Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Poker playbook


Recommended Posts

I'd be interested in hearing about various plays people make that were +EV at the time. If you can think of something that gets you a caller, gets you a free card, gets your opponent to fold, loosens up the table, or otherwise accomplishes the goal you're hoping for, this is the thread. I'll start by posting a couple I've seen recently, or seen on this board, but please add in any if you can think of them.

1) The non isolation play.

I think everyone knows about the isolation play. A short stack enters the pot. You want to play against him, but not against anyone else. You think you have him beat, but you don't have a monster hand. Instead of calling his bet, you raise big to isolate against him.

But sometimes, you don't want to isolate. Sometimes your hand is strong enough that you're afraid the short stack will kill your action from other players. In those cases, you might want to invite a downstream player to try to knock you off the pot.

For example, recently in a live tournament, a player to my right loses most of his chips. He shoves a couple hands later with junk, and doubles up, but is still short. A few plays later, he shoves again. I have pocket kings. I look around the table, notice a decent player in MP looking at his cards and then intently watching the action, and figure I can hook him. It's a talkative table, so I look at my cards, then look at the UTG player and say, did you have to push this hand? Then I go in the tank for a couple seconds, and reluctantly call. The player to my left sees this, and shoves, thinking I'm weak, and UTG could easily be on tilt. He had eights. If I had raised, I don't stack him. If I hadn't looked weak, he might just have called and folded when an overcard appeared.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 132
  • Created
  • Last Reply

A loose player sat down at a NL ring game a few days ago. He's playing up his loose/dumb image to a T. He raises the pot to 5 BB from EP, and gets a caller from MP. A player in LP, who had just gotten bad beated on the previous hand, shoves his last 8 BB in the pot. Both blinds call the 8 BB. The loose player announces a raise. Everyone quickly informs him that he can't raise, because the 8 BB wasn't a full bet. The dealer confirms it. He asks for the floor. The floorman comes over, and quickly confirms it as well. So he calls. The middle position player tosses his hand, figuring he's up against a monster.

Flop comes down rags. Everyone checks to him, and he checks behind. Turn is a 9. Check, check, bet, fold, fold. He flips over K9s. Everyone asked him why he wanted to raise so badly preflop. He said, I didn't. I just wanted y'all to think I did. He then scooped the pot and left the table.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A loose player sat down at a NL ring game a few days ago. He's playing up his loose/dumb image to a T. He raises the pot to 5 BB from EP, and gets a caller from MP. A player in LP, who had just gotten bad beated on the previous hand, shoves his last 8 BB in the pot. Both blinds call the 8 BB. The loose player announces a raise. Everyone quickly informs him that he can't raise, because the 8 BB wasn't a full bet. The dealer confirms it. He asks for the floor. The floorman comes over, and quickly confirms it as well. So he calls. The middle position player tosses his hand, figuring he's up against a monster.

Flop comes down rags. Everyone checks to him, and he checks behind. Turn is a 9. Check, check, bet, fold, fold. He flips over K9s. Everyone asked him why he wanted to raise so badly preflop. He said, I didn't. I just wanted y'all to think I did. He then scooped the pot and left the table.

Explain this to me like I'm a donk.
Link to post
Share on other sites

For example, recently in a live tournament, a player to my right loses most of his chips. He shoves a couple hands later with junk, and doubles up, but is still short. A few plays later, he shoves again. I have pocket kings. I look around the table, notice a decent player in MP looking at his cards and then intently watching the action, and figure I can hook him. It's a talkative table, so I look at my cards, then look at the UTG player and say, did you have to push this hand? Then I go in the tank for a couple seconds, and reluctantly call. The player to my left sees this, and shoves, thinking I'm weak, and UTG could easily be on tilt. He had eights. If I had raised, I don't stack him. If I hadn't looked weak, he might just have called and folded when an overcard appeared.

you acted weak, and they still thought you were weak? I thought weak = strong and vice-versa...or is this just common knowledge for FBG only?
Link to post
Share on other sites

A loose player sat down at a NL ring game a few days ago. He's playing up his loose/dumb image to a T. He raises the pot to 5 BB from EP, and gets a caller from MP. A player in LP, who had just gotten bad beated on the previous hand, shoves his last 8 BB in the pot. Both blinds call the 8 BB. The loose player announces a raise. Everyone quickly informs him that he can't raise, because the 8 BB wasn't a full bet. The dealer confirms it. He asks for the floor. The floorman comes over, and quickly confirms it as well. So he calls. The middle position player tosses his hand, figuring he's up against a monster.

Flop comes down rags. Everyone checks to him, and he checks behind. Turn is a 9. Check, check, bet, fold, fold. He flips over K9s. Everyone asked him why he wanted to raise so badly preflop. He said, I didn't. I just wanted y'all to think I did. He then scooped the pot and left the table.

Explain this to me like I'm a donk.
If someone shoves, but what they shove is not a valid bet (or in this case, a valid raise - i.e. 2x the last bet) it is not considered a raisable bet (it's like a call)
Link to post
Share on other sites

The fake string stopngo.

This isn't the most ethical play, but it's powerful. I think most people know about the stopngo, which is a tournament move where you bet a little less than half your chips preflop, then shove the rest in on any flop. It's risky, but pretty effective at picking up a big pot, and is often preferable to a straight shove if you're at the point in the tournament where people are calling all-in raises with middling aces because they know that people are shoving with anything.

