Aggression - help wanted

I´ve really been trying lately to work on my aggression. It´s all fine when I bet the pot on flop and everybody folds, or I get a lot of action in return and can get out of the hand. The problem comes when I get callers on the bet. I know it´s not like this, but it feels like the times I keep showing aggression, they hold a monster and when I decide to slow down, they have nothing but manage to win anyway (e.g. the time when I held KQ with one opp, flop showed rags but two clubs and I decided to bet the pot. He called and a jack or something came up on the turn. We both checked it down, and at the showdown he had a missed ace-high flush and won the pot with his high card). It gets even harder when there are several players still in after the flop. I just can´t get this straight. Please help me.

Its all about reads, if he's tight and tagged as a "slowplayer", check fold it down. If he's a laagy player, bet again if the turn is a blank.
If its a calling station your not supposed be there betting in the first place!
And if its a tight passive guy you might bet again if you think he's drawing or check it down if its the other way around. Imo this is one of the most importent part of your reads in nl, is he drawing or is he not?

The thing is, there's no easy answer to this dilemma. You have to have good reads on the players in the pot, and a good read on the board, and then just go from there. I vary my play in this situation a lot. Discerning genuine weakness from faked (slowplay) is the biggest factor; discerning calling stations from people you can actually get to fold is another.

I try not to be aggressive unless I feel I really have learned a lot about the player. I've found it's best often to not buy the pot unless you actually know it can be bought; don't just through a bet out there hoping. You have to know it will be bought. If you get a call, then there's something wrong. Is it a draw or a slowplay? Knowing the player, you should be able to reason it out rather quickly and it's an easy fold or another aggressive bet.

Originally Posted by bigred

I try not to be aggressive unless I feel I really have learned a lot about the player.

I'm the opposite. If I don't know the player I follow aggression with aggression, always - at least on the flop. Only one time in 3.5 are you going to pair a card on the flop... no way I'm just giving up on the hand with a check on the flop. Now, if I get called there and I don't know the guy, I'll proceed with caution... but that flop bet succeeds often enough to make it quite profitable, IMO. I haven't tracked specific numbers but I feel like my opponent will fold the majority of the time to this bet.

Originally Posted by dalecooper

Originally Posted by bigred

I try not to be aggressive unless I feel I really have learned a lot about the player.

I'm the opposite. If I don't know the player I follow aggression with aggression, always - at least on the flop. Only one time in 3.5 are you going to pair a card on the flop... no way I'm just giving up on the hand with a check on the flop. Now, if I get called there and I don't know the guy, I'll proceed with caution... but that flop bet succeeds often enough to make it quite profitable, IMO. I haven't tracked specific numbers but I feel like my opponent will fold the majority of the time to this bet.

How much are you betting here? Pot-sized, 3/4, 2/3, 1/2, ....

I'm guessing that 3/4 or 2/3 is the sweet spot where it is most profitable. With 3/4 you have to win every 2 1/3 pots to be profitable, with 2/3 it's every 2 1/2 pots.

I believe Harrington recommends approximately a 1/2 pot bet, but I find that is not enough, at least at the $.05 / $.10 stakes.

2/3 of the pot is what I almost always bet with nearly any hand. I change it up for different situations, but I'd say 80% of my bets are 2/3 of the pot. Good profit-to-risk ratio. For a cheaper pot I'll bet the whole thing. At a .25/.50 blind structure, let's say the pot is $2 - I'll bet $2. If the pot is $4 or more, I'll bet about 2/3, rounding up the nearest even dollar.

Yeah, if you have raised preflop and get two or fewer callers, I would say a 2/3-3/4 potsize bet at a flop that you've missed will take it down quite a bit of the time, at least enough to make it +EV.

I've just found on lower limits that it's a lot harder to bluff people. They'll call anything. Sure when you're playing at real stakes with real players, it pays to follow aggression with aggression. I used to do the same thing. However, a lot of party playing and low limit stars suggests that it would be in your best interest to know something about the player before bluffing/aggressing. In low limits I will go as far to basically say bluffing is wasted on the unread player.

Which tables are we talking about? And when you say limits, do you mean actual limit games, or just lower buy-in NL and PL? I play about 80% of the time on the Party NL and PL $25 buy-in tables, and have no problems getting people to fold most of the time. Typically, if I pre-flop raise 3xBB (my usual) and then follow up with a 2/3 pot bet on the flop, I get folds. I get them so much, that I expect them... calls are unusual, raises wholly unexpected. I find that those tables are getting tighter than they used to be, in general, so unless you just ended up at a crazy table, this is pretty good strategy. The only caveat - your pre-flop raise should leave you in the hand with 1-2 others. If you're getting more action than that you need to increase your pre-flop raise. Then the flop bluff will pay off because there's less of a chance that someone hit.

