owning a floater

[Pingviini]

he just came to the table but I remember him calling too much on the flop in position with the intention of taking the pot down afterwards. Consider this an example how I try to deal with these guys. This also buys you free cards and gets your c-bets a little more credibility because of the possible CR threath.

Hand #223901668 at table: Table TH 45
Started: Sun Mar 05 00:44:45 2006

atx12 is at seat 1 with 391.70
dondario is at seat 2 with 304.10
jgad is at seat 3 with 286.81
PingZen is at seat 4 with 505.80
El-Twig is at seat 5 with 199.51

dondario posts the large blind 4.00
atx12 posts the small blind 2.00

atx12: --, --
dondario: --, --
jgad: --, --
PingZen: 9c, Kc
El-Twig: --, --

Pre-flop:

jgad: Fold
PingZen: Raise 12.00
El-Twig: Call 12.00
atx12: Fold
dondario: Fold

Flop (Board: 5c, 8c, Js):

PingZen: Bet 24.00
El-Twig: Call 24.00

Turn (Board: 5c, 8c, Js, Kh):

PingZen: Check
El-Twig: Bet 24.00
PingZen: Raise 100.00
El-Twig: All in
PingZen: Call 163.51

[zenbitz]

You try to deal with them by hitting TP+Draw on the turn??? What if the turn's the Qh instead of the K?

[Fnord]

This line has a name: Stack-a-donk

[Pingviini]

You try to deal with them by hitting TP+Draw on the turn??? What if the turn's the Qh instead of the K?

I am most likely going AI. I should've perhaps done that here,too. If I recognize a guy who likes to float i position I am doing a lot of CR'ing, especially with semi-bluffs.

how do you deal with them?

[alias2211]

Hey Ping=

I've been trying to get a basis on this sort of player, so thanks for introducing the topic. I would like to get a better description of the 'floater' opponent if possible, before proceeding much further. I think I know what you're talking about, but let me run this definition by you:

1. The floater has a higher VP$IP percentage than most players. (lots of hands)
2. The floater has a higher calling percentage than most players when in good position. (lots of hands in position)
3. The floater will call just about every flop bet when in position. (pays to see signs of weakness more often than most players)
4. (Related to #3) The floater is more likely than most players to call a turn bet when in position than most players.
5. If you check to the floater on the turn after a flop raise or on the river after a turn raise, the floater will make about a pot sized stab at the pot with the hopes of taking it down. (More likely to attempt to exploit this perceived weakness from #3 and #4)

Please confirm or refute any of the numbered assumptions made about The Floater opponent. Once we have a better description of the The Floater that we can all work off, I'll chime in again. I hope this turns into a good discussion because it's so important in 6MAX.

[arkana]

1. The floater has a higher VP$IP percentage than most players. (lots of hands)
2. The floater has a higher calling percentage than most players when in good position. (lots of hands in position)
3. The floater will call just about every flop bet when in position. (pays to see signs of weakness more often than most players)
4. (Related to #3) The floater is more likely than most players to call a turn bet when in position than most players.
5. If you check to the floater on the turn after a flop raise or on the river after a turn raise, the floater will make about a pot sized stab at the pot with the hopes of taking it down. (More likely to attempt to exploit this perceived weakness from #3 and #4)

1. Not necessarily
2. OH YES
3. HU in position yes (obviously some more than others)
4. Not as often as on the flop, most floaters call flop looking to take it away on the turn (gets much more expensive after that and more likely to be facing bigger hand after two barrels).
5. Yes

Simple definition is players who like to call a continuation bet on the flop in position with the intention of taking it away on the turn if orig bettor shows weakness. This can be with marginal hands (middle pair) or drawing hands or air.

