HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

This for $22 and below.

In these levels I run into a problem I havent been able to solve. I know aggression is advocated on the forum and it made sense to me so I play pretty aggressively. However I find that I am getting called a lot and when I play turbos this tendency of my opponents eats away at my stack because most of the time I don't have anything. Lets I decide to be more patient I find that my stack gets eaten away the same only at a slower pace and if I do raise villain stops calling me down with bottom pair all of a sudden.
I am having a hard time playing a game with balanced aggression.
Did anybody else have this problem? And how did you overcome it?

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

Most players $22 and below are half-sentient monkeys who mash the CALL button relentlessly regardless of their cards. These loose/passive players are goldmines. If you notice you have a button mashing monkey, then be happy - because you are going to value bet the crap out of them and watch them call call call you to victory. Against this villain, you can value bet thinner and they will pay you off with all sorts of hands.

I would refrain from being overly aggressive against a villain who will call you too often. Aggression is great against someone who is capable of folding but against someone who can't, you should consider cbetting/bluffing less and value betting more.

This kind of player will make you want to break your monitor on occasion when they suck out on you by catching their miracle card on the river but for all the other times when they don't make their draws, you'll wind up ahead.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

The main problem is that you are betting to large. You should be shoving when you have a +ev hand or draw, not on a bluff.

To continue this discussion, my AF street by street is 4.13/2.32/1.67

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

I had problems against this player for a while at the lower limits and I just started playing straight forward. Within the first couple of hands I didn't c-bet without at least a decent gut shot. I would then check down if I didn't improve to something decent. I left a lot of value on the table early on, but it got me to a lot of showdowns and it made it a lot easier to read my opponent later on. You can't bluff (even a c-bet) when there's no fold equity.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

Yea you have to play a little more transparent and straight forward in the lower games (against most opponents).

I would review my PF raising range, bet sizing (pre and post flop) and aggression factor OOP and see if you might be leaking some chips in those areas. Generally if you're playing overaggressive AND it's a bad thing, it should show up in those areas at these limits.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

[ QUOTE ]
The main problem is that you are betting to large. You should be shoving when you have a +ev hand or draw, not on a bluff.

To continue this discussion, my AF street by street is 4.13/2.32/1.67

[/ QUOTE ]

Those numbers are very close to mine at the 6's and it was very successful. My river was a bit lower. I just move to the 11's, but I'm going to stay with this until I reach a level where I need to adjust.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

I personally have had this happen to me numerous times, and I was so caught up in playing "solid poker" that I would keep on doing what the "books / pros" say you should do, which is be AGGRESSIVE.

Honestly, I have found with trial and error, aggression gets you so far, if you find that your opponent does not back down with Ace high, or even a bottom pair, you are not going to win the battle by being aggressive.

Here you will have to just adjust to your opponent, slow the pace of the game, and make a lot of small bets and a lot of value bets.

You will have to risk getting outdrawn on, thus you should try to keep the pot small, but on the river if you notice he has missed his straight draw or flush draw, then go ahead and overbet. These calling stations always have the mentality of "he is full of it", and they will most likely call. Lets say they fold, and then you start telling yourself "I am such an idiot, why would I shove there, I could have value bet and taken a nice chunk", this is true but now you have such a powerful tool under your belt, he is now shaken and will most likely be doubting his fold, so the next few times you overbet on the river (with the best hand), he might crack and call. Or it just really makes him lose focus and he'll start making stupid raises, and he now is your pet.

In conclusion, don't shy away from playing small ball poker, if your opponent is the type who will allow pots to be checked around, and limped in; this is good news for you. If you are a good reader of hands and situations, you will crush these opponents 7/10. Remember though, everyone wins, so this type of player beats you, do not let it tilt you, it really annoys and you have all the right in the world to be upset, just take it as a normal loss and move on.

I wish POKERSTARS had a "REMATCH" button after the HU SNG ended. Dont you all?

-- MxGucci

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

Mx: Do you usually play big ball or small ball. I usually play small ball, except against these opponents, I will play big ball, especially on the flop.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

I don't really get how your opponent would be questioning his fold if he folded a busted draw...?

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

The good old rule that all poker books tell you applies:

- Play aggressive against tight players
- Play tight against aggressive players

Although this is more of a strategy for full tables, but I think it really works at HU sng's as well, especially when blinds are low.

I always try to play a mental game with my opponent, if I notice he is aggressive, I will slow down the game by stalling a lot, firing out min bets (with no hand / with a monster hand), this usually frusturates them. They sometimes will re-raise you on the mere fact that they think you are "weak". If lets say you had "no hand", you insta-fold, and he gets the feeling he can do that move everytime you min raise. And when you do have that "monster hand", depending on the board, I will either cold-call him or just re-raise him.

This really works against aggressive opponents, you just have to adjust your playing style based on each opponent. Realize what might tick them off, and exploit it. There is no "rule book" of plays which you must follow 100% of the time, obviously there are strategies which are profitable, but if both opponents are using the same strategies, would that be profitable?

