Exploiting Fish Mistake #1: Continuing With a Marginal Hand

Other Mistakes which fell into this category:

-overvaluing top-pair type hands
-continuing with marginal draws despite improper pot odds

Some exploitations may seem simple/easy to you however it is best if we list them all. Let's hear about ways to exploit these mistakes!

Presuming we know we're ahead then the most obvious to me is taking them to value town. Throw out a decent sized bet on every street (ensuring drawing odds are denied) and let them call.

If we feel that they have a made hand which we're ahead of then a raise would obviously be in order, trying to get it in early or ensure that all it all goes in on a later street.

Flame away if I'm miles off.

It depends on how marginal their hand is. If they're overvaluing top pair type of hands, make better than top pair and get it in. Hopefully you can b/3b the flop all in.

If they're overvaluing draws, then you can pot flop/turn to exploit that. Unless they're trying to get it in with something like gutshot + two overcards which is marginal as hell since overcards are not always outs. But if they play their draws aggressively, it is actually very hard to exploit that other than calling when you have a good hand.

People that float too much with utter crap to try and take it on a later street should just be barreled off.

overvaluing top-pair type hand:

-Do not go creative when you think they got something

-Bet hard when you are ahead (no slowplay against fish)

continuing with marginal draws despite improper pot odds:

-Continue to give them improper odds.
- Sometimes fold when you think they got there- even though they bet a ghey amount
- Maybe try to get it all in on flop/turn by betting big

We have different types of fish i think,but in general

-Value town big in MicroStakes

-Give bad odds

-Let them draw in when we have the pure nuts

-C/R flop or turn

If they're betting into you with something like tpnk and their bets are a reasonable size let them take themselves to value town and dont scare them off by 3betting on the flop and turn.

Originally Posted by Biglines

If they're betting into you with something like tpnk and their bets are a reasonable size let them take themselves to value town and dont scare them off by 3betting on the flop and turn.

Disagree. Fishy wont build big pots for you. Since their weakness is calling to much we must maximize that advantage when we have high equity.

Trapping is better versus aggressive players in general.

I agree with whats been said so far.

To summarize: value bet our hands when we think they have a marginal holding and hit sets when they have overpairs.

Disappointed in the replies so far

Think people, don't just say the first thing that comes to mind.

Talk to me about ranges, equity, manipulation.

I will unlock these threads later, for the time being think outside the box a little bit, jot down your thoughts, and we'll enter them at a later time.

Now that everyone has had some time to think, perhaps we can come up with some creative replies. Things I am looking for:

-example HH's with reads
-ranges and pokerstove calculations
-pot odds calculations
-anything else that might make someone actually think

Basically I'm looking for some evidence that you sat down for more than a mere 2 minutes and actually put a lot of effort into determining methods of exploitation.

What about allowing aggro donk to value town themselves by making them try to bluff you off the best hand. Risk - occasionally they have some strange draw and hit, but the reward is to get maximum value out of a super strong hand.
In this hand aggro donk is 62/31/20, albeit over a small sample, but its pretty clear. The only hand that has any real equity is QT (26% according to PS), almost everything else is virtually drawing dead. AQ has 4 outs, everything else is like runner runner or 1 outers. I bet small on the flop to hopefully show weakness then just call down.
Obviously this wouldn't be a good play vs someone decent, but if I raise at any point he can easily let go. By playing more passive I make him take his bluffs to the next street.
Flop bet may be a little too small upon looking at it, but the point is the same.
PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (9 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Button ($142.15)
SB ($20.90)
BB ($113.60)
UTG ($17)
UTG+1 ($60.60)
MP1 ($98.50)
Hero (MP2) ($108.65)
MP3 ($96.85)
CO ($168.45)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with K, K
1 fold, UTG+1 raises to $2, 1 fold, Hero raises to $6, 5 folds, UTG+1 calls $4

Flop: ($13.50) K, 6, J (2 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero bets $5, UTG+1 raises to $10, Hero calls $5

Turn: ($33.50) 7 (2 players)
UTG+1 bets $10, Hero calls $10

River: ($53.50) 3 (2 players)
UTG+1 bets $34.60 (All-In), Hero calls $34.60

Total pot: $122.70 | Rake: $3

Ahhhh, a more advanced concept with some evidence. I like it. Seeing how we have the deck pretty much crippled on this type of board texture calling is obviously a better play than raising. There are many reasons, here are just a few:

1. If we looked at his c/minraise+fold to flop 3bet range vs. his c/minraise+stack-off range on the flop they would carry similar equity (i.e. not much at all, something like 12% at the most).