Here is a good example:

***** Hand History for Game 366522172 *****
0/0 TEXASHTGAMETABLE (NL) - WED FEB 15 18:38:34 EDT 2006
Table Wattsville (Real Money) -- Seat 1 is the button
Total number of players : 6
Seat 1: Svammel ( $157.00)
Seat 2: ceyreste ( $71.20)
Seat 3: perfekt ( $35.72)
Seat 4: HERO ( $194.00)
Seat 5: ShermanPie ( $584.98)
Seat 6: jeffp2270 ( $200.00)
ceyreste posts small blind (1.00)
perfekt posts big blind (2.00)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to HERO [ Qd, Qc ]
HERO raises (8.00)
ShermanPie calls (8.00)
jeffp2270 folds.
Svammel calls (8.00)
ceyreste folds.
perfekt calls (6.00)
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 4d, 2d, 2c ]
perfekt checks.
HERO bets (20.00)
ShermanPie folds.
Svammel calls (20.00)
perfekt folds.
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 7s ]
HERO checks.
Svammel bets (50.00)
HERO bets (166.00)
HERO is all-In.
Svammel bets (79.00)
Svammel is all-In.
** Dealing River ** : [ Td ]
** Summary **
Main Pot: $365.00 | Rake: $3.00
Board: [ 4d 2d 2c 7s Td ]
Svammel balance $328.00, bet $157.00, collected $328.00, net +$171.00 [5d 6d] [ flush ]
ceyreste balance $70.20, lost $1.00 (folded)
perfekt balance $27.72, lost $8.00 (folded)
HERO balance $37.00, bet $194.00, collected $37.00, net +$-157.00 [Qd Qc] [ two pairs ]
ShermanPie balance $576.98, lost $8.00 (folded)

[alias2211]

Thanks arkana, glad to find out I am on the right track. This was a perfect HH to post here, I am hoping to see a few more posted so we can continue to analyze a few different scenarios against the floater.

In the past few weeks I have come to a better appreciation for this style, it's definitely an archetype that I think any good player should be able to morph into given the correct table conditions. This style can completely destroy a table, when you see huge stacks like 400-500BB, it's usually because the table has allowed this style to run rampant, not because someone got lucky 3-4 times in a short period. Let me tell you what I like about it:

PF he calls with a hand with a lot of potential. But if it comes ragged, he can easily get off of it (like it was all black and overs). And that would have been only $8/$157 or about 5% of his stack. Doyle would call this every single time, he would actually call up to 10% of the time w/o thinking about it (he gets to thinking more about the call when it's 20% of his stack!!!).

On the flop, his hand's potential is met with a gutshot SF draw. The pot size here is $27, so just about anything up to pot sized he's going to call because of implied odds to the river. And this goes with his consistent call every bet in position on the flop stance, so it's tough to tell if he actually has a good hand or just some junk.

On the turn, there is now $67 in the pot, compared to his ~$130 left. So now he sees you check, assumes weakness, and gets to bet his draw for a reasonable about ($50 into $67). If you fold, he picks up the pot with the worse hand. If you call, he gets to see another card for about the right price. If you push, well, he's only got to call another $80 for a crack at $167 pot, with plenty of outs. Some might call that pricing yourself into committment. But, if his approach of betting the turn is working well at the table, picking up a lot of decent sized pots with it, he is going to come out ahead in the long term by just picking up the pot over and over.

As for your play AGAINST the Floater, which I also like very much, you get your money in while ahead and still not giving him quite favorable odds. And how did you do it? You checkraised against him. This time it didn't work out but you got your money in while ahead.

I would like to point out that this style works best when you are the big stack at the table. As for bankroll management concerns, you probably need like 40 buyins to try to play this way more often than not, because of the pot sizes you're playing on a regular basis and the nature of pricing draws and hitting them. I would not recommend floating against a table until you have 200BB or more, maybe even 300BB, because your % of stack value for PF calls goes down proportional to your stack size.