Here's the twist: Late in a tournament, a player wants to steal the blinds. There's been a lot of stealing and restealing going on. The player has about 10 BB. He takes out 3 BB, puts them in front of the line, and then reaches back and grabs the rest and puts them in front of the line, too. Everyone instantly calls a string bet on him. He's forced to keep the raise out there. If anyone calls, he shoves on the flop.

This is a pretty standard stopngo play - but what's powerful about it is that it gives the impression that you really wanted more chips in the pot preflop. It's very difficult to raise him without a powerhouse hand, because it seems like he wanted to get all in anyways. But at the same time, it invites a caller who thinks they're getting a cheap shot at stacking him. When he shoves the flop, though, it's hard to call unless you crush the flop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For example, recently in a live tournament, a player to my right loses most of his chips. He shoves a couple hands later with junk, and doubles up, but is still short. A few plays later, he shoves again. I have pocket kings. I look around the table, notice a decent player in MP looking at his cards and then intently watching the action, and figure I can hook him. It's a talkative table, so I look at my cards, then look at the UTG player and say, did you have to push this hand? Then I go in the tank for a couple seconds, and reluctantly call. The player to my left sees this, and shoves, thinking I'm weak, and UTG could easily be on tilt. He had eights. If I had raised, I don't stack him. If I hadn't looked weak, he might just have called and folded when an overcard appeared.

you acted weak, and they still thought you were weak? I thought weak = strong and vice-versa...or is this just common knowledge for FBG only?
That's correct. I did act weak, and a top player would not have been fooled. The reason people act weak when strong and strong when weak, though, is because it sometimes works.
Link to post
Share on other sites

the fake-bet thing is pretty funny, but whoever mucked his hand for free because of it was an idiot.

He folded instead of calling the extra 3 BB. I agree that he's an idiot, but I'm guessing he had ace junk or something and just wanted to beat the lag.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Homegame. Playing 6 card stud hi-low with no qualifiers, a wild (probably nines or tens) and a twist, meaning you can pay to discard and draw one more card (down for down and up for up) after all the cards have been dealt.

We're four handed on the river (:confused:) and it's pretty clear from the boards and prior betting that it's me and one other guy, to my left, vying for low. I don't remember the exact hands but his board has been better than mine for at least two streets and I think he recognizes this, too. We both twist and I pair my ace.

The two high hands bet and raise into me and I tank. I know I'm beat but decide to try anyway. I lean forward and stare for about 20 seconds at his board like I'm slowly figuring out what he has and then give a tiny little jump - an aha. I three-bet and he gets a big houndog look and reluctantly folds. FWIW, it was the same opponent from this recent hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice munga. I think that only works because people know you're a smart, analytical player. If I were to try the same thing, people would call me down more often than not. It's all about your table image.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one that the Grinder pulled on me in a tournament I played against him last year. I was relatively shortstacked at the final table, and there was a lot on the line. He bets into me, and I call. The flop comes down three spades. I'm first to act, but before I can, he says I call. Then he stops himself and says, sorry I thought you said all in. I called the floor, who warned him, but there was nothing I could do - I couldn't shove into him, because he was clearly planning on calling (the guy is a LAG, too). So I check/folded the flop with my unmade hand, instead of shoving like I had originally intended. That's a good (but unethical) move for taking the out-of-position advantage away from a player who seems likely to stopngo. It's kind of like the opposite of someone checking in the dark.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one that the Grinder pulled on me in a tournament I played against him last year. I was relatively shortstacked at the final table, and there was a lot on the line. He bets into me, and I call. The flop comes down three spades. I'm first to act, but before I can, he says I call. Then he stops himself and says, sorry I thought you said all in. I called the floor, who warned him, but there was nothing I could do - I couldn't shove into him, because he was clearly planning on calling (the guy is a LAG, too). So I check/folded the flop with my unmade hand, instead of shoving like I had originally intended. That's a good (but unethical) move for taking the out-of-position advantage away from a player who seems likely to stopngo. It's kind of like the opposite of someone checking in the dark.

I swear I saw him do something similar on TV recently. Can't remember what event it was though. Maybe I'm just imaging it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one that the Grinder pulled on me in a tournament I played against him last year. I was relatively shortstacked at the final table, and there was a lot on the line. He bets into me, and I call. The flop comes down three spades. I'm first to act, but before I can, he says I call. Then he stops himself and says, sorry I thought you said all in. I called the floor, who warned him, but there was nothing I could do - I couldn't shove into him, because he was clearly planning on calling (the guy is a LAG, too). So I check/folded the flop with my unmade hand, instead of shoving like I had originally intended. That's a good (but unethical) move for taking the out-of-position advantage away from a player who seems likely to stopngo. It's kind of like the opposite of someone checking in the dark.

I swear I saw him do something similar on TV recently. Can't remember what event it was though. Maybe I'm just imaging it.
He swore up and down it was an accident, too. It was a really effective move by him because I was steaming after it. I called the floor over because I knew it wasn't an accident and I wanted to get everyone else riled up while giving me a minute to cool down.
Link to post
Share on other sites

He swore up and down it was an accident, too. It was a really effective move by him because I was steaming after it. I called the floor over because I knew it wasn't an accident and I wanted to get everyone else riled up while giving me a minute to cool down.

Good move to delay the hand and allow yourself time to recup and settle down.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I play low limit NL online, so perhaps this is below the level of most here, but I'll try to add to the discussion anyway.