Man, I must be playing at the wrong tables then. I swear I must have a sign on me that says "please call me I'm bluffing." I was referring to mostly the days when I played on party. Had a little trouble there since a lot of my game i sbased on agression and buying pots. I found that it just dind't work there. I'm back at stars now playing mainly SNG's but I will occasionaly play a few rings games. I've just found in the lower $25 tables and less that bluffing is a waste of money for me a lot of the time. Perhaps you pull it off better than I do.

Originally Posted by bigred

I've just found on lower limits that it's a lot harder to bluff people. They'll call anything. Sure when you're playing at real stakes with real players, it pays to follow aggression with aggression. I used to do the same thing. However, a lot of party playing and low limit stars suggests that it would be in your best interest to know something about the player before bluffing/aggressing. In low limits I will go as far to basically say bluffing is wasted on the unread player.

I agree whole-heartedly with bigred here. Don't bluff the unbluffable.

And I have also found that the majority of the micro NL players are very hard to bluff, your preflop raises on these tables are usually not respected unless they are something ludicrous like 10xBB.

On micro NL players my best advice would be to only bluff when you have a VERY good read on the player you are trying to bluff out, otherwise, don't bluff at all, just play your good hands and the fish will be fried.

Originally Posted by dwarfman1990

I agree whole-heartedly with bigred here. Don't bluff the unbluffable.

And I have also found that the majority of the micro NL players are very hard to bluff, your preflop raises on these tables are usually not respected unless they are something ludicrous like 10xBB.

On micro NL players my best advice would be to only bluff when you have a VERY good read on the player you are trying to bluff out, otherwise, don't bluff at all, just play your good hands and the fish will be fried.

Curious as to what you would do the aforementioned type of situation. You bet big pre-flop, and the flop isnt kind to you. Do you check and hope somebody doesnt come back at you hard thinking weakness? Do you bet small?

Originally Posted by bigred

Man, I must be playing at the wrong tables then. I swear I must have a sign on me that says "please call me I'm bluffing." I was referring to mostly the days when I played on party. Had a little trouble there since a lot of my game i sbased on agression and buying pots. I found that it just dind't work there. I'm back at stars now playing mainly SNG's but I will occasionaly play a few rings games. I've just found in the lower $25 tables and less that bluffing is a waste of money for me a lot of the time. Perhaps you pull it off better than I do.

I wonder, how aggressive are you, and how often are you buying pots? It might be that your table image is that of a bluffer and as such you're getting called more than usual. My table image is usually the classic tight/aggressive, although I'll change that at times just for fun. As a result decent players respect my raises and don't mix it up with me a lot. I do get some call-downs by fish, but as soon as I identify that kind of player, I stop bluffing and start looking for top pair-type hands.

I also wonder, what time of day do you play? I am strictly a 9 to 5-er. I don't play nights, I don't mix it up with the drunks and maniacs. The daytime games are usually (not always) tight enough that bluffs and semi-bluffs are quite profitable for me.

I can't play from 9-5 normally because of classes, homework, lifting, etc. I usually pplay at night when the fish have come to feed.

Originally Posted by bigred

I can't play from 9-5 normally because of classes, homework, lifting, etc. I usually pplay at night when the fish have come to feed.

The big problem with calling stations is that they keep calling. You can't play an overly aggressive semi-bluff style if you're sitting with calling stations. I seek out tight tables because I like the musical rhythm of fold, fold, fold... but if you're finding this to not be the case, you need to pre-flop raise a bit less, follow aggression with LESS aggression, and limp in with more drawing hands.

Originally Posted by dwarfman1990

Originally Posted by bigred

I've just found on lower limits that it's a lot harder to bluff people. They'll call anything. Sure when you're playing at real stakes with real players, it pays to follow aggression with aggression. I used to do the same thing. However, a lot of party playing and low limit stars suggests that it would be in your best interest to know something about the player before bluffing/aggressing. In low limits I will go as far to basically say bluffing is wasted on the unread player.

I agree whole-heartedly with bigred here. Don't bluff the unbluffable.

And I have also found that the majority of the micro NL players are very hard to bluff, your preflop raises on these tables are usually not respected unless they are something ludicrous like 10xBB.