2. If we understand on this board texture he'll be c/r bluffing a large % of the time (even more so seeing how we have 3 kings, making it that much harder for him to have 2pr/TP type hands) it would make no sense to re-raise the flop. All a raise would be doing is blowing out his marginal made hands and his bluffs/air. By just calling we allow him to take a wider and weaker range to the turn.

Now let's look at this with a weaker hand:

If we have AK/KQ/QQ/AJ type hands this would be an important concept. In order for a lot of money to profitably go into the pot with these type of hands we must FORCE (by force I mean we make him continue with a weak/wide range by not re-raising the flop) villain to continue with a wide range. If we re-raise the flop and shrink his range we start losing the equity battle.

Let's look at these pokerstove numbers:

Against a range for villain which includes 2pr/sets/QT/AQ/top pair/2nd pair (AJ/QJ/JT) and like 5 total bluffs we have:

91% equity with KK
76% equity with AKo

Now, let's look at his range vs. a shove. We'll remove some of the 2nd pair hands, the AQ type hands, and all the bluffs where his stack-off range becomes:

KK,JJ,66,AKs,KTs+,QTs,AKo,KTo+,QTo

Against this range this is how our hands stack up:

87% equity with KK
57% equity with AKo

So you can see, the weaker our hand is the more we profit from forcing our opponent to continue to the turn with his entire flop raising range.

This thread lost focus. Suddenly we are talking about adjusting to spew monkeys- which should have been another thread in itself.

However, nice line allabout. Very good adjustment.

There's a fine line between a spewmonkey and the bad player that really thinks he has the best hand. I guess I was just looking at it another way than some of the previous posters looked at it, which was be aggressive with your strong hands. This was just to point out that sometimes its ok to be more passive, taking board texture into account as well as the player.

Originally Posted by Sir Pawnalot

This thread lost focus. Suddenly we are talking about adjusting to spew monkeys- which should have been another thread in itself.

incorrect, you only think this thread lost focus because poker-wise you think in a one-dimensional world where everything is black or white.

No, sir pawnalot, I think this was the type of hand that spenda was looking for. He said to "think outside the box." And that is exactly what allabout did. He let the villain over value his hand/induced a bluff.

Spenda wants more than just the generic "o well you should bet when u have TP beat and bet 2/3 pot to price out draws."

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

-continuing with marginal draws despite improper pot odds

Some exploitations may seem simple/easy to you however it is best if we list them all. Let's hear about ways to exploit these mistakes!

I don't have any examples, I'm at work right now, but have been thinking about the draw hands vs. pot odds...

Using allabout's example from above, say villian has suited cards in his range... AQs, AJs, etc... and we feel fairly confident that is his line, so the flop texture doesn't help him a lot, making 3 of the 5 flush cards, he needs to hit runner runner for his flush... by betting the $5 into the $13.50 pot, which is 2.7 to 1 (I think), with him having roughly 9 outs for the flush, (I'm not counting the other options here, working on just flushes)... this is where it gets a little fuzzy for me... he needs better than 3.7 to 1 to call, let's say 35% chance to call, with 10 outs he has roughly 40% chance of hitting, so he should call...

(That may all be totally wrong, please let me know if I'm on the wrong track)...

The spade hitting the turn, if he was on the spade flush draw, he now has 4/5 for his flush, with 9 outs remaining, and possibly a good pair... if he doesn't bet we need to offer him good odds on his 18% chance to hit... so (just using the 33.50 pot size in the example) if he checks, we would want to offer him a bet size of say around 6.00 to make him have the odds to call...

Does that sound right, or is that more what you were looking for Spenda? We exploit his flush draw by giving him the odds to continue calling it down?

Originally Posted by Monty3038

We exploit his flush draw by giving him the odds to continue calling it down?

We don't want to give him the odds to continue calling, because if he is getting the proper odds to chase his flush then that means in the long run he'll profit, i.e. in the long run we'll lose. What we want to do is deny him the correct odds to call, but hope that he chases anyway.

Monty giving him just the right price would be correct if he would fold for any amount less. However, against a fish we know that they will continue against even improper odds. Therefore we want to find a bet-size that gets them to call but to do so incorrectly.

