[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
jazz,

another smallish pattern i've detected from these types of players (and this last one in particular) is the tendancy to not start bluffing until after I do. this generally means that checking doesnt induce bluffs, betting does. The disadvantage is that I need to actually make a hand to exploit this, which i'm bad at. The further disadvantage is that I miss value with weak made hands because they don't bluff at them as much when I check to induce. Additionally, it allows them to play faster with more marginally made hands like mid pair and to do so safely because I'll end up showing down a slightly worse range.

Once I play a session vs one of these guys where I'm even remotely happy with my play I'll post it up for critique.

thx for the thoughts on this. I feel I have a lot to learn from getting beaten in this way, and that I should be picking up tricks if they're out there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why you are bluffing at pots OOP at all? Your opponent is limping preflop, meaning there is a measly 1 BB to steal. Moreover, he is checking behind a lot, giving you free cards on a frequent basis. I'd probably make a stab at an occasional pot on the flop (say with 96 on a 755 board), but often just check/fold against this opponent UI on the turn. These infrequent bluffs are meant more to balance my value bets and induce weaker calldowns than they are to make much profit on their own.

For what it's worth, I think you'd probably learn a lot more posting a session where you think you played badly or were upset by how it turned out. I am sympathetic to not wanting to post when you don't feel like you played your "A" game, but it'd probably do some good.

In general, I think you are vastly overrating this approach in position. Your opponent is either running good or you are making fundamental mistakes in playing small pots OOP. It's possible you are trying to win too many of the pots and putting in too many bets trying to steal them.