Below are odds along the way for those interested in comparing value of bets/calls to likelihood of winning:

PF:

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=1591575
pokenum -h qd qc - 5d 6d
Holdem Hi: 1712304 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Qc Qd 1333031 77.85 371807 21.71 7466 0.44 0.781
6d 5d 371807 21.71 1333031 77.85 7466 0.44 0.219

FLOP:

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=1591580
pokenum -h qd qc - 5d 6d -- 4d 2d 2c
Holdem Hi: 990 enumerated boards containing 2c 4d 2d
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Qc Qd 606 61.21 384 38.79 0 0.00 0.612
6d 5d 384 38.79 606 61.21 0 0.00 0.388

TURN:

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=1591582
pokenum -h qd qc - 5d 6d -- 4d 2d 2c 7s
Holdem Hi: 44 enumerated boards containing 7s 2c 4d 2d
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Qc Qd 30 68.18 14 31.82 0 0.00 0.682
6d 5d 14 31.82 30 68.18 0 0.00 0.318

[arkana]

I would like to point out that this style works best when you are the big stack at the table. As for bankroll management concerns, you probably need like 40 buyins to try to play this way more often than not, because of the pot sizes you're playing on a regular basis and the nature of pricing draws and hitting them. I would not recommend floating against a table until you have 200BB or more, maybe even 300BB, because your % of stack value for PF calls goes down proportional to your stack size.

I dont think you necessarily have to have a big stack because you don't have to open your PF range up to be able to float, you can just decide to float on certain flops where its unlikely that your opponent hit the flop hard either (I prefer to have a decent chance of improving my hand too, ie middle pair with backdoor flush draw and overcard etc but as mentioned if you have the balls you can do it with air too). In NL there are lots of small - medium pots that are up for grabs if you are willing to put enough pressure on your opponent. Obviously you can't do it too often as others will become aware of what you are doing and start check raising you. If you want to float then you want to do it against weak TAGs (not the 10% VPIP though, also they should have a high c-bet frequency) on the right boards (you need good hand reading). Its definitely not something to be attempted if you can't even employ the basic TAG strategy successfully. Playing against floaters you simply have to identify them and check raise when you feel that they are floating (pick the wrong spots and you are handing them your money though). This requires putting a lot of money into the pot with marginal hands and is high variance. Floaters tend to go for the easy targets so check raising them will probably get them to stop floating against you, at least for a while.

[alias2211]

If you want to float then you want to do it against weak TAGs (not the 10% VPIP though, also they should have a high c-bet frequency) on the right boards (you need good hand reading). Its definitely not something to be attempted if you can't even employ the basic TAG strategy successfully.

TRUTH.

I do not recommend floating to players who are new to NLHE. Keep playing more 6MAX to develop your postflop skills and then try it when you have some improved hand reading/situation reading abilities. If you try it before that, you will lose your nerve after the first significant downswing, because downswings that floaters experience are indeed significant. And if it takes anything to be a successful floater, it has to be nerve.

[r8ed]

Great discussion here. It's strange how you (I) don't really contemplate these things until it is written down. I float against the right players and it's extremely productive. However, if somebody catches on and check-raises a couple times as mentioned, I do tend to back down a bit. I shouldn't but I do. So, that's a very effective tactic.

I absolutely hate having a floater and another reasonable player call a pfr when I hold a hand like AJ, then having them both call a cbet (whether I hit or miss). Do I really want to pump up the turn with a large pot when I could be beat by either player?

Floaters can really influence a table into being too passive or too aggressive. I prefer to be the floater and be controlling the table (where appropriate). Then I tend to switch it up if they catch on. I didn't realize I was doing this however. I just did it in certain circumstances.

[zenbitz]

You try to deal with them by hitting TP+Draw on the turn??? What if the turn's the Qh instead of the K?

I am most likely going AI. I should've perhaps done that here,too. If I recognize a guy who likes to float i position I am doing a lot of CR'ing, especially with semi-bluffs.

how do you deal with them?