I know they first thing that comes into everyone's mind on this subject is betting to protect our hand but when our opponent will continue with a marginal hand (i.e. a wide range of hands) there are many cool things we can do to exploit this.

Anyone have any ideas?

checking to induce bets from weaker hands

In my live games, one of the things I am looking at when approaching this problem is whether the fish has shown a tendency to call pots down to showdown or whether he will fold the river or fold to a raise on the turn.

Translating that into the statistical universe that you guys inhabit, I would therefore be looking closely at percentage of hands taken to showdown and percentage of pots won at showdown. If the first number is high and the second number is low, I am going to be less concerned about getting the money in ASAP when I am ahead (unless I need to price out draws), because I figure the fish will call me all the way down to the river. But if the fish has shown some ability to fold, but just folds too late in the hand, I want to try to get called for as large as sum as possible on an earlier street, because I probably won't be getting paid off later.

DAMN IT SPENDA!!! This has got me thinking of ways to exploit someone that will call down/continue with marginal hands, and it's something I do a lot, but I can't think of WHY or HOW I do it specifically. Later after I wake up from my nap, I'll try to look through some of my HH's from last night's session and post them here and see if I'm on the right track.

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Monty giving him just the right price would be correct if he would fold for any amount less. However, against a fish we know that they will continue against even improper odds. Therefore we want to find a bet-size that gets them to call but to do so incorrectly.

I know they first thing that comes into everyone's mind on this subject is betting to protect our hand but when our opponent will continue with a marginal hand (i.e. a wide range of hands) there are many cool things we can do to exploit this.

Anyone have any ideas?

Ah, I do see where my statment was incorrect, I should have rephrased it to bet larger to take his odds away from him, I think I was thinking correctly, but expressing it wrong.

I do think there is a lot of benefit in learning to let villian take the initiative when he is behind (this is something CodeRed and I have worked on a bit) and I no longer c-bet every flop when I have equity. I tend to mix it up quite a bit, especially when my hand is well hidden, hoping to give the intiative away to the fish, letting him jump onto the hook and climb his own way into the boat...

Example: Last night was playing on Stars and guy to my left ran 86/63/1 over about 80 hands... totally crazy play... knowing he will lead out on pretty much anything, any time I had good hole cards, I would either call BB or min-raise, he would bet 7-9x BB and I'd call and we'd be isolated... he also couldn't let go of anything, saw him go AI with 23o, 45s, etc. all on uncoordinated and losing boards...

Maybe not the best example, but knowing his characteristics led to a lot of fun letting him lead his way down a path to ruin. Guy went through like 3 BIs on my table in about 17 minutes. I will look him up every night.

- overvaluing top-pair type hands

Bet/bet/bet with TPTK+ hands vs passive lines
Bet/shove OOP or call flop/shove turn vs aggressive lines

-continuing with marginal draws despite improper pot odds

Depends on type of draws, stacks, their breaking points and general width of their range they continue on big bet streets:

if they call lot of flops with bottom pairs and shit or draw and fold missed rivers but put good chunks of money on turn only with good tptk+, then isolate them with super wide range, build pot on early streets and blow them off on big bet streets. If draws miss and they are loose and aggro, then turn some of your goodish hands on river into bluffcatchers (c/c instead of b/f)

If a guy wont fold any draw for any (somewhat realistic) price, then we move from protecting our hand to betting for value. I'll work up to betting pot with a decent hand against a guy I have this read on. Of course once you hit river things change, because he now either has a busted draw or something else (that sounds kinda basic, but you get the point).

To answer spenda's question, I think we can often choose larger- or smaller-than-normal bet-sizing when villain is likely to overvalue medium strength hands. Here, villain is 30/6 over 50 hands. The most obvious bet-size manipulation attempt is the river. But the flop bet is slightly larger than average and turn is slightly smaller, intentionally. IDK if I should be showing the results or not, so I put them in white. Initial raise is a bit loose for me, but table was extremely nitty.

$0.25/$0.5 No Limit Holdem
9 players
Converted at weaktight.com

Stacks:
UTG ($50.00)
UTG 1 ($15.00)
Hero (MP1) ($50.75)
MP2 ($10.00)
MP3 ($10.00)
CO ($77.20)
BTN ($84.15)
SB ($43.55)
BB ($10.50)

Pre-flop: ($0.75, 9 players) Hero is MP1
2 folds, Hero raises to $1.75, 2 folds, CO calls $1.75, 1 fold, SB calls $1.50, 1 fold

Flop: ($5.75, 3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $4, CO calls $4, SB folds

I tried to bet here like I was worried about the flush draw instead of having it.