Following the strong=weak philosophy I've noticed that in the online environment fast=strong and since we know that strong=weak we can therefore assume fast=weak. I know, nothing new here, but I've also noticed that occasionally there are a few players who also know that fast=weak. When I see an otherwise good player with a marginal hand call down a fast bettor I immediately know that he is on the lookout for fast betting. I will then play alot (especially pairs) against this good opponent and when I hit the flop will fast bet it. Invariably he will call. On the turn I again will fastbet, but leave plenty of room for him to come over the top. When he does I'll fastbet him all-in and collect the chips.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tangling with the big stack

I know that the conventional wisdom says not to tangle with the big stack. But when you're on the bubble, ITM, or at the final table (or deep in a very large or online tourney), it can actually be a very good idea. Let's say you're at the final table, and you have one of the two biggest stacks. The other big stack raises while you're still left to act. The little stacks fold. Now you resteal from him.

It's high risk, high reward, but it's much more likely to result in you taking the pot right there than tangling with one of the small stacks. An even remotely competent player will know that they should avoid tangling with the big stacks. They'll also know that you shoudl want to avoid tangling with them. So they have to be afraid that you have bullets. On the other hand, they'll also know that you might be stealing. But if you're putting them to a decision for all or even most of their chips, they'll have to fold a lot of big hands, especially if the other players at the table are close to elimination and will move them way up the ladder.

I laid down AK to this move recently at a final table, and the guy flipped over 22. I'd actually rather make this move with air than with a big hand, because if he calls, he probably has jacks or better or maybe AK/AQ.

The beauty of this is it knocks his stack down, while increasing yours. That's a huge move. It also works without a confrontation, which should be your goal at the final table.

In fact, for big stacks, you should probably avoid taking a flop against a small stack at the final table. The small stack is going to get pot committed way too easily and play looser postflop than they should. You should only play against them with hands that are good, as Sklansky said, "hot and cold". On the other hand, big stacks can easily be stolen from postflop because they will play too tight.

It's higher risk, but against competent players who follow the conventional wisdom, you can usually profit by following unconventional wisdom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I play low limit NL online, so perhaps this is below the level of most here, but I'll try to add to the discussion anyway.Following the strong=weak philosophy I've noticed that in the online environment fast=strong and since we know that strong=weak we can therefore assume fast=weak. I know, nothing new here, but I've also noticed that occasionally there are a few players who also know that fast=weak. When I see an otherwise good player with a marginal hand call down a fast bettor I immediately know that he is on the lookout for fast betting. I will then play alot (especially pairs) against this good opponent and when I hit the flop will fast bet it. Invariably he will call. On the turn I again will fastbet, but leave plenty of room for him to come over the top. When he does I'll fastbet him all-in and collect the chips.

Awesome. This is probably way more useful way more often than some of the ones I said. Please don't worry about what works at what level, either. Even if you think it's common knowledge, let's get a bunch of them written down. Worst case, everyone's seen that move before and knows how to handle it. Best case, it starts a conversation about the move you discussed and how to counteract it, and we all learn.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to watch for players who routinely fold to the mostly donk-ish min re-raise or call the min re-raise and check/fold the next street. Usually they are the same players who use the min re-raise when they have a monster. It is easy to steal pots from these players even when you have air. This seems to work well for me at $25NL and $50NL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another good piece of information you can get from people in a live game is their reads on other players. If you're in seat eight talking to the player in seat nine, who just played a hand against seat two, ask him about his read on that player. A lot of times they'll tell you something that you hadn't even noticed. I've had someone explain why they called, and it was something like "I asked him if his ace had me outkicked, and his face dropped as he said probably. So I called, because I knew he didn't have an ace". Or "Did you see the way he was shuffling his cards when he saw the flop? He was planning on folding the whole way until it checked around to him".

Usually when someone talks to you about how to play, they're trying to set you up for some later play. That's a given. But there are two times that's not true - when they just made a questionable play, and when they just watched someone else make one. When they just made the questionable play, their ego is going to be fragile. If you ask them what they folded, or ask them why they called a big bet with top pair weak kicker, they'll give you way more information than they should. When someone else made the questionable play, their ego is going to be in full force. A lot of times, they'll try to explain why the other guy was an idiot, and that tells you a lot about their thought process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of which, if someone asks you about your kicker on an ace high board, it means one of two things. If they're deciding to call on the turn or river, they legitimately have a weak kicker. If it's your turn to act, they have a set.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any chat tips for online play?

I've found it is sometimes easy to goad a player into showing his hand if you intend to fold. Usually by demeaning his play as he will feel like his ego is hurt and want to show he plays well or that you suck.

Additionally usually the guy chatting while you are taking has the goods and wants you to call.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another cheap/questionable move - if you're a low to middle stack in a tournament, shuffle your chips. You're not supposed to keep a dirty stack, but lots of people shuffle their chips, and it's kind of an irritating habit, so nobody will really pay attention.

If you are a chip shuffler, by the way, stop it or learn to control the speed with which you do it. If you shuffle your chips quickly, I know you're in an intense mood right now. If you shuffle them slowly, you're a lot more laid back. Chances are good that the fast chip shuffler is feeling more pressured and is looking for reasons to play, while the slow shuffler is looking for reasons to fold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A good rule of thumb: don't call with little pairs in an all in situation.

