please help me with these texas hold em no limit questions

OK,Im new here and signed up specifically to ask a few questions that have been bothering me the past 24 hours. And I would appreciate it if any, and all would help me on these questions. Now before I ask any of these questions I want to add that im a very tight/passive/patient successful ONLINE Texas Hold Em no limit cash (ring) game player. And when I say successful I mean that I am making money at it. Which in a way contradicts why im even going to ask ANY questions right? Because some would say, "if it aint broke, dont fix it". Well, in my opinion...not necassarily. Im a very young, (20 year old), average intelligent, highly motivated at doin the best I can at ANYTHING & EVERYTHING I do. And so if there is a more sufficient way of doing something, im open to doin it. Especially playing Texas Hold Em. The only thing I fear in being open minded "or" (possibly accepting one's other knowledge towards a skill that ive already seemingly doin well at) is...doing the complete opposite of what made me successful at making money in Texas Hold Em no limit cash games to begin with. In other words if I have a bank roll in online Texas Hold Em of say xxxxx, and I try a different strategy then the one im already a custom too, that I might end up with a bank roll of x...! So I dont believe I want to completely change my strategic ways, but merely alter* some of them. Now with that being said I want to mention that when I say strategy, I dont mean strategy as in a mechanical formula where your supposed to do everything the same way every single time, because if your reading this yourself, and are a "successful" Texas Hold Em no limit player. You would already know that the majority of the time,there is no simple formula to making money in Texas Hold Em. Every single situation has a different strategic move depending (in my opinion) MOSTLY on the type* of player whom your up agasint. However, it is also in my opinion that there are, a few basic elements which if you have no read on a person you can rely on. Let me give you a great example of this. You have a strong hand in late position and have no read on a player for whatever reason, say he just sat down. And in earlier position he has merely called all your bets to the river where he suddenly check-raises you say $25 into a $100 pot. Now with no read on this player im goin to alter my independent* stategy thinkin to rely on a very simple basic* strategy that I think most players would do. And thats simply to call. Only because its on the river, its the final bet to win the pot, and Lets face it im getting paid 4:1. Now its my belief in this scenario that this player who has been check raised on the river is usually beat (ROUGHLY 75% of time ex.). But this is one of the few very basic strategies that I personally rely on in no limit if im check-raised on the river agaisnt a player whom I have no read on for whatever reason. Atleast I'll pay him/her off and gain knowledge towards that players style of play and rarey but* occasionally take down a nice size pot compared to the call/bet its costing me to take down the pot. Now with all this being said............. Do I just scratch all this and just keep playin the way that im playing? Or do I try to open my mind a little and experiment in a different way in a couple of different positions towards some of the basic strategies that ive already set? For those who say just scratch it and keep playin the way im playin...ok, thanks for the easy way out, lol (just kidding). But for those who think its possible to alter some basic strategies that I am already a custom too. Here they are............................................... ...................


TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE OR TO BE MORE PASSIVE...that is the question

Note: this doesnt apply to dominant over card pocket pair hands like AA,KK,and QQ, that pre-flop are the majority of the time favorites over any other pocket hands unless of course I have KK and im unfortunately up agaisnt AA

Instead this is for MID/STRONG HANDS like AQ,AJ,AT,KQ,KT,

1: Hands I raise with preflop..........ok heres the problem here, it seems every great Texas Hold Em no limit player says the number one way to making money playing is to play tight-aggressive. Well I like to use it to my advantage to do the complete opposite. like I said before I play tight-passive and patient. And heres why. I can occasionally bust (win a nice size pot, usually 1/3rd there stack or more) agaisnt tight-aggressive players WITHOUT me simply bad-beating them on a all in. when I have a great hand and a tight aggressive player plays overly aggressive. However,it is my own personal belief im simply rarely never goin to bust a tight-passive player (one like myself) without bad beating them on a all in. Im just not goin to do it. They're too tight...so