Uh... I guess I am lost on the alternative. Both hands here, Hero is OOP vs a floater, not sure about the flop, but pretty sure he's ahead on the turn.
Line: (Hero-Villian)
PFR - Call
Cbet-Call (although it's not a Cbet with big over pair, it's a value bet)

So, on the turn you can either lead again (possibly folding a floater with crap) or check/raise (Ping's method). Either has it's pluses and minuses. One thing I don't like about the c/r turn is that it implies that if you c-bet a flop, get a call, and still hold nothing, you should sometimes (often??) check/fold? Because it's going to become transparent if you lead turn when you have nothing and c/r when you have a hand! I suppose you can set up a c/r with air, too, but looks like these dudes are calling you down.

But I think I dodged the question... how do *I* deal with them? I dunno! I play 25NL, so they aren't that crafty.

[Pingviini]

You try to deal with them by hitting TP+Draw on the turn??? What if the turn's the Qh instead of the K?

I am most likely going AI. I should've perhaps done that here,too. If I recognize a guy who likes to float i position I am doing a lot of CR'ing, especially with semi-bluffs.

how do you deal with them?

Uh... I guess I am lost on the alternative. Both hands here, Hero is OOP vs a floater, not sure about the flop, but pretty sure he's ahead on the turn.
Line: (Hero-Villian)
PFR - Call
Cbet-Call (although it's not a Cbet with big over pair, it's a value bet)

So, on the turn you can either lead again (possibly folding a floater with crap) or check/raise (Ping's method). Either has it's pluses and minuses. One thing I don't like about the c/r turn is that it implies that if you c-bet a flop, get a call, and still hold nothing, you should sometimes (often??) check/fold? Because it's going to become transparent if you lead turn when you have nothing and c/r when you have a hand! I suppose you can set up a c/r with air, too, but looks like these dudes are calling you down.

But I think I dodged the question... how do *I* deal with them? I dunno! I play 25NL, so they aren't that crafty.

I can do the CR with air, too. given a really good read. If I usually semi-bluff CR floaters that doesnt mean that I wont lead on turn with a semi-bluff or a made hand. Time to mix it up bud. CR'ing is just sending a message to others that stop the floating, you will get spanked.

Arkana pretty much nailed what floating is. thanks for that.

[Demiparadigm]

I like this thread... so I figured I'd post a hand.

I know you all hate the fact that I play trash for raises, so this is a free play to tell me how horrible I am again.

Villain had re-raised the past 3 times I raised, and won without showdown. I caught just enough on the flop to make a poorly timed semibluff to say "Watch out, because I can play back hard."

POKERSTARS GAME #4218782609: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($0.25/$0.50) - 2006/03/08 - 15:52:10 (ET)
Table 'Dubiago' Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: JJMONT ($88.45 in chips)
Seat 2: Sinnister81 ($43.20 in chips)
Seat 3: anacrime ($59.60 in chips)
Seat 4: kalepas ($33.90 in chips)
Seat 5: Demiparadigm ($114.90 in chips)
Seat 6: ViCiouSRaGe ($136.40 in chips)
Sinnister81: posts small blind $0.25
anacrime: posts big blind $0.50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Demiparadigm [6h 7c]
kalepas: calls $0.50
Demiparadigm: raises $1.50 to $2
ViCiouSRaGe: folds
JJMONT: folds
Sinnister81: raises $3 to $5
anacrime: calls $4.50
kalepas: folds
Demiparadigm: calls $3
*** FLOP *** [3s 4s 9c]
Sinnister81: bets $10
anacrime: folds
Demiparadigm: raises $67 to $77
Sinnister81: calls $28.20 and is all-in
*** TURN *** [3s 4s 9c] [Qc]
Sinnister81 said, "qq"
*** RIVER *** [3s 4s 9c Qc] [5h]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Sinnister81: shows [Qs Qd] (three of a kind, Queens)
Demiparadigm: shows [6h 7c] (a straight, Three to Seven)
Demiparadigm collected $88.90 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $91.90 | Rake $3
Board [3s 4s 9c Qc 5h]
Seat 1: JJMONT (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: Sinnister81 (small blind) showed [Qs Qd] and lost with three of a kind, Queens
Seat 3: anacrime (big blind) folded on the Flop
Seat 4: kalepas folded before Flop
Seat 5: Demiparadigm showed [6h 7c] and won ($88.90) with a straight, Three to Seven
Seat 6: ViCiouSRaGe folded before Flop (didn't bet)


On the plus side, when I make a huge suck out like this, it does wonders for my action on subsequent hands.

