking to be raised in this spot, so why bet so small?