SCENARIO 1: Instead of role playing the tight-aggressive way and raising a strong hand like Queen King off suited in late position with two callers, (one loose-calling station and one tight-aggressive player). Ill merely limp when I believe most players would say to raise. Now this is the way I think, and the reason Id limp with this hand and play passive as opposed to aggressive. If I limp, I miss, and the two early posistion callers check, ill check it out and play honest and lose no money other then my pre-flop call bet, no big deal, im simply patient like that. But if I play more aggressive as opposed to passive, and I raise preflop, and I bet out into the pot in late position after they both check, either A: the loose-calling station is goin to call me no matter what just because hes ignorant to pot odds or simply wants to see what I have and I lose money unless a miricale comes and I hit, or the tight-aggressive player simply calls my bluff bet on the flop and bets strong (being aggressive) into me on the turn, to which I fold and lose money . Thus I lose not only the extra pre-flop money I raised with, but also the extra bluff bet money I bet on the flop.

QUESTION #1:Why risk the extra money preflop raising in any position with a mid strong hand when its usually goin to miss the flop. I can simply save the extra money for another hand.

QUESTION #2: And why bluff bet the pot in late position when I miss, when by nature im an extremely patient player who can wait and could also use this extra money that I bluffed with to keep in my bankroll or later use on another hand that I actually hit with?

QUESTION #3:Or do you guys actually believe in the longrun im goin to make more money playin tight-aggressive? Now Im sure alot of you will write and say the that I should atleast raise pre-flop so that I rid players of trash hands and rid small pocket pairs so that they dont hit a set or flop two pair agaisnt me and win big. However im sure that you know the overall probabilty of flopping a set is about 7:1, and flopping two pair is about 49:1. So not only is this not normally not goin to happen,but

Let me add that I have a simple personal basic strategic system which allows me never to go busted over someone say, flopping a set or two pair while I simultaneously flop top pair. So it never worries me when someone limps in with a pocket pair, or a trash hand. Besides, I have to expect that, im not goin to sit down and play at a mostly tight table because im not goin to win much money at it. Im goin to sit down at a loose table....So if im sitting at a loose table to begin with, even if I raise in late position with say ace jack suited. The majority of the players who are at the table are so loose that if they have limped in or havent called yet ,(blinds), and I raise say 4 times the big blind,these players are loose players and are goin to usually call the extra pre-flop raise with say pocket pair 55 anyway...

Also, let me add that im not sayin I never bluff, it's just that I only bet a certain type of player...and sadly, thats myself, specifically tight passive. Does knowing this bother me? No, and the reason why it doesnt bother me is just because someone might have a read on me and know when im weak in a pot with them doesnt mean that I also dont have a read on them and know that they're tryin to buy the pot. And so ill fold my winning ace high hand most of the time and instead wait patiently when they bluff at me at the wrong time, then ill capitalize with a strong hand and ill not only trap them but take a decent size of there stack from that player. So from that....

QUESTION#5: Is the paragraph above a weak element to my game? Or is it actually a more wise and patient strategy to stick with.

TEXAS HOLD EM NO LIMIT TOURNAMENTS

I pretty much use the same basic* strategy that I use in ring games, (tight-passive) and apply it to use in Texas Hold Em no limit multi table tournaments. And this is something that I am a little slightly more aggressive in the later stages of, of course. But overall im still plain tight-passive. And so if I do well at these atleast placing in roughly 75% of the ones I enter. My...

FINAL QUESTION #5: If I should alter questions 1-3 in ring games. Should I take questions 1-3 and apply them for Texas Hold Em multi table tournaments as well? Or do you guys feel that Texas Hold Em no limit tournaments are much more complex then Texas Hold Em no limit ring games?

Now before I leave this, I want to empathize how much I really would appreciate everyones comment's and add that im sorry for how long a post this is to read

OK.. here are the first things that popped into my mind when I read your questions.. there are other answers and I hope some of the other members address the ones I miss, or feel the urge to elaborate, or argue against mine.


I'll start by saying I couldn't read all of your above paragraph. Too long with no breaks.