Turn: ($13.75, 2 players)
Hero bets $5, CO calls $5

Now I'm trying to act weak.

River: ($23.75, 2 players)
Hero bets $5, CO calls $5

The river bet is tiny compared to how I would normally value bet the river. What I think is true is that villain has mostly mediocre hands, but maybe 15% of the time got there with a flush. I'm hoping that if I bet small, he'll raise me with a flush. Also, there's a better chance to get value out of the worst part of his range. If I didn't think he was capable of shoving a flush over the top, I would have value bet more.

Final Pot: $33.75
Hero shows: As Ts
CO shows: Qd 8d

Hero wins $32.10 ( won $16.35 )
SB lost -$1.75
CO lost -$15.75

Originally Posted by Vrax

- overvaluing top-pair type hands

Bet/bet/bet with TPTK+ hands vs passive lines
Bet/shove OOP or call flop/shove turn vs aggressive lines

-continuing with marginal draws despite improper pot odds

Depends on type of draws, stacks, their breaking points and general width of their range they continue on big bet streets:

if they call lot of flops with bottom pairs and shit or draw and fold missed rivers but put good chunks of money on turn only with good tptk+, then isolate them with super wide range, build pot on early streets and blow them off on big bet streets. If draws miss and they are loose and aggro, then turn some of your goodish hands on river into bluffcatchers (c/c instead of b/f)

Originally Posted by bjsaust

If a guy wont fold any draw for any (somewhat realistic) price, then we move from protecting our hand to betting for value. I'll work up to betting pot with a decent hand against a guy I have this read on. Of course once you hit river things change, because he now either has a busted draw or something else (that sounds kinda basic, but you get the point).

these posts are indicative of why I locked this thread in the first place. If you're going to come, you better come hard boys.

In reference to Robb's HH

There are spots when we value-bet where it's very thin, so thin that if we make our normal valuebet size (let's say 75%) of the pot our opponent's calling range might be so tight that we're actually value-towning ourselves.

Let's say we're playing 100nl and the pot on the river is $60, we bet $45 and our opponent calls. 6 out of 10 times he calls with a better hand, 4 out of 10 times he calls with a worse hand.

(.4*45)+(.6*-$45)= -$9

Therefore each time we bet $45 we lose $9, over 10 thin-value betting instances we lose $90. That's nearly a buy-in.

However, let's look what happens if we bet $20 into $60. The question becomes have we bet small enough to expand his river calling range to make our bet size profitable. Obviously our opponent has to call more frequently with worse hands due to either basic pot odds principles if he's a good player and a smaller/less-scary bet-size if he's a 1st-leveler.

Therefore, out of 20 river calls he now calls 13 times with worse hands and 7 times with better hands. This would be logical as his calling+winning range really should not expand at all (unless we're bluffing, which we're not in this case).

(.65*$20)+(.35*-$20)= +$6, or over 10 hands +$60

Therefore betting $20 compared to $45 is $15 more profitable in each case. All because we bet a small enough amount to gain value from our hand.

We now need to identify spots/players to employ this theory. One definitely is against a fish. The reasons for this is that they get to the river so often with a mediocre 1pr type hand that cannot stand a big river bet.

So, what's my point. My point is that against a player with too tight of a river calling range in order to go for thin value we must bet small. However, when we have the nuts like yours, it's much better to bet bigger. Yes, he got to the river with a wide range. This means that when we bet bigger we are going to eliminate a fair share of combinations from the range that might call a $5 bet. However, let's look at this:

In your hand history let's compare a $5 bet to a $20 bet. We must first assume that our opponent is going to call 100% of his combinations to a $5 bet, I think that's a fair assessment as the board texture+the river card means he's either going to have a flush or Jx or better.

The question becomes how much of his range does he have to fold to make $5 better than $20. Simple math tells of that $5 is 25% of $20. Therefore if our opponent calls $20 1/4th as often as $5 we break even.

Looking at this board texture it would be a safe assumption that a $20 bet. Let's first look at the range he might get to the river with (this is this wide because of your turn bet size):

A2s+,KTs+,Q8s+,JTs,A5o+,KTo+,QTo+,JTo,10fd's

Basically that range is any suited-ace, most off-suit aces, all broadway hands and like 10 combinations of flush draws.