Obviously if there is a lot of dead money in the pot, it's different, but, for example, if someone shoves in to your BB and you hold 22, he's always going to have two overcards unless he spefically holds a deuce. And if he holds any pocket pair, you're about as far behind as if he held aces.

In fact, you should only call an all in bet in a tournament if it gives you better odds than you'd get on a later bet. That means it has to be better than your chances of stealing a blind, better than your chances of winning with 97o or some other junky hand, and better than your chances of lasting long enough to pick up aces. You're giving up all of that when you make this call. You don't have any fold equity whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like a lot of players forget the gap concept and/or the high end of their opponent's range when they call all in bets in tournaments. They realize that if you need Kx to raise, you need Ax to call, so you see people calling big bets with ace anything but looking surprised when their opponent flips over a bigger ace or a pair higher than their kicker. When you call an all in, you really need to have something good. It's much better to shove your chips in on your own terms.

I think the reason people forget this is that they got confused by Harrington. He told people they had to push with junk when they got to an m of 5 or lower, but a lot of people started calling with junk instead. Which is odd, because in the same book, he talked about your calling requirements still need to be ridiculously tight to be +EV against even a super loose range. I'm seeing a lot of tournaments where the later levels are going way too fast because people start getting nutso. This isn't true of all tournaments, but if you're in one of these, your strategy adjustment should be to get more aggressive a couple rounds before the bubble.

If 100 spots pay, you should be getting more aggressive when there are 200 spots left - start playing aggressive pre bubble poker before they do. You want to build up enough of a stack that when people lose their minds, you can tighten way up and wait for a chance to pick them off. That's hard to do as the blinds raise, so you'll need to be pretty aggressive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In general, if you've played in a particular tournament before, and a lot of the same players will be there again this week, you can expect it to run similarly this time. Develop a strategy for the tournament and stick to it - in addition to changing gears to adjust to changes in your image or your table, which is very reactive and thus predictable by good players, you should also be changing gears based on changes you expect in the different stagest of the tournament.

For example, a lot of pros are super tight in the first hour of a tournament. If the chip stacks are deep, though, and your competition is weak, I'm willing to loosen up for cheap money in an attempt to double through someone who overplays TPTK or two pair on a flushed board. There are great opportunities early, and a lot of the top players eschew them altogether, which gives you a better than normal chance to win against weaker than normal opposition.

When you do play, though, you should only be building the pot with two pair or better. Dump your straight and flush draws in the face of serious resistance, even if the pot odds are right - you'll find another spot later. Assume there are very little implied odds to your flush, but good implied odds for even barely concealed straights and great implied odds for your sets and boats.

As the blinds go up, but before the antes kick in, there's usually a time when even the loose players tighten up. Limping when the blinds are 25/50 is one thing, but when the blinds are 100/200, people don't play their truly junky cards anymore. If they're tightening up, you have two choices - loosen up, or play even tighter than they do. I lean towards playing even tighter than they do, because you want to rehabilitate your image after playing more hands early than the top players.

Once the antes kick in, the standard thought is that you should start stealing more often. I completely disagree. The reason you shouldn't do this is that EVERYONE is doing this. Your raises will get no respect, so you'll get callers and reraises that you don't want. You could choose to become a reraiser here, but in the grand scheme of things, the pots aren't big enough. Given the choice, I tighten way up here and avoid the feeding frenzy.

The second and third post-ante blind levels are when you should loosen up. By now, people will have noticed you've been playing tight while everyone else loosened up, so they're going to fear your raises more. And now is the time to make them pay for this by attacking blinds that are twice as valuable as the ones you ignored earlier.

As you get close to the bubble, conventional wisdom is to tighten up. You should also be paying attention to the moment that people at YOUR table seem to think the bubble has started. The first time someone starts making crazy bubble moves (either crazy tight or crazy loose) it's like a switch flips at most tables. Good tournament players will loosen up and steal from the players who tighten up. What usually ends up happening is that half of the table plays too tight, and the other half plays too loose. If that's how my table is, I'd rather err on the side of being too tight in terms of my opening hand requirements. I don't want to tangle for a lot of chips against people who will reraise with A8o. I don't want to raise with a hand I can't feel confident calling a reraise with.

Pay attention, and tighten up your raising requirements. Pay attention to who's loose, though, and loosen your reraising requirements against them. Now is the time to resteal, because the players who are trying to take advantage of people's fear of going out on the bubble are still afraid of going out on the bubble themselves. If you can't afford to resteal without going all in, though, then the opposite applies - you should be looking to steal blinds with all in bets.

Once you're through the bubble, everyone who tightened way up goes nuts. They figure that they've made the money, but they let their chipstack erode too much so now's the time to go all in or fold. This is a very profitable time to pick up a premium hand, but otherwise, sit back and watch. You should be able to move up a full prize level just by waiting.

This is what I call the consolidation. If the average stack before the bubble is 20,000, the average stack will be about 25,000 to 30,000 within twenty minutes. It doesn't really matter who wins these all in confrontations if it's not you - the reality is that some people are going to win, and some are going to lose, until most of the short stacks are gone. Then things settle back down again until either a big jump in prizes or the final table gets in sight. You have a green light to steal during this time.