But anyway, back to the floating... I would say that the majority of the profit that I make in NLHE is from fold equity.
Actually, that's not true. The majority of the money I make is from people getting pissed at me making them fold, who then decide to give me their stack with weak holdings.
The main way that I get this image is by playing raised pots with "implied odds" hands. I then either miss the flop and fold, sense weakness, and put my opponent to a decision, or flop the monster and milk my opponent for stacks.

[r8ed]

Your HH has nothing to do with floating but the style you explain can work very well against many opps. If tighties keep raising preflop and cbetting, then either backing down to a flop reraise or a turn raise from you - you already won enough of their money to offset the times you end up folding. So if you can at a minimum break even while pissing them off - the next time they have TPTK and you hit two pair and reraise them.....

[Demiparadigm]

Your HH has nothing to do with floating...

The concept is similar, and I meant the hand history to show another way of looking at it. I am calling a raise with the intention of taking the pot away later. The semi-bluff was poorly timed, but I make a lot of money with these type of plays.

[Iwind]

Against two small stacks? Do you have reads on them, is that why you think this play will work? I imagine it would work much better against someone with a full stack. That also gives you better implied odds, I mean even if you call with the intention of taking the pot away later hitting a good flop and being paid off isn't a bad thing either. At least from what I've seen those without full stacks are MUCH better at making bad calls than they are folding. Once they have put a decent amount in the pot they don't like folding I've been called down doing stuff like this with oponent holding AK and such.

[Demiparadigm]

Against two small stacks? Do you have reads on them, is that why you think this play will work? I imagine it would work much better against someone with a full stack. That also gives you better implied odds, I mean even if you call with the intention of taking the pot away later hitting a good flop and being paid off isn't a bad thing either. At least from what I've seen those without full stacks are MUCH better at making bad calls than they are folding. Once they have put a decent amount in the pot they don't like folding I've been called down doing stuff like this with oponent holding AK and such.

This is only 50NL. They both have full stacks. They were also relatively tight players. Anacrime is the one most likely to have a hand, so when he folds, I feel I have a good chance to take this one away.

[Iwind]

Oh, didn't notice, thought 100NL was what you were playing. Different when it's tight players with full stacks, unless your image is too loose.

[SinkRox]

I think floating goes hand in hand with inflection / pressure points, gaining awareness of the pressure point in the hand (normally relative to stack sizes) then this would probably increase ur success of pulling the floating moves, and also defending against them.

These points are bassically the point where one player has to make a decision for all his chips, either beacuse he's been raised ai or threatened for his stack from a large enough raise... you gain a huge advantage if your the one applying the pressure at the pressure point and putting the op to the hard decision.

Harrington talks about this and if you search google theres a high stacks blogger who calles them pressure points and has discussed them pretty well.

[SmackinYaUp]

I think floating goes hand in hand with inflection / pressure points, gaining awareness of the pressure point in the hand (normally relative to stack sizes) then this would probably increase ur success of pulling the floating moves, and also defending against them.

These points are bassically the point where one player has to make a decision for all his chips, either beacuse he's been raised ai or threatened for his stack from a large enough raise... you gain a huge advantage if your the one applying the pressure at the pressure point and putting the op to the hard decision.

Harrington talks about this and if you search google theres a high stacks blogger who calles them pressure points and has discussed them pretty well.

you have a link for this saved anywhere?

[sunfunbunch]

This may help.

http://doubleas.blogspot.com/2005_05...12157952476050

This too.

http://doubleas.blogspot.com/2005/08...big-hands.html

[Iwind]

Very interesting posts in that blog for sure.