On the river he won't fold Ax,KTo,KTs, and the flush draws turned flushes if we bet $20. If we bet $5 he'll call with them all of his turn range. The question now becomes have we eliminated 75%+ of his hand combinations.

Alright for fun I'll go through it:

A5o-AKo=78 combos
KTo=9 combos
KTs=3 combos
A2s-Aks=36 combos
flushes=10 combos

That's 136 combinations that are calling a $20 river bet. Therefore, for $5 bet to be better than a $20 bet his turn calling range has to have 544 combinations in it, we know it does not. Bah, a lot of typing, I might add more later.

robb,

i dont understand why you are fancying up your line in that specific hand? you have TPMK with a flat caller behind you. you have top and bottom on the turn and are likely freerolling to the nut fd. A2-A5,A7-AJ now splits with you and you are only worried about a very passive AK, imo, which likely would have RRed you pre. AQ would have likely popped you on the flop being afraid of the FD you may or may not be repping. you beat all else. and, if someone is trying to outfancy your fancy, you have 9 outs to the nuts.

in other words, i am betting the turn a bit harder...maybe $8-$9.

once the flush gets there, i have a decision, but if he thinks i am repping the flush, i need to bet a bit smaller, but i dont bet $5. i half pot it....maybe $10. i am less worried about the weak ends of his range, and more worried that he cannot let go of marginal hands, per thread discussion. basically, i am PRAYING he has an A and cant let it go. if he does something incredibly stupid, like raising over me, fine. but, betting $5 to suck in a Q or worse is leaving money on the table, imo, since i doubt any A will fold to a 1/2 pot bet, and a "smart Q" drops his hand to a minbet.

my .02....flame away. btw, decent thread.

Based on reads I had from earlier hands, I felt he was likely on a flush draw (not a set/full house) if he was strong. I did not think Ax was likely, again, based on an Ax hand he showed down earlier. Given what I felt was a read on his lack of strength, I was hoping to maximize earn by getting him to raise the flushes (which he likes to chase).

That said, I certainly agree with Spenda and Chopper that the river bet should probably be larger. I rarely bet less than half pot on the river, and probably shouldn't have tried anything fancy here. In the spirit of the thread, I was trying to think about how bet-sizing might play into this hand where a donk obviously overvalues medium-strength hands. Thanks for the good analysis, guys.

also, only one person has mentioned a really easy way to exploit this type of player:

hint: he/she didn't explain it at all

The best way of all to punish the other guy when he is always calling with bad hands is to bet smaller then a bit bigger then a bit bigger again on river and he will look back at the hand and say "Shit Otter just towned me without me realising he did" And i will take his monies

Somethings thats become apparant through the thread is that this category can be broken down further into sub-types. Players who play their mediocre hands passively (calling stations postflop) and those who play them aggressively. Versus the second kind, I like betting to induce just such behavior. I tend to think these guys all into the mistake of thinking "I have something, and if I raise he might fold anyway". Its like they give themselves outs without really considering them. Maybe I'm overthinking though and they just go "woohoo, a pair!".

Couple of examples:

Hand 1
No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

saw flop | saw showdown

BB ($60.92)
UTG ($17.25)
MP ($62.65)
CO ($46.10)
Button ($65.40)
Hero (SB) ($79.20)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A, A
UTG raises $1, 3 folds, Hero raises $4, 1 fold, UTG calls $3.25

Flop: ($9) K, 8, 9 (2 players)
Hero bets $3, UTG raises $13 (All-In), Hero calls $10

Turn: ($35) 10 (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($35) 2 (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $35

Results:
Hero had A, A (one pair, Aces).
UTG had 3, K (one pair, Kings).
Outcome: Hero won $33.25


Hand 2
No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

saw flop | saw showdown

UTG ($13.25)
MP ($50.50)
CO ($65)
Hero (Button) ($51.25)
SB ($67.25)
BB ($55.90)

Preflop: Hero is Button with A, K
2 folds, CO raises $1.75, Hero raises $6, 2 folds, CO calls $4.25

Flop: ($12.75) K, 9, 8 (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets $6, CO raises $59 (All-In), Hero calls $39.25 (All-In)

Turn: ($103.25) 2 (2 players, 2 all-in)

River: ($103.25) 6 (2 players, 2 all-in)

Total pot: $103.25


Results:
Hero had A, K (one pair, Kings).
CO had J, K (one pair, Kings).
Outcome: Hero won $100.25


Anecdotally, people often seem to spaz out with a small-half pot sized c-bet in a 3-bet pot. Normally to induce this kind of reaction I'd use a half pot sized c-bet, because I feel really small ones look suspicious, however in the first one I kept it even smaller because of his stack size, to give him the impression he had room to bluff if he missed the flop.