This isn't true of every tournament, but it's generally been true of tournaments I've played in. Players adjust over time, though, and different tournaments run differently. The point is to pay attention to how things seem to flow, and have a plan before you sit down. If you get knocked off that plan because you got caught bluffing, so be it. If you don't follow that plan perfectly, but still play good poker, you'll be fine. But it'll remind you when to change gears and why, in a way that's different from everyone else. And that's a very valuable thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another move: When you go all in, put your headphones in your ears and close your eyes. There's nothing they can say or do to elicit a reaction from you if you can't even sense them. You'll look like a knob, but that's OK.

Then, when the blinds are folding around to the button, sneak a peak at your cards and reach for your iPod. A good opponent will notice and won't steal with anything short of an all in bet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is odd, because in the same book, he talked about your calling requirements still need to be ridiculously tight to be +EV against even a super loose range. I'm seeing a lot of tournaments where the later levels are going way too fast because people start getting nutso. This isn't true of all tournaments, but if you're in one of these, your strategy adjustment should be to get more aggressive a couple rounds before the bubble.

Actually it is not odd at all. It is hard to play good poker. Most people lack the discipline to play with strong underlying concepts. So they go buffet style will pokers - take a little for here, and less from there. People that are typically more loose and aggressive, focus on the parts of books that tell them to be aggressive. They say "I already do that, and now I have validation from a champ." But then they have gaps. They semi-bluff when they have zero chance of winning the pot. They ignore how tight they should be in other places. Timid players often simply can often cite Sklansky or Harrington at length, but simply don't raise enough. These players almost never bluff enough. When I was a strong player, I read all the books and then tried to figure out who had read what, what parts they understood, and where they had the gap. You can put people on a hand with much greater specificity if you can get at their underlying thought process and motivation for being at the table.My favorite move, is to gamble on anything for low stakes (compared to the stakes at the table) at the table. I will bet on the suit of the last card on the flop, if the next pitch on the screen will be a ball or a strike, about who will win the next pot- anything. This creates an atmosphere of fun and gambling and no one takes me as seriously - because they am sure I am just an action junkie.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Any chat tips for online play?I've found it is sometimes easy to goad a player into showing his hand if you intend to fold. Usually by demeaning his play as he will feel like his ego is hurt and want to show he plays well or that you suck.Additionally usually the guy chatting while you are taking has the goods and wants you to call.

When I play, I don't even have the chat box open...so I don't think any chat tips will work. The only time I ever look at the chat box is if someone was dealt a ridiculously bad beat, I'll look to see if anyone is typing in which case I know that they are a bit unriled.I've read most of this thread, and the only part I didn't necessarily agree with is BF's move to tangle with the big stack. I make it a rule of thumb to NEVER F with the big stack, unless I have a huge hand. Conversely, if I'm the big stack, I will push around the table as much as possible. Usually I will reraise any raiser when I have position and a decent hand, I'll enter/raise most unopened pots with any two playable cards. I pay particular attention to the small stacks however, as they will raise/call with most any two cards.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I play low limit NL online, so perhaps this is below the level of most here, but I'll try to add to the discussion anyway.Following the strong=weak philosophy I've noticed that in the online environment fast=strong and since we know that strong=weak we can therefore assume fast=weak. I know, nothing new here, but I've also noticed that occasionally there are a few players who also know that fast=weak. When I see an otherwise good player with a marginal hand call down a fast bettor I immediately know that he is on the lookout for fast betting. I will then play alot (especially pairs) against this good opponent and when I hit the flop will fast bet it. Invariably he will call. On the turn I again will fastbet, but leave plenty of room for him to come over the top. When he does I'll fastbet him all-in and collect the chips.

I like to use a similar line of thinking but in the opposite direction. When I flop a monster and am in a pot with someone I know to be aggressive, I have found it very profitable to use the time clock to my advantage. If I can get them to bet into me, then I will take my time responding, often hitting the "time" button when the warning is delivered. My goal is to make them think I am calculating my pot odds. Often their next move is to make an overly aggressive play to get you out of the pot at which time you can collect a huge amount of chips from them.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I play low limit NL online, so perhaps this is below the level of most here, but I'll try to add to the discussion anyway.Following the strong=weak philosophy I've noticed that in the online environment fast=strong and since we know that strong=weak we can therefore assume fast=weak. I know, nothing new here, but I've also noticed that occasionally there are a few players who also know that fast=weak. When I see an otherwise good player with a marginal hand call down a fast bettor I immediately know that he is on the lookout for fast betting. I will then play alot (especially pairs) against this good opponent and when I hit the flop will fast bet it. Invariably he will call. On the turn I again will fastbet, but leave plenty of room for him to come over the top. When he does I'll fastbet him all-in and collect the chips.

I like to use a similar line of thinking but in the opposite direction. When I flop a monster and am in a pot with someone I know to be aggressive, I have found it very profitable to use the time clock to my advantage. If I can get them to bet into me, then I will take my time responding, often hitting the "time" button when the warning is delivered. My goal is to make them think I am calculating my pot odds. Often their next move is to make an overly aggressive play to get you out of the pot at which time you can collect a huge amount of chips from them.
I think the real answer lies inside both posts. There is no specific "time" tell. You simply identify people's betting patterns in regards to time taken (either by them or their opponent) and exploit them.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll look to see if anyone is typing in which case I know that they are a bit unriled.

