AA vs weird play

So I get AA. Finally a good hand. I'm sitting on the BB, one limper, SB limps, I raise to $0.40. Fold, SB calls.

SB was a weird player, with an irregular playing style, couldn't figure out what he was doing, and he never got to a showdown so I didn't know if he was often bluffing or not on his irregularly large raises.

Pot: $0.90
Flop: 8c 7s 7d

He checks. I raise $0.60. He calls

Pot: $2.10
Turn: 3c

He checks. I raise $1.50. He calls

Pot: $5.10
River: 3d

He raises $4
me: ?

I definitely like having a read here.

I think I muck this one, but I'm watching this guy like a hawk.

That wasn't really an oversized bet, by the way. It's less than the pot. However, oversized bets from non-solid players are almost always bluffs postflop. Solid players make them to get donks to stack off (and catch me sometimes )

Originally Posted by sejje

I definitely like having a read here.

I think I muck this one, but I'm watching this guy like a hawk.

That wasn't really an oversized bet, by the way. It's less than the pot. However, oversized bets from non-solid players are almost always bluffs postflop. Solid players make them to get donks to stack off (and catch me sometimes )

Yeah, it wasn't oversized here, but remember a lot of these guys don't really look at the pot all too much. The size of their bet is mostly determined by how great they think their hand is - or how badly they want to bluff you out. (why else throw all-in on a $0.30 pot right?) But in the past he had thrown oversized bets before, folding thereafter, or most often folding out his opponents.

So yeah, I had to put $4 into what would become a $13.10 pot, so roughly a 1/3 investment. I figured maybe he might be really happy about his KK/QQ, but then I'd expect him to throw all-in.. going below pot, made me think he meant it here. That he had a sure winner and wanted to lure me in. If he had had KK, on this board he would have doubts to win, and as such throw all-in. Don't ask me why, that's how the fish play.

But yeah, like I said, I couldn't yet make out what this guy was about.. would he really be calling a raise with a 7 or a 3? So I called it. He flipped 78o. He actually flopped a boat..

(if it would be something within his expected range of cards, like a 3TT flop, then I'd fold the river on this board without a doubt, a T is too likely to be in his hand, while his line screams "I have you beat".. but the 7 or the 3 would seem weird to me.. that's why I called)

88, A7, A3, plus the unlikely 77 and 33 all beat you here and are feasible hands. This is $10NL, so you have to add some non-feasible hands in there as well. But, as you say, 99-KK may also play like this.

My big problem here is that there are TWO pairs on the board. If he has hit one of them, then no matter how shitty his hand, you're dead. 3 is very unlikely, cos what could he have had to call pre-flop and flop - but 7 is definitely possible.

I think his river bet was well handled, the kind of size where an overpair is baffled and might call, might fold, might even re-raise. I think you played fine, pretty much, but came up against a monster.

However, I don't think his play is weird on this hand. It's pretty typical slowplay of someone with a very strong hand.

This is a standard fold without a strong read.

bet more preflop

I'd probably jack it up to 50 or 60. You can't be afraid that people will fold to your AA. You don't want hands like 87 calling.

I had to tone it down because my last 2-3 raises got no callers. So the "standard raise" for all the hands is my range to raise with had become 4BB.

(btw, as long as I don't get more than 2 callers on my raise, then I *do* want hands like 78o to call. Pretty much free money more often than not. Here he just hit that boat which is a way less than 1% chance)

When an OOP villian does the Check-call, check-call, big bet, this is a sign of a monster. He checked the flop and called your 2/3 bet. OK, he may still have nothing. Then you bet 2/3 pot and he called again (after checking). You should start to suspect something fishy here. The final tell is that he went from passive to agressive all of the sudden and he bet out instead of checking--basically telling you "I flopped a monster and was reeling you in and now I want to make sure you don't check to end the hand". Classic monster flop tell, especially since he didn't go "all-in" like most donks do when they miss their draw.

Originally Posted by jackvance

I had to tone it down because my last 2-3 raises got no callers. So the "standard raise" for all the hands is my range to raise with had become 4BB.

No matter. I see what you mean, but you hafta consider some other things.

1) If people are folding to reasonable preflop raises you need to open up and raise with a larger range. Everytime you have a suited connector or suited ace or weak top pair hand like QJ in the CO or BTN, raise your standard raise. Eventually they will get sick of it and your raise will BECOME the standard raise. The other option is to leave the table. You'd rather play at a loose table anyway.

2) You raise more because you'd like the EP limper to fold so you will have position on the SB limper. If they both call, you will be out of position, meaning that you won't be able to extract max value from AA postflop.

3) You need to get as much money in while you are a guaranteed favorite as possible.

Originally Posted by djzcko

When an OOP villian does the Check-call, check-call, big bet, this is a sign of a monster. He checked the flop and called your 2/3 bet. OK, he may still have nothing. Then you bet 2/3 pot and he called again (after checking). You should start to suspect something fishy here. The final tell is that he went from passive to agressive all of the sudden and he bet out instead of checking--basically telling you "I flopped a monster and was reeling you in and now I want to make sure you don't check to end the hand". Classic monster flop tell, especially since he didn't go "all-in" like most donks do when they miss their draw.

Yep that's exactly the impression I got. It's just that his weird play before this hand reeled me over to call it, giving it a chance to be "weird-ass move". I hadn't gotten a solid read on this guy yet, that always makes it harder.

