Disscussion how to win playing LAG: 3r ft 180
Posted by computerscreen
Posted by
computerscreen
posted in
Low Stakes
Disscussion how to win playing LAG: 3r ft 180
UTG1: 162591
UTG2: 90694 (Hero)
LJ: 104594
HJ: 97236
CO: 110230
BN: 123280
SB: 46104
BB: 77579
UTG: 6192
UTG2: 90694 (Hero)
LJ: 104594
HJ: 97236
CO: 110230
BN: 123280
SB: 46104
BB: 77579
UTG: 6192
Preflop
(10500)
(9 Players)
Hero was dealt
2
7
UTG calls 5492, and is all in, UTG1 folds, Hero calls 7000, LJ folds, HJ folds, CO folds, BN folds, SB folds, BB checks
UTG calls 5492, and is all in, UTG1 folds, Hero calls 7000, LJ folds, HJ folds, CO folds, BN folds, SB folds, BB checks
Flop
(22992)
Q
K
K
(3 Players)
BB checks,
Hero bets 10500,
BB folds
Turn
(33492)
Q
Q
K
K
(2 Players)
River
(33492)
Q
9
Q
K
K
(2 Players)
Final Pot
Hero has
2
7
UTG has
Q
4
Hero
wins 3016
,
UTG
wins 26276
Loading 57 Comments...
its kinda lol to write on site full of proffessional poker players~ to add many MTT's ones :-) as regarding the offer i kindly thanked you very very much :)
In poker we only get dealt so many hands, so if we both play a tournament and get dealt 100 hands the trick is who play those amount of hands the best. A new player should only play a small amount of those hands because tricky hands are -ev for them. But experienced players can open up there ranges and capitalize on hands lesser players can't play. So in general as we get better and understand the game more our ranges should open up and we become more LAG
SNG wizard and many other programs won't teach you the foundation ranges, but it will suggest how you would push if you adjusted already.
But you can ignore me anyways, go google and study short stack shoving in poker, its your biggest leak i bet andyou will learn fast!!!!
Not sure how limping 72o in EP is a crushing, LAG style of short stack play...? I haven't played a 180 since April 2011, but I'm assuming this hand is from a final table of a $3r 180. If you elect to play this hand, why not min raise? Is the limp to confuse all of your 6 opponents behind you into folding?...essentially a cheap steal with a cbet vs. the bb if no one decides to play? If I'm one of your opponents I'm squeezing this spot ridiculously wide if I'm any of the stacks behind you.
So now we might realize that there are many situations in high stakes games that don't involve any players that will exploit us...in these spots we must fully take advantage of each +ev hand, and i've shown already in many hand historys (IMO) spots where most are folding half the deck (or more) and I am playing 72o. So regardless if I am mathematical sound, we need this for high stakes.
But there are two reasons I think this play isn't in high stakes, first its not in any books and I've heard no talk of it on any coaching sites. And secondly because there is a stigma that there are certain things in poker you cannot do so people get trapped in their boxes, this happens in all avenues and I think poker has been trapped in some of these regards.
Simply put poker is missing a chart of what hands villains need to reshove in order to make our min raises not profitable. Without that knowledge and the knowledge that construct brings people who suggest this or that hand is a fold are just completely guessing. Or do I misunderstand the game?
Once we are able to profitably, limp, min fold < 10bbs, play post flop with < 10bbs and all these taboo things, we can then mix our ranges (limping, min fold, min call, 3x, cib 3bet, flat, etc.) in way that will confuse even std. good regs. And when we can confuse a player he is not able to profitable put money into the pot.
In other words, yes I imped aces.... but I don't always limp aces....'good' regs however' don't have a limping range and therefore can never take advantage of weak players who we suck in, but also never take advantage of weak regs that won't re exploit our limps with weak hands
thebattler33 is the first person that comes to mind when I think of someone who has a style that can't be explained, doesn't seem like it should even work, but in fact crushes.
I agree that you don't want to be some MTT reg robot playing the same style as all the others and thinking in the same mindset or you're playing like 8% ROI poker. I'm not sure there's anyone whose goal it is to do that.
I agree that a LAG style is best, esp. in 180s. I also like doing things outside of the box in certain spots. But, overall, I'd much prefer to be balanced by shoving my entire range <10bbs. There will be some exceptions, but I don't like letting my stack diminish even shorter and essentially spewing by having an utter trash limp or min-fold range at 10bbs.
I think with the hands you're posting you're being results oriented. I doubt limping 72o, etc. UTG is going to be profitable at a final table with anyone competent. In these examples, no one played back at you and you had an easy time c-betting vs. the big blind in the best case scenario where everyone folds. Where are the hands that people play back at you and your stack dips below 8bb or so?
And we have to understand this IS balance, and we aren't looking for the type of balance people think off. There are two sides to every poker coin (4 in fact), and we most utilize both sides. Its not enough to be balanced but rather to know when to be balance and when not to be. To know that we must know when we are balanced and when we are not.
I'm not being results oriented because 1. I've gone into the mathematical aspects of these plays, and 2. I have a big enough sample size to know that there is merrit to these thoughts. Now I could totally be wrong, however in many of my hands posted, people who suggest I'm not playing +ev have not done the math and are only saying what they have been taught.