Then you have your classic calling stations. I like to go for thinnish value versus these guys, as they really will call with such wide ranges I think we can bet a lot of hands for value that people dont consider. I also make my bets, especially my c-bets on the higher side for value. If they're going to call when behind, we should be getting them to call as high as possible:

Hand 3

No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

saw flop | saw showdown

CO ($74.30)
Hero (Button) ($46.10)
SB ($74.85)
BB ($37.95)
UTG ($18)
MP ($49.25)

Preflop: Hero is Button with K, 10
2 folds, CO calls $0.50, Hero raises $2.25, 2 folds, CO calls $1.75

Flop: ($5.25) 10, 2, A (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets $4, CO calls $4

Turn: ($13.25) Q (2 players)
CO checks, Hero checks

River: ($13.25) 10 (2 players)
CO bets $0.50, Hero raises $9, 1 fold

Total pot: $14.25

Results:
Hero didn't show K, 10 (nothing).
Outcome: Hero won $22.05


Even with 2nd pair and an ace on the board I think we have value here. He's 68/8 with 47% fold to c-bet. That means he hates to fold, which I believe tends to mean he's distrustful. He can easily have a worse T, a gutshot, or even a smaller PP on the flop we can get value from. For a 2nd pair hand, this c-bet is largish. This is a spot I used to think "no value, only better hands call" but thats wrong. Turn sucks since his gutshots either got there or improved to a better pair. River may look like I'm value towning myself, but again his range is so wide I think I can r/f this profitably. Unlikely he'll fold any A or Q here.

Hand 4

No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

saw flop | saw showdown

SB ($153.70)
BB ($50)
UTG ($60.05)
Hero (MP) ($57.55)
CO ($66.75)
Button ($74.01)

Preflop: Hero is MP with J, J
1 fold, Hero raises $1.75, CO calls $1.75, 3 folds

Flop: ($4.25) 4, 10, 6 (2 players)
Hero bets $3.50, CO calls $3.50

Turn: ($11.25) 7 (2 players)
Hero bets $8, CO calls $8

River: ($27.25) 2 (2 players)
Hero bets $20, 1 fold

Total pot: $27.25

Results:
Hero didn't show J, J (nothing).
Outcome: Hero won $45.90

Another guy who hates to fold, 47/6 with 0% fold to c-bet. Notice flop and turn bets are both on the high side. Question on river is whether to check to let him bluff his busted draws or bet to get value from his pairs. Again a lot of people get worried about the somewhat coordinated board, but his range is so wide here we can let monsters under the bed scare us away from value.


Against people who chase draws its the same thing. If they'll pay a high price to chase a draw, we give them a nice high price.

Hand 5

No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (5 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

saw flop | saw showdown

MP ($69)
Button ($13.15)
SB ($216.31)
BB ($32.85)
Hero (UTG) ($88.65)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with K, Q
Hero raises $1.75, 1 fold, Button calls $1.75, 1 fold, BB calls $1.25

Flop: ($5.50) 4, Q, 6 (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $4, 1 fold, BB calls $4

Turn: ($13.50) 3 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $9, BB calls $9

River: ($31.50) 9 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $20, 1 fold

Total pot: $31.50

Results:
Hero didn't show K, Q (nothing).
Outcome: Hero won $49.95

Both opponents here hate to fold and love to chase draws, so this is a gin flop imo. We can bet expecting them to pay a good price for their draws and slowdown if the most obvious draw comes in. This is pure value on flop on turn. River is a bit more iffy. A lot of his range is missed draws, so I was probably a bit hopeful trying to get value from worse Qs or TT/JJ type hands. Maybe a better option would be a small bet to get some value from his really weak hands, or one suggestion I've never used is to just min-bet it and give him the opportunity to bluff at weakness (basically the same concept as checking when OOP but we're IP).

Some ideas there anyway.

Bjs:

Note the folds on the river on those last two hands. As you said, these guys are calling stations. But their tendency is to eventually realize (way too late) that they are behind. In other words, I suspect if you look at their showdown statistics, they don't show down too many pots or lose too many showdowns. They just call too much on flop and turn.