Unriled? Is that a combination of riled and unraveled?
Exactly! Hey, it's early, I haven't even finished a cup of coffee yet
Link to post
Share on other sites

I play low limit NL online, so perhaps this is below the level of most here, but I'll try to add to the discussion anyway.Following the strong=weak philosophy I've noticed that in the online environment fast=strong and since we know that strong=weak we can therefore assume fast=weak. I know, nothing new here, but I've also noticed that occasionally there are a few players who also know that fast=weak. When I see an otherwise good player with a marginal hand call down a fast bettor I immediately know that he is on the lookout for fast betting. I will then play alot (especially pairs) against this good opponent and when I hit the flop will fast bet it. Invariably he will call. On the turn I again will fastbet, but leave plenty of room for him to come over the top. When he does I'll fastbet him all-in and collect the chips.

I like to use a similar line of thinking but in the opposite direction. When I flop a monster and am in a pot with someone I know to be aggressive, I have found it very profitable to use the time clock to my advantage. If I can get them to bet into me, then I will take my time responding, often hitting the "time" button when the warning is delivered. My goal is to make them think I am calculating my pot odds. Often their next move is to make an overly aggressive play to get you out of the pot at which time you can collect a huge amount of chips from them.
Interesting. I was told (and have generally found to be true) that you should beware the player who thinks for a long time and calls. That's usually a sign of a monster.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read most of this thread, and the only part I didn't necessarily agree with is BF's move to tangle with the big stack. I make it a rule of thumb to NEVER F with the big stack, unless I have a huge hand. Conversely, if I'm the big stack, I will push around the table as much as possible. Usually I will reraise any raiser when I have position and a decent hand, I'll enter/raise most unopened pots with any two playable cards. I pay particular attention to the small stacks however, as they will raise/call with most any two cards.

I totally agree and would have given the same advice at one time. I definitely agree that you should exercise caution if the big stack is loose/bad/lucky. But you're exactly the type of player I'm hoping for when I have a big stack at the final table. Let's say you have 700k, I have 700k, and there are three or four other players with 100-200k. The blinds are 15/30k with a 3k ante. With antes, the preflop pot is 60k. You raise to 90k preflop. I reraise to 200 from the SB/BB. Unless you have a monster, you're folding. I will almost always pick up a pot with 150k in it, while you will almost always lose 90k. Now our stacks are 850k vs. 600k - that's a huge leap I just made towards first place. The dangers for me are that you have a monster, or that a player who acts after me will call the all in bet. So I have to use some caution. But it's a hugely +EV bet most of the time, especially if the players to my left have a decent stack. The other thing that makes this super valuable is that it changes your style. You can't steal when I'm still in the pot. Now your stack is dwindling. Meanwhile, I can steal mercilessly from the small stacks. That's a huge advantage for me. I only need to make this move once (or maybe twice) at a final table to make myself a big favorite to win it all.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another move I like:

There are twelve people left in the tourney, and there are two very loose players at my table, both to my left. When I get the button, I will fold around more often than not, with the hope that those two battle. Then I'll steal from the cutoff or even UTG/UTG+1 with anything. The thought process is that it lets them get their action fix, it makes my actual steal look a lot more realistic when I pass on the obvious button steal opportunity, and it gives me a much better chance of making the final table when those two tangle incessantly. There are a lot of guys who will get into ridiculous all in confrontations with ace junk vs. QJ or a small pp just because they're defending their blinds, vs. someone who knows that they know that he knows that I know that they're probably just defending their blinds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read most of this thread, and the only part I didn't necessarily agree with is BF's move to tangle with the big stack. I make it a rule of thumb to NEVER F with the big stack, unless I have a huge hand. Conversely, if I'm the big stack, I will push around the table as much as possible. Usually I will reraise any raiser when I have position and a decent hand, I'll enter/raise most unopened pots with any two playable cards. I pay particular attention to the small stacks however, as they will raise/call with most any two cards.

I totally agree and would have given the same advice at one time. I definitely agree that you should exercise caution if the big stack is loose/bad/lucky. But you're exactly the type of player I'm hoping for when I have a big stack at the final table. Let's say you have 700k, I have 700k, and there are three or four other players with 100-200k. The blinds are 15/30k with a 3k ante. With antes, the preflop pot is 60k. You raise to 90k preflop. I reraise to 200 from the SB/BB. Unless you have a monster, you're folding. I will almost always pick up a pot with 150k in it, while you will almost always lose 90k. Now our stacks are 850k vs. 600k - that's a huge leap I just made towards first place. The dangers for me are that you have a monster, or that a player who acts after me will call the all in bet. So I have to use some caution. But it's a hugely +EV bet most of the time, especially if the players to my left have a decent stack. The other thing that makes this super valuable is that it changes your style. You can't steal when I'm still in the pot. Now your stack is dwindling. Meanwhile, I can steal mercilessly from the small stacks. That's a huge advantage for me. I only need to make this move once (or maybe twice) at a final table to make myself a big favorite to win it all.
I understand your point...but you can only make this play if a) you have position and b) I am trying to steal. If there is a big stack after me, even if I also have a big stack, RARELY am I raising preflop with a marginal holding. I may even try occasional limp with AK or something trying to catch a small stack going all-in. But if I'm raising preflop out of position, a lot of the time, it's with a hand I'm willing to go to the end with.And definitely, if you're able to come over the top of me and win a pot uncontested giving you a nice chip lead, that's a great move.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another move I like: There are twelve people left in the tourney, and there are two very loose players at my table, both to my left. When I get the button, I will fold around more often than not, with the hope that those two battle. Then I'll steal from the cutoff or even UTG/UTG+1 with anything. The thought process is that it lets them get their action fix, it makes my actual steal look a lot more realistic when I pass on the obvious button steal opportunity, and it gives me a much better chance of making the final table when those two tangle incessantly. There are a lot of guys who will get into ridiculous all in confrontations with ace junk vs. QJ or a small pp just because they're defending their blinds, vs. someone who knows that they know that he knows that I know that they're probably just defending their blinds.