On micro NL players my best advice would be to only bluff when you have a VERY good read on the player you are trying to bluff out, otherwise, don't bluff at all, just play your good hands and the fish will be fried.

yes, very very true. it might be a bit more accurate to say Don't bluff the unread. on the other hand, folks at micro limits are way easer to read. if you watch, you get to see what hands they play and how they bet, because everything goes to showdown.

every player is bluffable, but it takes some time and concentration to recognize who, and exactly how.

at the micro limits, raise your good hands. you'll get lots of callers, which makes up for missing the flop. if you make a hand, you've got a huge pot to cover the misses. if you miss, check to the turn and then bet the river. most micro fish just play the cards in thier hand, they are allways chasing that gutshot straight or whatever. a nice 2/3 pot bet dosn't cost much, because no one has been betting. and if they don't have anything, they won't call. they'll call with a pair of twos though, so don't be upset if you loose 4 out of 9 of these.

on the other hand if you miss and someone bets, they usualy don't bet enough to ruin your odds to chase.. so chase. the biggest thing about micro limits, a large percenage of hands are going to showdown. if they bet, be ready to show, or just get out.

Originally Posted by dalecooper

Originally Posted by bigred

I can't play from 9-5 normally because of classes, homework, lifting, etc. I usually pplay at night when the fish have come to feed.

The big problem with calling stations is that they keep calling. You can't play an overly aggressive semi-bluff style if you're sitting with calling stations. I seek out tight tables because I like the musical rhythm of fold, fold, fold... but if you're finding this to not be the case, you need to pre-flop raise a bit less, follow aggression with LESS aggression, and limp in with more drawing hands.

I agree with you on this one, dale. I sit back and wait for cards normally. When I hit, they pay me off. It's just a matter of keeping the discipline of playing tight/passive.

Something very important that nobody has mentioned yet is position - it's all about position! If you are going to bluff at a pot, it's best to get a look at what everyone else has done when the flop comes. If someone comes out and bets strong, lay it down. If it checks around, there is a good opportunity to take a stab at it with a 3/4 pot size bet.

If someont comes out and bets weakly on the fop, consider raising them to about the size of the pot.. In this case, the read is very important though.. Does this guy like to weak lead? Don't do it. Is he a calling station? Don't do it. If you get called here, respect it unless you improve greatly on the turn.

Also consider the texture of the flop mixed with the PF action. If it was raised PF and there are still 3 or 4 people in the pot, don't try to represent the A,K, or Q - someone has it.

If you typically have a lot of community pots, perhaps you should be raising more PF to thin the herd.

Wow, Rd, you're right. I could have sworn I mentioned position in one of my posts in this thread but it appears I didn't. Normally, if I do try to buy a pot it is when I'm HU or 3 handed and I'm checked to with position. Honestly though, like I said before, I don't normally do this unless I have a good feeling the players will fold. It's just not worth trying to buy pots from unread players at lower limits. They tend to be chasers/call stations more often than not.

Dale - can you briefly explain the profit-risk justification for betting 2/3 the pot? This sounds incredibly useful, and betting is something which I do not yet really quite understand. That is, I don't really have an appreciation for the size of the bets, and I think I'm suffering in my game because of it.

Scunning - the profitability of a bet is based on the size of the pot you are betting into.



First of all, we consider the pot to be free of ties to any player, regardless of prior bets. Poor or good play in the past, you are always betting to win the pot as it is now, and any bets are no longer yours.

Lets say we are betting into a pot of $100. If you are on the button and it is checked to you, many players will bet this pot regardless of their hand.

A pot sized bet (in this case, a bet of $100) will generally take down the pot as it nerfs the profitability of almost all drawing odds. However, if you are called down or if you fold to a reraise, you will lose your $100 bet

So, here, when you take the pot, you win $100, and when you lose your bet, you lose $100. So as long as you take the pot more than half the time, you are profiting with a pot sized bet.

The math on this is: 100 W - 100 L = $ Earned, so for $ to be positive, W > L
W = 1 - L


At 3/4 the pot, you nerf mostly the same drawing odds, so you take down the pot about the same amount of time, while investing less money in the pot your losing hands. In this case, you are taking a $100 pot, and losing $75 a loss, and you have to pick up 42% of pots to be profitable.

At 2/3, you only have to pick up 40% of those pots to be profitable, but your profits may decline as you may get called down a bit more.

At 1/2 and below, you get into flakey odds territory, where people with a low pair on a draw can call because they're getting odds, and you start to lose alot more of these pots so it becomes less profitable.