Scenario #1

Q1- why risk the extra chips preflop?
Because you are representing a strong hand. You are setting yourself up for the win.
Because if you don't raise your mid-strong hands your strong hands won't get action. Your also laying ground work for future plays. Holdem isn't a game played hand for hand, it's one big session, only raise AA/KK and watch everyone catch on eventually and fold to all of your PFR's.


Q2- Why bluff when you miss..
Because you have position, and the other players are showing weakness. You don't HAVE to have a hand to bet. Also your assumption that one of the 2 will call isn't always correct, and you don't always have to be correct to win money.


Lets say there is $10 in the pot and you bet $10 into it and both players fold.
You risked $10 to win $10 even, money 1:1 you need this play to be correct 51% of the time to be profitable.
If you make this play twice win once loose once you actually break even.

But if you bet $5 into a $10 pot and they fold then your getting 2:1 on your money. THIS play only needs to be correct 34% of the time to be profitable. You don't have to be correct EVERY time to win.
So it depends on the size of the pot and what % of it you can bet and get them to fold the correct % of the time.

Q3
There is more than one style of holdem play, and each one fits someone else better.
Weak tight can win money over the long run too. But at what rate, tight Aggressive has been proven to win at a larger rate over the long run.

Q5
where is Q4?
Do I believe they makes you passive? No, you say you only bluff certain players, that is correct. You can't bluff a calling station.

Final question..
If you play a MTT the same way you do the first 3 questions you will find yourself blinded out quite often, short of the money.

Mike got most of it. I would like to say this.

I can only assume you are playing low limits. Playing tight passive has no future. If you try to move up in limits, the fish count will go down and other players will peg you as tight passive in 2 orbits. You will get no action on your bets unless you change gears (which sounds like you wont)
So if you're ok with just waiting around to make a great hand and have a fish pay you off, that's fine. But if you want to play up in limits you're going to need to get a sense or an instinct as to what to do in boarderline situations. You won't be able to get accurate reads if you never bet unless you have the nuts (in which case you don't need a read). Poker is a game of betting more than it is a game of cards.

-'rilla

Mike hit it on the head. Thogh he may be wrong in everything, this time he is less wrong than normal. :P

I think you have one overall question. Why is it better to play position and opponents? Why not just wait and play the cards?

1 word. Ripptyde.

Apply presure to your opponent and he will give you more chips. You are already successful and profitable, as you point out. But by adding this in, you can learn to be MORE successful and MORE profitable. Ripptyde can probably provide the best insight here, because he is already very good at playing position and opponents.

Rippy, you want to chime in?

Hello Mr. Rock. My play style personally is really nothing like yours, but it sounds like trying to become tight aggressive would really be a massive change to your game, and I'm not sure it would wind up improving your profits in the ring games you play in either, as it sounds like you're doing very well there.

In MTTs though, it sounds like you will keep making the money very often with your style but very rarely ever win or even make the final table. In 100 MTTs, one win and just 15 other places for a tight aggressive player may end up pay out more than 75 places (if that's truly the number you're getting over a long term that is still very impressive) for a tight passive player, especially since just making the money often just pays out 1 or 2 times the buyin. But again, if you're honestly making the money 75% of the time over a very long period of time, I don't see why you should consider making such a drastic change that doesn't seem like it would suit you best.

If you want I can answer the questions you list for me personally, but like I've said I'm not sure they would apply to you the same way.

QUESTION #1:Why risk the extra money preflop raising in any position with a mid strong hand when its usually goin to miss the flop. I can simply save the extra money for another hand.

Build the pot (for if you hit strong), steal the blinds, set up a bluff post flop that'd earn you more chips. This concept of "saving money" seems extremely foreign to me. I don't expect my bets to be wasted, or to have to fold at the flop or turn before I've even seen the flop with the hand I think is the best hand preflop. But this is a difference in styles and there's really no right and wrong, which is why changing doesn't seem necessary for where you're playing.