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by jackvance

I had to tone it down because my last 2-3 raises got no callers. So the "standard raise" for all the hands is my range to raise with had become 4BB.

No matter. I see what you mean, but you hafta consider some other things.

1) If people are folding to reasonable preflop raises you need to open up and raise with a larger range. Everytime you have a suited connector or suited ace or weak top pair hand like QJ in the CO or BTN, raise your standard raise. Eventually they will get sick of it and your raise will BECOME the standard raise.

You know, I've actually been thinking about this. Because when I get a bunch of good cards in a short period of time, the table will always loosen up. Then I typically will add in a semi bluff here and there. If some more good hands come, THAT is the time you really raid the table and take stacks with TP hands. Won't happen often, but when it does, it pays off greatly ofcourse.

But if I get like a good hand every now and then.. yes I could raise with some nice marginal hands. I've been thinking about that. But then I get an effect that shoots myself in the foot.. people become more likely to call, but I have crappier hands. See the problem?

What I've done at one table, as sort of an experiment, was when I sat down, to raise some marginal hands. They usually get little callers or easy folds at the flop anyway. That way, I have set the standard for when my good hands come. Maybe I should play it like that more often.

The idea is to raise marginal crap until they get sick and start calling your raises. Then change gears and go back into tight-mode.

Jack, I really think you overestimate the calibre of 10NL players, no offense intended.

I'm pretty sure you're the only thinking player within five tables most of the time you play. I think they all folded to previous raises because they really had jack shit. You could probably get these guys to gamble their asses off by being an uber-bully, but that's about all they'd notice. They don't notice if your raise is a couple BB too many, or if you're only raising once every four orbits.

They do loosen up when you hammer them. Just had a short game. Bought in at $10. Typical super passive table. Lost $2 on bluffs to set the standards, but ran into real hands. Np. Then I got some good hands, went up to $15. Then a few of them went berserk, I ended up in a 3-way all-in with my QQ vs AQ and A7. That's 71% to take the $25 pot there! Bad ending though, the A fell on the flop. Damn, down to $5. Then another 3-way all-in, My AQ vs KQ and 44. No A on Q came, struck out. But, especially the first one, that was mainly negative variance.

I went from $8 to $15 without a single showdown. The table really went crazy then, lol, was my fourth 50cent raise in a row. This is in fact how I made that $70 in one day, yesterday. Hammered them until they just HAD to show me down. Only difference is then generally I won like the odds suggested.. I'd play some more now, but I really got to go.. gonna have some fun with this later.

But it's very important to find a good balance here.

Originally Posted by jackvance

They do loosen up when you hammer them. Just had a short game. Bought in at $10. Typical super passive table. Lost $2 on bluffs to set the standards, but ran into real hands. Np. Then I got some good hands, went up to $15. Then a few of them went berserk, I ended up in a 3-way all-in with my QQ vs AQ and A7. That's 71% to take the $25 pot there! Bad ending though, the A fell on the flop. Damn, down to $5. Then another 3-way all-in, My AQ vs KQ and 44. No A on Q came, struck out. But, especially the first one, that was mainly negative variance.

I went from $8 to $15 without a single showdown. The table really went crazy then, lol..

Don't go too crazy. I only advocate using that technique if your raises are getting too much respect. Start out playing your normal ABC tag game.

Meh, I love the aggressive style.. and my friend rules the 100NL tables with it too. Gonna play some more with him in the future to fine-tune my game and see how he does it. Ofcourse there you have more fold equity, so 10NL requires a bit more camping for the good cards, and reraise-bluffs are likewise pretty much out of the question on 10NL.

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by jackvance

I had to tone it down because my last 2-3 raises got no callers. So the "standard raise" for all the hands is my range to raise with had become 4BB.

No matter. I see what you mean, but you hafta consider some other things.

1) If people are folding to reasonable preflop raises you need to open up and raise with a larger range. Everytime you have a suited connector or suited ace or weak top pair hand like QJ in the CO or BTN, raise your standard raise. Eventually they will get sick of it and your raise will BECOME the standard raise. The other option is to leave the table. You'd rather play at a loose table anyway.

2) You raise more because you'd like the EP limper to fold so you will have position on the SB limper. If they both call, you will be out of position, meaning that you won't be able to extract max value from AA postflop.

3) You need to get as much money in while you are a guaranteed favorite as possible.

Well said.

Heh.. I'm finally starting to understand the attitude, the way my friends play poker. It is VASTLY different from the way that is advocated and taught here on FTR. It's pretty brilliant. I would have NEVER come up with this style of play myself, but seeing that it works and wondering why, I've ran some odds calculations and I'm starting to see why it is in fact a good way to play.

But yeah, it's really different from anything seen here on FTR. Analysing each individual hand and line is useless in that strategy, because the way of the Lagg works on different odds than those given to you by your hand. Can't say too much more about it at this point, because I'm still trying to fully understand it.

But I'll just say this, to those guys, 50NL and 100NL are a playground, the real challenge only starts at 200NL, 400NL and 800NL. (they haven't gone higher than that with any consistency) And I don't mean they grind it for 5BB/100 average every day.. when they play 50NL and 100NL, on a typical $100 buyin-for-the-day, that's a say 2 in 3 chance to double up to $200 in a few hours, or 1 in 3 to go broke. Pretty good, right. The way of the Lagg.. these guys call it "real poker" hehe.