[fasin8ing]

Whats the difference between a Floater and a LAGG making a rope a dope play with a weak hand?

[dalecooper]

I float constantly. I love to float. It's the most aggravating, crippling thing in the world to do to a TAgg who likes to continuation bet, and it's pretty damn annoying to almost anyone except a loose, passive idiot.

[Greedo017]

I float constantly. I love to float. It's the most aggravating, crippling thing in the world to do to a TAgg who likes to continuation bet, and it's pretty damn annoying to almost anyone except a loose, passive idiot.

i hate you

[boost]

good thread.

These guys dont bother me much though, let them call my cbets. I can still pick up the pot from them on the turn often enough to breakeven. And then theres the times that I have the hand, and they stack to me because they dont believe my second barrel is firing anything but blanks.

[fasin8ing]

I float constantly. I love to float. It's the most aggravating, crippling thing in the world to do to a TAgg who likes to continuation bet, and it's pretty damn annoying to almost anyone except a loose, passive idiot.

i hate you

I hate you too .. LMAO

[jackvance]

Great thread.. I've been running into these guys and now I see a whole explanation here of how/why this strategy works!

But anyway, back to the floating... I would say that the majority of the profit that I make in NLHE is from fold equity.
Actually, that's not true. The majority of the money I make is from people getting pissed at me making them fold, who then decide to give me their stack with weak holdings.
The main way that I get this image is by playing raised pots with "implied odds" hands. I then either miss the flop and fold, sense weakness, and put my opponent to a decision, or flop the monster and milk my opponent for stacks.

I'm one of those suckers that have in the past given stacks to floaters simply b/c I kept getting pissed if I had a bad run of cards, forcing me to fold often. I did figure out ways to milk them for money though. Very interesting to see explained how this strategy works.

[metaxy6]

So, identify floaters and mix up C-bets and CR's, with and w/o a hand -
any other ideas about dealing with these pests??
I kind of like floating back/playing more hands in position against them.

Also, Arkana - I'm wondering on your QQ hand whether you think the play was optimal way of dealing with this kind of opponent??
It just seems to me that this hand is like a floater's fantasy.
I know you want to teach this opp a lesson, but is checking on a coordinated board really the way to do it?
You might have priced him out by smacking the turn instead of allowing him to price himself in. Yes, you got your $ in while ahead, but were never really applying significant pressure here.

[dalecooper]

By the way, the thing that really will drive a traditional TAgg off the deep end is this: float for a while and call a few of his continuation bets, then drive him off the pot each time. He'll get mad and start "protecting," which means raising more before the flop (so you won't call, because he hates you) and making his continuation bets larger and larger so you won't keep calling with basically anything. So what do you do? Keep calling. Tighten up just slightly though - float more selectively, with draws and middle pairs that might be good. And sooner or later you'll end up in a perfect storm: he's got a big pair and raises big, you hit a flop just right, and he starts betting into you so heavily that he's pot-committed by the turn. Free stack. All it takes is a little groundwork.

[fasin8ing]

So, identify floaters and mix up C-bets and CR's, with and w/o a hand -
any other ideas about dealing with these pests??
I kind of like floating back/playing more hands in position against them.

Also, Arkana - I'm wondering on your QQ hand whether you think the play was optimal way of dealing with this kind of opponent??
It just seems to me that this hand is like a floater's fantasy.
I know you want to teach this opp a lesson, but is checking on a coordinated board really the way to do it?
You might have priced him out by smacking the turn instead of allowing him to price himself in. Yes, you got your $ in while ahead, but were never really applying significant pressure here.

This is no different than playing in a SNG against a maniac and tightening up a little and not tilting trying to make a stand with Ace x. Once you take down a pot with aggression they leave you alone. I have re raised the turn on a couple occasions with overcards or air. They fold like paper.

[jackvance]

So, identify floaters and mix up C-bets and CR's, with and w/o a hand -
any other ideas about dealing with these pests??