Examples, please? What's your "standard" steal range and what of that are you tossing to let these two (hopefully) battle it out?
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read most of this thread, and the only part I didn't necessarily agree with is BF's move to tangle with the big stack. I make it a rule of thumb to NEVER F with the big stack, unless I have a huge hand. Conversely, if I'm the big stack, I will push around the table as much as possible. Usually I will reraise any raiser when I have position and a decent hand, I'll enter/raise most unopened pots with any two playable cards. I pay particular attention to the small stacks however, as they will raise/call with most any two cards.

I totally agree and would have given the same advice at one time. I definitely agree that you should exercise caution if the big stack is loose/bad/lucky. But you're exactly the type of player I'm hoping for when I have a big stack at the final table. Let's say you have 700k, I have 700k, and there are three or four other players with 100-200k. The blinds are 15/30k with a 3k ante. With antes, the preflop pot is 60k. You raise to 90k preflop. I reraise to 200 from the SB/BB. Unless you have a monster, you're folding. I will almost always pick up a pot with 150k in it, while you will almost always lose 90k. Now our stacks are 850k vs. 600k - that's a huge leap I just made towards first place. The dangers for me are that you have a monster, or that a player who acts after me will call the all in bet. So I have to use some caution. But it's a hugely +EV bet most of the time, especially if the players to my left have a decent stack. The other thing that makes this super valuable is that it changes your style. You can't steal when I'm still in the pot. Now your stack is dwindling. Meanwhile, I can steal mercilessly from the small stacks. That's a huge advantage for me. I only need to make this move once (or maybe twice) at a final table to make myself a big favorite to win it all.
I understand your point...but you can only make this play if a) you have position and b) I am trying to steal. If there is a big stack after me, even if I also have a big stack, RARELY am I raising preflop with a marginal holding. I may even try occasional limp with AK or something trying to catch a small stack going all-in. But if I'm raising preflop out of position, a lot of the time, it's with a hand I'm willing to go to the end with.And definitely, if you're able to come over the top of me and win a pot uncontested giving you a nice chip lead, that's a great move.
I laid down AK to this move recently. I think I'd lay down anything but jacks or better against a fellow big stack. Wouldn't you, when you know that you're still a huge favorite for top two if you just fold and wait out the little guys? And again, the whole point of this is take advantage of your opponent's likely tendency to be loose/aggressive/weak at the final table. Which most people are when they get a big stack at the end.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I play low limit NL online, so perhaps this is below the level of most here, but I'll try to add to the discussion anyway.Following the strong=weak philosophy I've noticed that in the online environment fast=strong and since we know that strong=weak we can therefore assume fast=weak. I know, nothing new here, but I've also noticed that occasionally there are a few players who also know that fast=weak. When I see an otherwise good player with a marginal hand call down a fast bettor I immediately know that he is on the lookout for fast betting. I will then play alot (especially pairs) against this good opponent and when I hit the flop will fast bet it. Invariably he will call. On the turn I again will fastbet, but leave plenty of room for him to come over the top. When he does I'll fastbet him all-in and collect the chips.

I like to use a similar line of thinking but in the opposite direction. When I flop a monster and am in a pot with someone I know to be aggressive, I have found it very profitable to use the time clock to my advantage. If I can get them to bet into me, then I will take my time responding, often hitting the "time" button when the warning is delivered. My goal is to make them think I am calculating my pot odds. Often their next move is to make an overly aggressive play to get you out of the pot at which time you can collect a huge amount of chips from them.
Interesting. I was told (and have generally found to be true) that you should beware the player who thinks for a long time and calls. That's usually a sign of a monster.
on stars when it's your turn your name box blinks. i always try and make my move (no matter what it is) on the 3rd blink.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I play low limit NL online, so perhaps this is below the level of most here, but I'll try to add to the discussion anyway.Following the strong=weak philosophy I've noticed that in the online environment fast=strong and since we know that strong=weak we can therefore assume fast=weak. I know, nothing new here, but I've also noticed that occasionally there are a few players who also know that fast=weak. When I see an otherwise good player with a marginal hand call down a fast bettor I immediately know that he is on the lookout for fast betting. I will then play alot (especially pairs) against this good opponent and when I hit the flop will fast bet it. Invariably he will call. On the turn I again will fastbet, but leave plenty of room for him to come over the top. When he does I'll fastbet him all-in and collect the chips.

I like to use a similar line of thinking but in the opposite direction. When I flop a monster and am in a pot with someone I know to be aggressive, I have found it very profitable to use the time clock to my advantage. If I can get them to bet into me, then I will take my time responding, often hitting the "time" button when the warning is delivered. My goal is to make them think I am calculating my pot odds. Often their next move is to make an overly aggressive play to get you out of the pot at which time you can collect a huge amount of chips from them.
Interesting. I was told (and have generally found to be true) that you should beware the player who thinks for a long time and calls. That's usually a sign of a monster.
I think it is often very true but much like you said:

The reason people act weak when strong and strong when weak, though, is because it sometimes works.