In these examples I purposely picked spots where no one played back but that doesn't mean that I'm being results orientated.
Lastly I'm because you sound competent in poker that you know that we are not worried about our stack size whatsoever but instead we are worried about making the most optimal decisions available. Its that stigma again in strange spots that makes us covet our stack when we know its doesn't matter as long as we have chips.
Also, payouts in these are very top heavy, so when everyone at the final 9 is roughly equal in chips at about <10bb-15bb, I'm not as concerned about ICM. Grant it, I am not taking every thin cEV+ spot b/c of some ICM considerations, but I'm not going to overdo it and play too much tighter in a tourny where payout structures are this top heavy and stacks are even and short.
In this hand, picking up your 1bb, the all in players 1bb, plus the blinds and antes is a 25k-30k+ increase to our stack. More than worth it IMO if you're limping way more trash than nutted hands, since you're folding so often in that scenario.
lolx
So, what you're saying is that 100% of your min-raises or shoves do not contain JJ+? Your limps then contain a range of 1.8% JJ+ and 1.8% bottom of the barrel trash hands?
And we should not ignore icm at all, icm is icm, it has limitations but shoving our stack into spots where we can be often dominated is going to hurt our winrate. There is also the fact that if I'm in cutoff and you are in the bu, your 3bet shove will open you up to being called by the sb and bb who might call you way to loose. So if I limp 72o and you shove kto, and the bb calls you covered with KJs, that is a horrible icm suicide. There is a lot more to consider.
But most importantly you are entitled to resteal my limps a certain %..that doesn't make it not optimal for me.
The real question is, do you know how loose each player has to be to make my limp or min raise not profitable, because if you don't actually know the numbers...then how can you expect to exploit them?
You are limping with a hand that has worse equity than a random hand. You are forced to go to SD because of UTG, so you are behind his range already. The odds make up for this, but you just ignore the facts that you will get shoved on often enough by players behind you and that you have to play post flop as well.
I could think it is OK if this was a one time play to let the regs at the table see you limp such trash in order to induce light shoves in the future where you could snap em off with monsters, but it seems u r doing this way more often, which again I think is just burning money.
You argue that this strategy can not be exploited by the regs because they don't know your ranges and frequencies, but the same goes the other way round. You don't know either which part of their range they'll start shoving on you, what the fish will do, how they will play postflop short like that...
Pot is 10500 + 5492 = 15992. You invest 7000 by limping, thus the pot is 22992. Let's say 23k. We assume now for reasons of simplicity that the SB folds every time. Now we see a flop.
We assume that the BB will play absolutely straightforward and fold the flop every time he misses and you take down the pot by betting. I Do not know how often you'll bet flop, but I guess it is pretty close to 100% here.
If the BB continues we will give up every time. If he folds we go to SD with the player who is AI.
So you invest 10500 to win 23k. This means the pot becomes 33500. The BB will hit the Flop about 1/3 of the time so in conclusion you'll get him out of the pot 2/3 of the time. If he folds 2/3 of the time you win 33500*0,67 = 22445
Again let's say 25k. Now out of these 25k you have won 3k for sure (1,5k from u and the BB because shorty only has 5,5k). For the rest of the 22k you go to SD with the AI player. Assuming he shoves a 50% range (which seems rather optimistic considering he's sitting there with < 1BB but maybe he just lost a hand so whatever), your equity with 72o is 30%.
22000*0,3 = 6600
6600 + the 3k that you automatically win -> 9,6k
So in the long run you will make 9,6k after having invested 17500. So this play is terrible in itself (burning $$$ big time), before we start talking about others shoving over your limp.
Not sure if you can do the math on that but basically if we have postflop edge we can expect to always be +ev. Especially since short stack post flop skills are non existent in this age.
also you have to undersstand that if the last profitable hand in a range is say 79o we might rather play the range of 72o than fold kto, not sure if I explained that correct. Too loose can possibly be better than too tight.
Lastly for the times when we get a monster hands in the next few hands limping can become a lot more profitable, as we can get action often if we so choose.
But still:
the flaw in my calcs is to your disadvantage but even calculated correctly we have a loss if all the correct steps in the calculations stay like they are.
- bet the flop smaller on different boards: this board is already pretty damn good to bet small, but whatever I guess on A83 we can go a tiny bit smaller, but this does not make too much of a difference
- double barrel and get turn folds: we can also double barrel and not get turn folds and lose half our stack. Do u know the BB well enough to be able to tell how often he'll fold vs 2nd barrels on certain boards?
- If we open close to 100% our opponents will most likely think that we are some degen maniac who is randomly clicking buttons and not put us on AA, but rather jam the shit out of us pre (for the regs at least)
- Yeah this might generate action when we get monsters, but we only get them less than 5% of the time.
- the part about 'safely flipping' is in the math, lol. That part also covers that we are not flipping but that we are a 30/70 dog.
- the last sentence is just back to jumping out of a flying plane, landing on our feet and going out to watch a movie...
Maybe I'd do it against passive fish when I'm in late position or against regs who have good reshove stacks but whose stacks are to big to shove over a limp but limping in early position just doesn't seem right.
With 5 stacks left to act if they all shove 10-15% of hands over your limp, you're getting shoved on 50-75% of the time.
But after i read this I am just WTF lol. Thinking maybe i wasted my money
Be the first to add a comment