QUESTION #2: And why bluff bet the pot in late position when I miss, when by nature im an extremely patient player who can wait and could also use this extra money that I bluffed with to keep in my bankroll or later use on another hand that I actually hit with?

Again its this concept of you assuming that bluffed money is basically wasted money. As you said in question #1, most hands miss the flop. From what I gather, a passive player assumes that they'll miss and an aggressive player assumes that the opponent will miss. In my mind, if an opponent likely missed the flop and is tight enough to fold, and you're heads up, here's a perfect chance at taking down a free pot. Plus aggressiveness (bluffs shown usually by showdown) increase the amount of calls you'll get when you have a big hand. The action you and me get are probably on completely different levels.

QUESTION #3:Or do you guys actually believe in the longrun im goin to make more money playin tight-aggressive?

I personally feel aggressiveness is a key to success in poker, but I also realize that, especially in ring games with aggressive players, rocks can do very well. I think I'll make more money being aggressive, but I really don't know if you were, as they require different skills to be successful at them. Being tight passive is more about patience, reading possibilities, trapping, and playing the cards while successful aggressive poker is more about reading, timely bluffs (knowing which players you can push around, what you can push them off of, which hands to do it, making believable bets, etc.), creating an image of being more reckless than you are (at least for me - so I can get guys like you to come out to play with me ), and playing the player.

I don't think they necessarily translate that well from one to another. Many loose aggressive players don't have the poker knowledge to play a good tight game and many tight passive players don't have the player knowledge to know when a pot can be stolen.

QUESTION#4*: Is the paragraph above a weak element to my game? Or is it actually a more wise and patient strategy to stick with.

Yes, but "weak" in poker terms basically means passive. The thing that sticks out to me is that you say you sometimes "know" that they're buying the pot but still fold because your hand isn't strong enough. Its about as passive of thinking as you can possibly get. If your read is that strong, I don't see much risk in raising them and taking the pot down. You certainly have the image to be believed. But ... again, I'm not sure it suits your game.

FINAL QUESTION #5: If I should alter questions 1-3 in ring games. Should I take questions 1-3 and apply them for Texas Hold Em multi table tournaments as well? Or do you guys feel that Texas Hold Em no limit tournaments are much more complex then Texas Hold Em no limit ring games?

Yeah, I just don't see many successful MTT players that are absolute rocks. Some are very tight players, but you need to have some aggression in your game at times to get anywhere, I think. I personally like having rocks in MTTs with me. Free blinds, easy to get out of the way of big hands as they're probably the easiest people to read (even their trapping is relatively easy to spot - rocks don't call big bets on draws and such), easy pots to steal, etc.

When the blinds are small, like they always are in ring games, I think the most profitable players to play against are the loose aggressive players that'll risk more than they should on mediocre hands and not pick up on the fact that you've set them up. Its hard to get anything out of the tight passive players in these circumstances. But when the blinds are big in MTTs, its the tight passive players that you like, as they don't steal your blinds and let you steal a lot of pots, while the aggressive players kick the shit out of you until you have to make a stand and gamble with them.

The passive guy, unless they catch an amazing run of cards deep into a MTT, are basically destined to be blinded out before getting to the big money, while an aggressive player, particularly at the right table and in the right position, can at times steal enough to maintain or build their stack, even outside of the big hands they get.

Wow, I read your whole massive post and made another about the same size. Welcome to the board.

good job stirring up some much needed content
good reading.. i always enjoy reading michael1123's stuff especially when he gets going like that

Wow, someone actually enjoys my rambling on no sleep. I started that post before there was any replies to this thread yet.

And like usual, gorilla adds some great points. The whole point about how poker is a game of betting and dealing with borderline situations is something that came to me as well, but I didn't want to sound condescending. I do think is a limit to how far being a rock can take you. I also think that a good case can be made that playing tight aggressive takes more poker skill than playing tight passive, although playing tight passive definitely requires more of different skills, such as discipline and patience. If you're not ever going to "earn" or steal a pot from a better hand, then you better be damn sure you're winning a huge percentage of the hands you're taking to a showdown.