Implement your own game and feel, play your opponent more then your cards.

Dave: I play mainly small ball against calling stations

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

Thank you for all the responses, I do need to just slow it down a little bit. I feel some pressure from the fact that the blinds are increasing soon but I overreact to that pressure.

I just had a break even stretch and upon review I found that I am losing a lot of money bluffing, I mean A LOT. I am also being results oriented lately

Thanks again

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

I have always told my friends, bluffing is like cheating. It only gets you so far. It works out if you can time your bluffs, and you do everything right on how a bluff should be made.

I just dont find it really profitable in HU sng's, maybe in cash games, or in mtt's. But in a HU sng, you should focus on making semi-bluffs, and if your called, at least you have decent number of outs, in which you can be saved, and if your opponent folds, you just took the pot.

Say no to bluff!

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

There are plenty of players in the mid stakes games that bluffing is pretty profitable against, more so on Pokerstars than FTP (it seems to me). But it's pretty obvious who these players are.

I attempt bluffs at the 33s but it's really tough against some players because their hand ranges are so wide and there is a lot of incomplete/uncertain information from player to player. There's enough "wtf" type calls or raises in these to keep me away from too many bluffs.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

My thoughts exactly Ryan. It's so hard to bluff some players, even when you have played the hand so perfectly to show strength pre, flop, turn, and river, and when they end up calling you down with Ace high or bottom pair, it really just gets me boiled up.

-- MxGucci

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

I've been playing the $5's on Bodog and aggression seems to work pretty well for me. I start off every sng playing exactly the same way and maybe 1 out of 5 I'll have to adjust but most of them are all passive and I seem to build up to a 2:1 lead just about every time. By the time they start getting bored or whatever it is goes through their minds they are shortstacked and eventually they shove when I have a hand. Obviously there are exceptions, sometimes I'll encounter one who actually raises but then I just switch and win with real hands.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

So these passive players, actually call your preflop raises but then fold to any cbet you put forward? I highly doubt this is true, a passive low stake player is usually a horrible frusturating calling station, who will most likely call you on the flop with bottom pair or Ace high or two overs, and continue to call you down.

I wish BODOG accepted Canadians to play on their website. They are missing out on such a huge target market, but they are avoiding legal actions if and when online poker becomes illegal in Canada also.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

I struggle with this also from time to time but two things:

1. keep track of ur timing tells - when u cant bluff u will smartly switch from LAG to TAG. That's fine, but I did (and still do that) use to change the time it takes between making a bet or raise when I actually have a hand & when I dont... that's mostly b/c players are so predictable (these [censored] callingstations) that u get bored & tilted & start to speed up things... then when u get a real hand u feel that "payback time babe" inside u and change ur focus & with that ur timing. These CS have big timing tells themselves and that's why they can notice it on u (even if they're totally beginners). Use it to ur advantage.

2. watch urself (pretty obvious but somethings we (I) forget): if u want to play longball u have to set up an opportunity, so u have to "unlock" certain moves IN THEIR MINDS. That being said, when u actually have a big hand, don't do much out of what u have done recently, just stick to the moves THEY THINK are ur usual and be happy. U can make little adjustments of course like when u have a better hand u can put in a 4/5 potsize c-bet instead of a 3/4... very opponent dependent. An usual mistake is that we get excited with big hands and we are not happy winning a medium pot with a flopped set (specially against donks CS), we want to win all their money & often we end up winning nothing.

I'm dazzled with MxGucci saying u should VB river more against missed draws. I really could use some more explanation.
imho if theyre passive and u have a middle pair u prolly better exploring the odds and checking the river. although thats pretty situation dependent.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

[ QUOTE ]
So these passive players, actually call your preflop raises but then fold to any cbet you put forward? I highly doubt this is true,

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true.

You have to also know that there is more than one style of winning poker. If you are playing tight, then this is not going to work so well for you. But if you are a LAG monkey, then you MUST c-bet every hand. This system works because a bad player is going to either over-play back at the wrong times, or they are going to attempt to trap.

We all should put our pf stats in our sigs so that there is less confusion about why some people suggest certain plays. I play over 70% of my hands. If I find someone like this, then I am playing everything.

Re: HUSNG Theory: Aggression
 

[ QUOTE ]
So these passive players, actually call your preflop raises but then fold to any cbet you put forward? I highly doubt this is true, a passive low stake player is usually a horrible frusturating calling station, who will most likely call you on the flop with bottom pair or Ace high or two overs, and continue to call you down.



[/ QUOTE ]

I know it makes no sense, but it seems to be the case most of the time. They rarely fold preflop but unless they hit they usually don't call a cbet. Of course, what they think means they hit always varies and can mean a pair/gutshot/3 red cards, whatever but they probably fold half the time, and I make the same bets whether I hit or not, it seems to work pretty well so far. Obviously I adjust once they realize I'm making cbets so often or if they are a different type of player but this is the general case.