How profitable is it to play against mice?
My definition of a mouse is a player who is passive and who likes to minibet and miniraise. A mouse may or may not be a loose caller but he/she should be quite readable.
Yesterday I sat at a NL25 table and saw some player min. bet all 3 streets with a set.
Another hand, a player in BB flopped quads with 33 on a board of 33AQJ, the action went checked through on flop, check-called a min bet from UTG who had AK and was a mouse himself, and then checked through again on the river again.
Because of their predictability mice are easily for us to avoid losing huge pots to, unlike a LAG and the associated variances that we might have deal with.
The question is, where do we rank the mice between the stations and the wild donks?
Re: How profitable is it to play against mice?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbqsquirrel
My definition of a mouse is a player who is passive and who likes to minibet and miniraise. A mouse may or may not be a loose caller but he/she should be quite readable.
Yesterday I sat at a NL25 table and saw some player min. bet all 3 streets with a set.
Another hand, a player in BB flopped quads with 33 on a board of 33AQJ, the action went checked through on flop, check-called a min bet from UTG who had AK and was a mouse himself, and then checked through again on the river again.
Because of their predictability mice are easily for us to avoid losing huge pots to, unlike a LAG and the associated variances that we might have deal with.
The question is, where do we rank the mice between the stations and the wild donks?
Personally i rank rocks/mice higher than stations and bad LAG's as they will slowly win small pots when they have a good hand and lose their blinds/calls when they miss. They won't win a lot but they won't lose a lot. Just note down what they like to min bet with and call when they give you 100000:1 pot odds, try spike a 1 outer and stack them.