Become one That's what I intend to do now, lol.

I always saw some guys do this, but I never really got to grasp the ins and outs of it.. but I found out now you guys here have a name for it ("floaters") and I've gotten a glimpse at how it works so now I have to try it out

Btw how I started to deal with them was pretty much like you said I think. (mind you, mere 20NL here) No more c-bets against the floaters when I miss completely, just give up the hand. C-bet only on somewhat promising flops and made hands. Always check the turn, wait for the inevitable bet and check/raise when you think you're ahead.

I kind of like floating back/playing more hands in position against them.

I remember this one time a floater was seated to my right. That's really bad. He pretty much dominated my whole stay at the table.

[arkana]

Also, Arkana - I'm wondering on your QQ hand whether you think the play was optimal way of dealing with this kind of opponent??
It just seems to me that this hand is like a floater's fantasy.
I know you want to teach this opp a lesson, but is checking on a coordinated board really the way to do it?
You might have priced him out by smacking the turn instead of allowing him to price himself in. Yes, you got your $ in while ahead, but were never really applying significant pressure here.

Trust me a floater's fantasy isn't being check raised all in. Obviously i dont check this board against normal opponents who will check behind with a draw, but if im sure he will bet when checked to and i can get all the money in being a big favourite then why would i want to lead the turn and make his life easier? This also gets me more respect for my future checks. A floater feasts on players who turn their hands face up by playing the turn so predictably out of position (bet if you have a strong hand and want to continue, check when you are giving up).

[metaxy6]

Btw how I started to deal with them was pretty much like you said I think...No more c-bets against the floaters when I miss completely, just give up the hand. C-bet only on somewhat promising flops and made hands. Always check the turn, wait for the inevitable bet and check/raise when you think you're ahead.

I'm not sure this is what's being advocated. Sounded more like adding more deception/different lines and fighting harder for pots rather than more transparency/predictable lines and giving up pots.

Trust me a floater's fantasy isn't being check raised all in. Obviously i dont check this board against normal opponents who will check behind with a draw, but if im sure he will bet when checked to and i can get all the money in being a big favourite then why would i want to lead the turn and make his life easier? This also gets me more respect for my future checks. A floater feasts on players who turn their hands face up by playing the turn so predictably out of position (bet if you have a strong hand and want to continue, check when you are giving up).

I understand, and didn't mean to sound excessively critical. I just wonder if the floater likes the way this plays out because he never faces a really tough decision. Some of the posters who have introduced pressure points might be able to say more about this, but it seemed to me that we consistently want to re-direct pressure on this kind of player. The stack sizes didn't allow you to do that anywhere near as effectively after he bet the turn.


Maybe I'm being too results oriented. Given a choice between deception and force here, I'd go with force. You may like the result of getting respect for future checks, but getting credit for willingness to fire a second barrell (a huge one) is also a decent outcome.
It seems to me that this player's style allowed him to take down a pot that he shouldn't have. He knows that, and it only encourages him to keep playing this way.

[SmackinYaUp]

just make sure you identify them correctly. there's a very fine line between floaters and calling stations. i hate firing $40 turn bets into calling stations whom I'd mis-identified as floaters.

also, check the turn sometimes with tptk against these guys. either they check behind and call a value bet, get re-raised or stack you with a set...but most of the time it works in your favor.

[arkana]

I understand, and didn't mean to sound excessively critical. I just wonder if the floater likes the way this plays out because he never faces a really tough decision. Some of the posters who have introduced pressure points might be able to say more about this, but it seemed to me that we consistently want to re-direct pressure on this kind of player. The stack sizes didn't allow you to do that anywhere near as effectively after he bet the turn.

It sounds like you don't quite understand what pressure points should be used for. The idea of pressure points is to put your opponents to tough decisions and make yours easier, but if you can make it easy for him to make the wrong decision that is even better.