Also, I have found the key is to delay some but not so much that the timer actually starts. What I generally do is wait for the the warning noise that comes with the "iguana has x seconds to act" message in the chat window. I click the "time" button but then act before the timer actually starts. It give just enough time to imply I am calculating the odds but not so much that it screams "LOOK AT ME, I HAVE A MONSTER".
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I have found the key is to delay some but not so much that the timer actually starts. What I generally do is wait for the the warning noise that comes with the "iguana has x seconds to act" message in the chat window. I click the "time" button but then act before the timer actually starts. It give just enough time to imply I am calculating the odds but not so much that it screams "LOOK AT ME, I HAVE A MONSTER".

Cool. Back when I played online, I used to do the same thing. I think it works in some cases, and doesn't work in others. Like all of the things in this thread, it depends on the situation.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another move I like: There are twelve people left in the tourney, and there are two very loose players at my table, both to my left. When I get the button, I will fold around more often than not, with the hope that those two battle. Then I'll steal from the cutoff or even UTG/UTG+1 with anything. The thought process is that it lets them get their action fix, it makes my actual steal look a lot more realistic when I pass on the obvious button steal opportunity, and it gives me a much better chance of making the final table when those two tangle incessantly. There are a lot of guys who will get into ridiculous all in confrontations with ace junk vs. QJ or a small pp just because they're defending their blinds, vs. someone who knows that they know that he knows that I know that they're probably just defending their blinds.

Examples, please? What's your "standard" steal range and what of that are you tossing to let these two (hopefully) battle it out?
Depends on the table. I played in a live WSOP sat recently. Final table structure was something like12 (package)5321.5111So the emphasis was clearly on the top three spots. The little stacks started getting nutty when it got to 8 players because 6-8 were the same, but then cooled way off when it got to 6 because they all wanted the extra .5. The small stacks were tanking and folding a lot, so I knew they were tossing A8 and KJ a lot. I was stealing with suited connectors, ace anything, k9+, and might have stolen with less once or twice. But I also believe you should never go more than three times in two orbits unless that fourth hand is a little stronger (maybe AJ+, KQ, or 77+ if nobody's playing back, or tighter if they are). My standard raise was a little bigger than the pot, which was more than a third of the smaller stacks, and maybe a tenth of mine. So if those two hand ranges are "very loose" and "loose", I was probably "loose" to "fairly tight" when I was on the button with those two loose players ahead of me. I don't know if that's correct play - it seemed correct to me at that table and in that situation. But that's about where it was. Note that my calling requirements were much higher than my raising requirements - I'd drop 55 or AT to a shove by a loose small stack (or a pot committed pfr) in a heartbeat.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this for inducing a river bluff.

If I'm out of position and have been leading on prior streets with a draw-heavy board, I have no problem checking even top pair after a blank on the river. The reason being that my opponent will rarely pay off with a worse hand but will often try to bluff with his busted draw.

Another reason to check the river is to guard against getting raised. If my opponent has been slow-playing a set (which would be kind of stupid on a draw-heavy board, but it happens), I'll be facing a tough river raise. If I check/call to his set, I'll lose fewer chips.

In the long run this is profitable move against not-so-skilled on-line players. They generally call down hoping to hit their draw. They will not call the river after missing, so you are not missing a value bet. They will think your check is weakness, so they will often try to bluff after missing. Also, if this type of player has a strong hand, they'll often bet smaller with the hopes that you'll call, so you don't lose as much as you gain picking off the bluffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this for inducing a river bluff.If I'm out of position and have been leading on prior streets with a draw-heavy board, I have no problem checking even top pair after a blank on the river. The reason being that my opponent will rarely pay off with a worse hand but will often try to bluff with his busted draw.Another reason to check the river is to guard against getting raised. If my opponent has been slow-playing a set (which would be kind of stupid on a draw-heavy board, but it happens), I'll be facing a tough river raise. If I check/call to his set, I'll lose fewer chips.In the long run this is profitable move against not-so-skilled on-line players. They generally call down hoping to hit their draw. They will not call the river after missing, so you are not missing a value bet. They will think your check is weakness, so they will often try to bluff after missing. Also, if this type of player has a strong hand, they'll often bet smaller with the hopes that you'll call, so you don't lose as much as you gain picking off the bluffs.

Do you lay down if he shoves the river? I agree about check/calling your medium strength hands. But while I like this move, if you never check raise the river, you'll be too easy to read. I love the river checkraise when I have a monster, unless the monster came on the river with an obvious scare card like a third or fourth flush card, in which case it's better to just bet out again.
Link to post
Share on other sites

saw this last night and it worked brilliantly. It is similar to something BF mentioned already I believe.

3-NL

No raise preflop. 5-6 people in. Flop comes 10 J 2 rainbow. SB bets 25 on the flop. UTG raises to 60. fold, fold, button calls. SB reraises to 220. UTG raises to 320 all day. Button asks if he calls can the small blind reraise because UTG didnt make a full raise. The SB argues that yes he can because the raise was more than half. I pipe up and say that isnt the rule here and he cant reraise, dealer agrees, Button says he wants to talk to the floor so he can make sure. Floor comes over and says he cant reraise, so the guy says OK I call. Turn comes and its a 4. SB pushes all in for about 800. Button beats him into the pot and flips over 10,10 with a big smile on his face and SB quickly throws his cards in the muck when the river comes another 4.

UTG folded too and left also.

I am pretty sure SB thought he could easily push the button out of the pot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...