So, it seems to me that the strategy with this type of player has to be to extract your value on flop and turn. Indeed, if they call you on the river, that's probably a bad sign-- perhaps they made their hand! So in your bet sizing, I would think heads up against this type of opponent a plausible strategy might be to bet as large as you think Villain will call on flop and turn, and size your river bet large enough to deter a raise but small enough that the Villain may still call with a weaker hand.

Yeah agree, I mentioned in my op just last night that I think I'm betting too large on river. Still, sometimes you dont know till you try .

I like betting to induce. The only other thing you may want to consider is how draw heavy the board is too. Specifically hand 1 is very draw heavy so I might not want to small ball that flop. But since he's short its not as big a deal, so you might have considered that too. And he's not as likely to have a draw with an UTG raise and you having Ad.

Flop texture is always important, but less so with such a short stack, my main concern is how do I get the most money from him rather than what kind of whacky draw hand he may possibly have.

So Villain is so loose that no one can believe that he ran like god.He run the table down through pure aggression and people not putting him on overpair.Anyway,he was running 93/61/5.7.Which was annoyingly crazy,as he kept bluffing.


Anyway,i was getting 20-1 to on my pp,so i called and saw flop.I had position all day long so i used it to my big advantage on this flop.I didnt want to c/r just incase he had air,so i let him to induce a bluff.

How do we MAKE them to continue with their marginal hand.[for this example,villain check]How do we manipulate them into continuing their marginal hands while getting value from our hands at the same time?

I do believe checking the turn wouldnt be so +EV compared to Betting,because I have a solid read on Villain that he will continue to the river even with ATC.

I bet 6.25 into 12.50 knowing that he will continue 7 out of 10 times,i think we need 4/10 to break even.

No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Button ($48.71)
SB ($140.49)
Hero (BB) ($36.83)
UTG ($17.04)
MP ($54.77)
CO ($48.13)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 4, 4
4 folds, SB raises $2, Hero calls $1.85

Flop: ($4.20) 4, 10, A (2 players)
SB bets $4.20, Hero calls $4.20

Turn: ($12.60) K (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $6.30, SB calls $6.30

River: ($25.20) K (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $24.23 (All-In), 1 fold

Total pot: $25.20

That really isn't a spot where we're trying to make him continue with a marginal hand. Spots where we want or NEED our opponents to continue with marginal hands in when we have like a medium/mediocre strength hand where if he only continues with the strong part of his range our equity in the pot drops significantly. That would not be the case in your hand.

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

also, only one person has mentioned a really easy way to exploit this type of player:

hint: he/she didn't explain it at all

still missing some pretty basic poker theory is terms or range vs. range play people!

Just going to look at one spot in some detail. The detail is likely to be too assuming but I'd hope there is an answer out there as to whether or not, and when, we check behind or lead.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

BB ($7.30)
UTG ($11.05)
Hero (MP) ($10.35)
CO ($6.25)
Button ($2.85)
SB ($3.80)

Preflop: Hero is MP with K, J
1 fold, Hero raises to $0.40, CO calls $0.40, 3 folds

Flop: ($0.95) 3, K, 4 (2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks

Turn: ($0.95) 9 (2 players)
Hero bets $0.70, CO calls $0.70

River: ($2.35) 7 (2 players)
Hero bets $1.75, CO raises to $3.50, Hero calls $1.75

Total pot: $9.35 | Rake: $0.45

I'm going to have to make (probably too many) assumptions but, well...

What I want to look at is whether we get more money out of a fish by delaying betting until the turn (his range for continuing to the river from here being wider) or by betting into him on the flop.

I'm going to assume against a fish in this spot that:

If he does continue, he continues with that entire range to the river.
If we check the flop, he'll check behind. If we bet, he'll never raise
Once we act, our actions become 'robotic' - we proceed to act this way regardless of what cards come and so we are concerned with our equity on our street of action.

There are just too many permutations otherwise. Another way to put this is: we are playing against a nit-fish(?)

Betting the flop

Our line is predetermined: we bet 75% of the pot on every street.

Fish' range for continuing on this flop to a bet:

33+,AKs,A5s-A2s,K2s+,Q4s,J4s,64s+,54s,43s,AKo,A5o-A2o,K2o+,65o [our equity: 67%]

How much we bet altogether (the size of the pot is 1.75 times bigger after each round of betting): {(1.75)^3}*$0.95 = $5.10

We make $5.10 + $0.95 = $6.05, 67% of the time, i.e. $4.05.