Maybe I'm being too results oriented. Given a choice between deception and force here, I'd go with force. You may like the result of getting respect for future checks, but getting credit for willingness to fire a second barrell (a huge one) is also a decent outcome.
It seems to me that this player's style allowed him to take down a pot that he shouldn't have. He knows that, and it only encourages him to keep playing this way.

You are being very results orientated, more than 70% of the time he loses his stack here. Also if i bet this turn strong again he most likely folds and then i have yet again made the strength of my hand clear to him on the turn which is more likely to encourage him to float again because he knows i will lead the turn if i have it and check when giving up. If you never check raise this guy then youd better start firing second barrels with bluffs too otherwise hes gonna float you every damn flop and take down all the pots you dont want.

[metaxy6]

At the risk of getting sidetracked from the topic of floating/dealing with floaters,
for clarity's sake -
It's been said and said again that regular CR-ing is an important part of dealing with this type of opponent, but so is firing again - hand or no hand. If all you ever do is CR this type of opponent, then you’re opening yourself to exploitation. Also, the board and your read of his range should drive the action. CR is not appropriate for every board.

Looking at the hand in isolation, you're absolutely right that firing a big bet at the turn makes it obvious you have a hand. But if you take the hand in a context of mixing up betting, checking, check-raising - which is what's being called for - then it's a lot harder for the villian to read your hand in this spot.

It’s because of that context of mixed play that I feel fine about just going ahead and firing at this. Firing enough to price him out. He doesn’t really find out anything, except that I’m willing to fire another round, and hard. This is true because of the willingness to also fire with no hand at all. And CR with a hand. And CR with no hand. And check/fold for that matter.

I know that a lot of people might say screw that, it’s great that you got him to get his $ in as a major dog. Maybe all that matters is that he’ll stack off most of the time the way this plays out. I still tend to see it as the opponent not being forced to make a huge mistake, since he's been allowed to get himself close enough to priced in w/o very much behind.

Anyways, you seem to feel fine about the hand because you know how often you're going to win here.
You almost definitely have more experience than I at identifying and countering this type of opponent.

Are you always ok with CR a floater on a draw-heavy board? Wouldn't the aware player adjust and start checking his draws behind you?
Would you play it the same way w/ 99? AK?
What about the times the floater has a hand? CR gets expensive when he's flopping or turning sets.

[jackvance]

I'm not sure this is what's being advocated. Sounded more like adding more deception/different lines and fighting harder for pots rather than more transparency/predictable lines and giving up pots.

I don't think this adds predictability. If a check doesn't anymore mean I'm weak b/c I'm very capable of c/r, it does discourage them to some extent. I do continue betting though, in some circumstances. One that comes to mind is when I flopped a set when I raised a middelish pp and I doubled up against his 2 pair. (funny thing, he took a stack 3 turns later with again bottom 2 pair against a guy sticking to his TPTK.

ust make sure you identify them correctly. there's a very fine line between floaters and calling stations.

This is still not easy for me. However I think it's more dangerous to not realize floating is a valid strategy. Your average by-the-book poker player who think his ways are the only right way to play poker can very easily lose a stack to a floater when he thinks it's just a stupid newbie calling station..

[fasin8ing]

At the risk of getting sidetracked from the topic of floating/dealing with floaters,
for clarity's sake -
It's been said and said again that regular CR-ing is an important part of dealing with this type of opponent, but so is firing again - hand or no hand. If all you ever do is CR this type of opponent, then you’re opening yourself to exploitation. Also, the board and your read of his range should drive the action. CR is not appropriate for every board.

You make an awesome point.. We will C bet more often than we check raise. There is a point to check raising.... If you are playing TAGG poker C betting is habitual. I can see myself firing into a floater 1/2 3/4th pot size bets all day ... Check raising is leaving you wide open for a dissapointment unless you really have a hand. Check raising all in is a different topic. Most importantly said... " CRing can get expensive when you read player wrong " Without a redraw to the nuts , your paying him off more than you should.