Since this side of the debate has been opened up, I'll suggest what I thought about before. If you're happy staying where you are and making the money you're making, I recommend sticking to how you're playing. If you want to try and improve on your profits as much as possible, which may or may not happen with you - especially early on, then I'd think about changing your style.

But here's probably what should be the biggest factor in your decision. If you really want to improve your poker game, really dive in and get your hands dirty, dealing with the tough decisions and close calls of when to make a stone cold bluff, when to call with weak hands, when to change your game up to suit the players you're playing against, make tough reads, and all around put developing your poker game before your profit, then I think you have to try and make the switch. To be honest, I think its kind of debatable as to whether a complete rock is actually playing poker or just waiting around for the nuts.

Best of luck to you, whichever way you go, man.

Just one question? what type of MTT's are you talking about (entry size, entry $ ect.?) Because 75% is a hell of a %age and I don't see a weak passive game getting there in larger MTT's.

Ok I wanna thank everyone for commenting on some of the questions ive asked. I went out to eat this morning after reading the first two post, and quite honestly I felt like I had been winning Texas Hold Em in the complete opposite of how most successful players play. It was really confusing and kinda scarey. Why was it scarey? Imagine playin basketball for college and thinking your doin everything right with the exception that you might have to gain some body mass in order to make it pro. Only catch is before you can get drafted, someone tells you youre actually shooting the basketball all wrong. Look, one of the many reasons I wanted to know some of these questions is to improve my game so that I can move up successfully into higher stake tables. I started out with $100 bux and now play $1-$2nl 9 player ring games sitting down with maximum $200 at each table, and been building a roll to one day hopefully sit at a $5-$10nl table. However I dont want to sit down at a $5-$10nl until i have atleast $7k in my roll. Im sure that figure is also foreign to a bunch of you. Most would say your crazy to sit down at a table with less then 15 times the max sit. I would sit down with only 7 times the max sit. Maybe I can have less a roll due to the fact that im tight-passive.


As far as the statement someone said about how if I only raise with AA,KK,and QQ, that good players would simply pick up on this and not give me any action. Im sorry if it seemed like I meant I only raise with these hands.There are some exceptions. However if I dont get any action, thats fine, and it doesnt frustrate me. Im fine taking down the blinds and calls that anyone in early position has posted by simply raising with this hand. Its better then losing money with these hands. I think some of the difference between passive and aggressive players when they make a raise is when a passive player like me makes a raise, I MAKE A RAISE TO NOT NECCASSARILY RECEIVE ACTION, BUT TO REPRESENT A STRONG HAND, that if one decides to play againt me in, is goin to cost them a bit of money. I dont base most of my profits on good players, I sit and wait for bad players to make bad decisions at wrong times and then I go to work on them. I do change it up depending on my position and strength of hand and what type of opponent im up agaisnt. Im sorry if it seemed like I meant I only raise with these hands.Theres are some exceptions. I guess what im tryin to say is, I dont make most my money making aggressive preflop raises with strong hands, I make most my money off of bad players who are overly aggressive with strong hands that I make a good read on while executing there flaws, wether it be flopping a set to there aces while there only realizing they have top pair and not making a read on me failing to recognize I have a set, or something as simple as giving me pot odds to outdraw them on and end up making them pay me off huge on the river. Alot of bad aggressive players make the mistake of playin too aggressive with weak hands and as soon as they make a strong hand, they end up slowplaying it...you would be suprised.....

One more thing before I go, I know its probably hard for some of you too believe that I place in around rouglhy 75% of multi table tournaments im in since im a tight passive player. But I really have no reason to over exagerate. let me add that I do play more aggressive towards the later stages of the tournament due to the fact that I have gained a great rock solid table image.

For the guy that asked what limit multi table tournaments I play in, I play in many, but mostly a $10 dollar rebuy for the first hour usually 800-100 entrants with generally 99 payouts usually placing around 50th.

