Originally Posted by dev

The super/system approach is more of a philosophy than an actual strategy. It's good for home games where the game ends when the fish are broke. Since that's not really the topic I wont elaborate.

I think if you have opponents that play so passively that they never bet even those types of hands, just v-bet if you beat AA. It's unlikely this type of opponent will be folding overpairs or tptk much. It is likely that they'll be folding when they miss the flop, so just use an aggressive preflop strategy and cbet good cbetting boards. Second barreling is a bad idea, better to just take a free card and run away screaming if they bet the river.

Originally Posted by iopq

lol, getting "exploited" at NL5
do you really think they say "hmm my hud says he double barrels only 10% of the time, therefore ipso facto I must conclude that when he checks the turn he generally has a weak hand he doesn't want to show down, I bet"
or do you think they flopped top pair and check/call two streets and fire river when turn gets checked through?

which one is more likely

Originally Posted by Sir Pawnalot

I tried some hours of experimenting at micro stakes again (10 hours).

Playing 20 dollar nl. 4 tables on VC poker.

At first I was shocked. People per flop was ridiculously low and people seemed to play a serious game.

How easy was it not to play against people who had almost the same strategy as I had when I first started playing. Hand reading was very easy.

Because there were more TAPS and TAGS, I could profitably LAG it up. If there were more than two lagtards or stations I would tighten up.

Brunson style works well in some of these games nowadays. I believe FE is higher with a straight draw than a flush draw- especially if you got a gapper (QTs, J9s)- because your draw is not so obvious and you can represent a set, two pair, overpair or TPTK more successfully.

Key to beat these weak-tights is to read their game and pounce when they tell you they are weak.

Start Bankroll for experiment: 200 USD.
End of experiment: 315 USD.

This was an experiment so do not give me a lecture on BRM.

Originally Posted by dranger7070

No he posts to make a point lol. He's just saying that the chances of there being a good enough player(s) to exploit you on a regular basis at 5nl is laughable.

And for an answer to your original topic/question. I'm at the same level (well one step down (2nl) but it plays the same so no worries) and I like to play my draws fast. And basically just value town them when you think they are on the draw and you have a decent holding.

As to saying that "they always flat AA/KK PF is just ridiculous dude. I mean seriously, sure SOME of them (about 1%) will flat PF but a lot will raise it up (minraise mostly lmao) or try to ship it PF. I agree that there are some fish who like to get "tricky" and flat PF, but don't even worry about these guys. If they are doing that they aren't getting maximum value 99% of the time.

Originally Posted by Sir Pawnalot

At full ring micro a 3 bet is often extremely strong. This makes 3 betting a strong play at these stakes. A weak/tight would probably not call with AK or better- so post flop should be easy- even though we would have to fold more often than not.

When we are bet into we can fold. If we flat call his preflop raise his range includes more air (ATs+) and we can win more pots post flop.

Hope your luck will turn around.

Originally Posted by Sir Pawnalot

Because there were more TAPS and TAGS, I could profitably LAG it up. If there were more than two lagtards or stations I would tighten up.

Originally Posted by dev

TAPS and TAGS... was this a typo or does TAP mean something other than tight/aggressive player?

Anyway, if a player is weak/tight, all you have to do to exploit them is play more aggressively. Just get value from your hand. They don't get enough value from you when they have the best of it and you DO get value from them. Or they can choose to just fold way too much to you and you can get value from bluffing.

When you're thinking of how to beat a specific type of opponent, one thing to consider is why YOU don't play that way. Weak/tight players beat themselves.

Originally Posted by Sir Pawnalot

TAP- Tight passive, not the same as TW, but close

Calling more when you are running bas seems like bad idea.

Originally Posted by dev

Changing your play at all when you're running bad seems like a bad idea. What's right when you're running good is right when you're running bad.

Originally Posted by Sir Pawnalot

We MUST adjust our game when we are on a bad run. In general we lose FE and must play tighter or change table.