ran into an interesting player...

There was this intersting player I played with at the $50 n/l. He would bet with his big pairs (bet big like 5 to 10 preflop) so that no one would get odds to flop a set against him. Also when he raise big like this and someone calls he knows he's up against a big pair (AA,JJ, KK, QQ), So if he has JJ and raises like $7 preflop and someone calls him, he'll check/fold if he's in early position. When I confronted him about this he just gave me a lame excuse. Is this a good way to bet your big pairs??? please tell me it isn't???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Off5th

When I confronted him about this he just gave me a lame excuse.

---

Don't confront him. Just call him when you get AA and make easy money.

Stop tapping the glass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Off5th

Is this a good way to bet your big pairs??? please tell me it isn't???

---

No. It isn't.

Unless you a) have AA, and b) are perceived as a habitual bluffer, this is a horrible way to play big pairs.

Why is it a good way to play AA?

When I used to play ring games and I was the first to open I'd raise that bad boy 7-8BB.

I can see "why" he's doing this. Make post flop an 'easier game' but you are letting KQ fold his hand to easily when you raise that much and you hold QQ :D

I've ran into some of these players, and I have even gone as far as calling with sOOted connectors, or even non-sOOted connectors. Sure it costs me a lot of BB.. but if I hit... its better than playing b.jack at that point! :lol:

9 handed .5/1NL with $100 effective stacks.

A player is opening 20% of his hands for 6xbb (or more) pre-flop. How many hands do you need to play to beat this game? Is it ever correct to just call the opener?

Ripptyde should pay attention to the answer to this one...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fnord

9 handed .5/1NL with $100 effective stacks.

A player is opening 20% of his hands for 6xbb (or more) pre-flop. How many hands do you need to play to beat this game? Is it ever correct to just call the opener?

Ripptyde should pay attention to the answer to this one...

---

Why do I have the feeling that I'm about to learn something here ;) (don't get me wrong, that's a good thing as always).

That's obviously a pretty wide opening range and and how the table overall is responding will be key. So, my answer to your question will vary with how the rest of the table is responding to this overly loose aggro. It will also vary with how this guy's play is post-flop.

My simple answer to your question is .... (I tend to over-analyze for those of you that are too thick to see the blatently obvious ;) ) ... that you can beat 'this game' by playing relatively few hands, and playing them relatively passively (assuming that the villian will carry forward his pre-flop aggression into post-flop).

If the rest of the table (read as: 3 or more on average) is calling this guy's openers with a wide range, my first statement would be that this is the kind of game that I find difficult to play in (read as: while playing my normal LAG style). In this kind of game, my experience is that you have to tighten up considerably and generally only re-raise to isolate when you have very good hands and otherwise fold alot. If you get in there and gamble with the rest of the table you are going on a chip roller-coaster ride and will be at the mercy of the deck; profitable when you hitting and bank roll draining when you are not. I don't like this variance and playing against wide hand ranges in multi-way pots forces you to play str8-forwardly and show down winners. I'd be more inclined to selectively get in there and gamble if the players at the table are very terrible, but along with that comes the huge challenge of putting people on hands when by the very nature of their play they have a wide range and play many of the hands in that range in a wild and unpredictable way. Plus, the money isn't that deep. When I find myself if one of these games I tend to get frustrated and usually end up moving tables because even though I know I'm looking at a potentially very profitable situation, many of my 'weapons' are blunted and I have to play ABC-poker which to me is quite boring.

Now, if the table is generally backing down to this guy's pre-flop aggression and most of the pots end up 2 or 3 way at the most, my counter strategy would have to be different. With position I'd be inclided to call or re-raise many of his openers with a wider range, and let him bluff/semi-bluff $$ off to me in the right spots. OOP I'd narrow that range considerably, but I'd still play more hands than in the above multi-way pots scenario. And yes, I do think just calling can be correct so that you disguise the strength of your monsters for example.

the guy obviously didn't know how to play poker. I looked at my hh and it was an $11 raise preflop. Then he checked I pushed and he folded. Who the hell checks after making that much of a big raise??? He told me he folded JJ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by midas06

Why is it a good way to play AA?

---

notice the "AND"

You have to be perceived as straight up psycho for it to be a good play.

Sounds to me like the guy is afriad to play his big pairs. Easy guy to play against. Seen guys like him before. Play your AA,KK and AK against his big raise . Personaly I would fold the rest unless its a multi way pot. He is setting himeself up to lose big pots and win small ones. After all when he raises you know what he has. Or close to it. If he really is just raising big with JJ,QQ,kk and AA you only have to deal with him 4 times out of every 221 hands.

Quote:

---

9 handed .5/1NL with $100 effective stacks.

A player is opening 20% of his hands for 6xbb (or more) pre-flop. How many hands do you need to play to beat this game? Is it ever correct to just call the opener?

Ripptyde should pay attention to the answer to this one...

---

1 in 5 or more. Auto reraise preflop.