Also someone mentioned that hes sure I hardly ever make final table due to the fact that im a tight passive player. I will say that this is true. Like I say I usually place in this tournament 75% of time but have only made final table twice.....

Which is why I wasnt sure if I maybe changed my style I could make final table more often.....Once again thanks for everyone's comments

Ok I wanna thank everyone for commenting on some of the questions ive asked. I went out to eat this morning after reading the first two post, and quite honestly I felt like I had been winning Texas Hold Em in the complete opposite of how most successful players play. It was really confusing and kinda scarey. Why was it scarey? Imagine playin basketball for college and thinking your doin everything right with the exception that you might have to gain some body mass in order to make it pro. Only catch is before you can get drafted, someone tells you youre actually shooting the basketball all wrong. Look, one of the many reasons I wanted to know some of these questions is to improve my game so that I can move up successfully into higher stake tables. I started out with $100 bux and now play $1-$2nl 9 player ring games sitting down with maximum $200 at each table, and been building a roll to one day hopefully sit at a $5-$10nl table. However I dont want to sit down at a $5-$10nl until i have atleast $7k in my roll. Im sure that figure is also foreign to a bunch of you. Most would say your crazy to sit down at a table with less then 15 times the max sit. I would sit down with only 7 times the max sit. Maybe I can have less a roll due to the fact that im tight-passive.


As far as the statement someone said about how if I only raise with AA,KK,and QQ, that good players would simply pick up on this and not give me any action. Im sorry if it seemed like I meant I only raise with these hands.There are some exceptions. However if I dont get any action, thats fine, and it doesnt frustrate me. Im fine taking down the blinds and calls that anyone in early position has posted by simply raising with this hand. Its better then losing money with these hands. I think some of the difference between passive and aggressive players when they make a raise is when a passive player like me makes a raise, I MAKE A RAISE TO NOT NECCASSARILY RECEIVE ACTION, BUT TO REPRESENT A STRONG HAND, that if one decides to play againt me in, is goin to cost them a bit of money. I dont base most of my profits on good players, I sit and wait for bad players to make bad decisions at wrong times and then I go to work on them. I do change it up depending on my position and strength of hand and what type of opponent im up agaisnt. Im sorry if it seemed like I meant I only raise with these hands.Theres are some exceptions. I guess what im tryin to say is, I dont make most my money making aggressive preflop raises with strong hands, I make most my money off of bad players who are overly aggressive with strong hands that I make a good read on while executing there flaws, wether it be flopping a set to there aces while there only realizing they have top pair and not making a read on me failing to recognize I have a set, or something as simple as giving me pot odds to outdraw them on and end up making them pay me off huge on the river. Alot of bad aggressive players make the mistake of playin too aggressive with weak hands and as soon as they make a strong hand, they end up slowplaying it...you would be suprised.....

One more thing before I go, I know its probably hard for some of you too believe that I place in around rouglhy 75% of multi table tournaments im in since im a tight passive player. But I really have no reason to over exagerate. let me add that I do play more aggressive towards the later stages of the tournament due to the fact that I have gained a great rock solid table image.

For the guy that asked what limit multi table tournaments I play in, I play in many, but mostly a $10 dollar rebuy for the first hour usually 800-100 entrants with generally 99 payouts usually placing around 50th.

Also someone mentioned that hes sure I hardly ever make final table due to the fact that im a tight passive player. I will say that this is true. Like I say I usually place in this tournament 75% of time but have only made final table twice.....

Which is why I wasnt sure if I maybe changed my style I could make final table more often.....Once again thanks for everyone's comments

Sorry for double posting, when I hit the submit button it said error web site, so when I hit the submit button again I seen that it double posted....

Look in the top right corner of the second post, clicking the X will delete the double post.

So, you are open raising AA/KK/QQ in MTTs, and limping with what?
What % of flops do you see?

You have be limping a fair amount, because there's no way you will get that many high PPs in an MTT and not blind out before the money most of the time.