Delaying betting until the turn

We bet 75% of the pot on 2 streets.

Range for continuing:

33+,AQs+,A9s,A5s-A2s,K2s+,Q9s+,Q4s,J9s+,J4s,T9s,97s+,64s+,54s,43s,A Qo+,A9o,A5o-A2o,K2o+,Q9o+,J9o+,T9o,98o + a number of heart draws [our equity = 80%]

We bet {(1.75)^2}*$0.95 = $2.90.

We make $2.90 + $0.95 = $3.85, 80% of the time, i.e. $3.08

The problems with this post...

The mathematics is half-arsed and assuming.
Too many assumptions have been made.
Ranges are presumptuous.

What I think I might have learned...

We want to make the pot as big as possible and are best using all 3 streets to do this against extremely loose-passive players.

On a board as disconnected as K34r with KJo, we probably don't want to check behind unless we expect that he'll build a pot for us with junk and then continue with worse hands.

This would probably be a lot better if I narrow opponents ranges and give hero a hand like AK so that our equity should improve markedly come the turn. Also, boards where the river will often improve our opponents hand.

I've been thinking about this thread for a while after watching some videos from GS and doing some personal study, I think what Spenda is looking for is checking to induce a bet.

Here's an example of a hand that I was just involved in that hopefully illustrates the point:

Villain has been running an impressive 92/67 over 66 hands.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.05 BB (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Hero (MP2) ($5.86)
CO ($4.13)
Button ($1.88)
SB ($7.22)
BB ($28.62)
UTG ($8.60)
UTG+1 ($9.88)
MP1 ($9.74)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with 3, A
3 folds, Hero raises to $0.20, 3 folds, BB calls $0.15

Flop: ($0.42) Q, Q, A (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.30, BB calls $0.30

Turn: ($1.02) 10 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks

River: ($1.02) 8 (2 players)
BB bets $1.70, Hero calls $1.70

Total pot: $4.42 | Rake: $0.20

The key here is checking behind on the turn. The reason for checking behind is to keep his range wide on the river because I don't want to be playing against the top of his range. By checking behind on the turn, I manipulate his range in such a way that my hand plays well against it, and at the same time allow him to bluff a lot of missed rivers.

Against a standard opponent I wouldn't take this line but b/c this player was so incredibly loose, I knew that a. my weak ace still fared well against his range and b. he would bet a lot of rivers with worse hands b/c he sensed weakness on the turn.

As an aside, this player ran 97/67 or so over 150 hands, was up 8 BIs at one point, and then went broke. Fun to watch though.

Flame me if this has already been said.

But the whole point of this thread is to understand and exploit villian. first is to narrow villians range. Also what it really comes down to is playing the player and is player dependant. Styles, tendancies, stats. And how he/she would play that range and also. And also if you can go that far what range does your opponent put you on.

Obviously if your villian calls any bets regardless of odds then it dosn't matter. There is not point to get into FPS when you have opponents calling your all in on the flop with a gutshot or calling your 4 bet allin on flop with 9's 100bb's plus deep.

The point is to understand your opponent narrow his/her range through quick process of elimination P.O.E. And exploit the maximum amount from said villian that is possible through the changing streets of play. Based off villian's range

If not flame me to tears and carry on

?

There is no point getting into FPS?

What does this mean?

"Fancy Play Syndrome".

As for the HH's above, The A3s hand from RML604 is not a great example of what we're trying to talk about here. Our opponent already has a pretty wide range. The better way to play that hand would be to bet the turn, protecting our hand against club draws and hands like JT/KT that might have called the flop. If we're raised on the turn it's a simple fold and then we're able to analyze the river card and more than likely check behind. Therefore the way we exploited this villain was by fully maximizing our earn when we're ahead of his calling range.

I got Spenda to admit what he was after so it would be cheating to mention it now, but its outside the box of the normal "continuing with a marginal hand" type of situation. In fact even after he told me I still kinda see it as different although technically correct. Think about different player types, not just pure fish and when they might do this.

I dont think its as simple as saying "work out their range and exploit it". One of the harder things to do (at least it was for me) as a beginning player was to work out HOW to exploit someones ranges. Given the way I've seen some "regs" attempt to exploit people I'd say thats fairly universal, because as a rule most people suck at all bar the most basic examples. Thats why Spenda talks about giving it some real thought and not just typing the same canned response everyone knows by rote.