What to do with extremely aggro pre-floppers?

[fretelöo]

I think it's a trade-off.

Having them to my right let's me choose my spots, but makes me fold a lot more as well --> boring play, easier to get unnerved etc.

Having them to my right will "force" me to play more pots with them, which isn't all too bad because their postflop play is even worse than mine. Also, they're not maniacs. If I raise in EP, they wouldn't generally 3bet me with A3o or K8s. But, of course, I'm oop...

[threads13]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok,

here's what I found (just posting this as an example for one of them):
I've seen him raise (I always assume that he'd raise stronger than that as well):

Btn: A3s; AQo; 77; K9o; Q6s;
CO: J9o; T9s; A3s; AJo; QTs;
MP3: 97s; A5o;
MP2: A8s; KTs;
MP1: J8s; A3s; QJs; QJo; 77;
UTG+2: 66; A3s; A8o;

If we assume he'd auto-raise his top10% plus what I've shown here, we come out at ~20%. If we always add the stronger hands (i.e. A4s if I've seen him raise A3s) as well, we get this range: { 66+, A3s+, K6s+, Q6s+, J8s+, T8s+, 97s+, A5o+, K9o+, QTo+, J9o+ }, which is ~28% of his hands. A wee much but close enough.

If we want to be a favourite of at least 60:40 (is that enough?), we end up with this range for ourselves: { 77+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, ATo+, KQo }

Winkey's range is just about as good: 58.7:41.3: { 55+, A8s+, KJs+, ATo+, KJo+ }

[/ QUOTE ]

Warning... thinking outloud:
I think what you would find interesting is if you put in your PFR% in the poker tracker option you will find that it doesn't include all of your PF-raising range. Reason being, there are times where those hands that would would raise, if the situation calls for it, won't be raised. For example, I will raise J9o sometimes PF, but I bet if you put your PT option to 11% or so that J9o wouldn't be selected(I am at work so, double-check me). This means that this is a somewhat narrow version of your range. So if this guy raises 25% of the time, putting PT PF utility on 25% won't give an accurate assessment of his PF raising range. Therefore, 28%(on PT) MAY be too small.

I think part of what you are looking for is what your iso-raising range should be against this guy, right? Are we assuming that he has just open-raised? From what position? Is he on your right? If the players to your left, and blinds, are tight then you are pretty much wanting to get him HU and you are going to be 3-betting with a wide range yourself.

[NigelSmith]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont think of it in terms of %ages etc mainly cos I suck saying "the top 5% is hands xyz" and I dont have pokerstove fired up whilst playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me neither -- I'm thinking more about the day after, when I go through the hands I played against them trying to see if I played things correctly (which, hopefully, feeds back into how I play them next time).

How do the session reviewers (free pimp chance, Aussie!) decide whether someone is playing to loose or too tight against an easy raiser?

[Absolution]

Good loose aggressives aren't giving much up so you should realize that first. Their mistakes are mostly pre-flop where they put too much money in with hands that can't afford it. However, they make up for it post-flop a lot of times because people are scared to play with them. This is optimal strategy in 6-max except for maybe the lower levels. I tend to just let them bet their hands for me. I don't always call down with A high though. You'll end up getting value bet a lot if you just take the attitude that you're going to showdown any pair or A or K high. Game theory helps here I think since you can't put them on a hand. You know they can't always have it and you know you can't always fold to their aggression when you have a hand with showdown value. Pick some spots to show down when you think they may be weak. Once you pick off a few bluffs they will start tightening up against you postflop and you'll see them start to check more.

Edit: I just realized I didn't talk much about preflop, which was your question. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I will 3-bet most pp above 44 against these guys as well as things like suited broadway. I tend to 3-bet these guys instead of cold-calling, but cold-calling might be okay in these situations. I just hardly every cold-call in general. I would prefer to be heads up against these guys though. The worse they play post-flop the more hands I'll play against them.

[OziBattler]

[ QUOTE ]

How do the session reviewers (free pimp chance, Aussie!) decide whether someone is playing to loose or too tight against an easy raiser?

[/ QUOTE ]

and I shall take it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I speak mostly for myself but when i do a review, each villian starts off as an unknown unless Im given a read by hero. Say ive got 200 hands in total, Early on in the review I look at each hand regardless of what hero did. Oftern you see a few players who clearly are out of line and, in terms of your question, raised preflop when it probably wasnt best to to so do. The worse the bad play and the more it is seen the more relevant it is IMHO.

Now obviously this results in reads that are over a small sample size so they should be used with caution. I normally want a reasonably clear reason to recommend a play other than the default ABC line and would try to say so as such in the review. Eg might say something like "Normally I would fold to UTG+1 raises with this AJo but last orbit he 3bet Q10o in MP so consider 3 betting his open raise this time"

in short, I get reads...probably better than I would get if I played the hands since i basically multitable when I play my hands and miss some of the finer reads esp if i folded preflop and have moved on to the next table (There is probably a lesson in there for me [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] )

[ciscociskers]

grunch

AJo/ATs definitely 3-bet as most of the time those hands are beating the 20% PFR range of noted villains and the same with KQ

hands like A4s and T9s i would play them in late position as if villain had limped ... implied odds cut down a bit but these hands should fair well against their range

[Hoskinator]

I don't usually bluff people who are aggressive because you end up losing.

with marginal hands, I will usually drop them and if I am chasing a draw then I don't mind checking and let the aggressor put in the one bet per round.

if you have a better hand then raise it up agaisnt them. If you punish them they sometimes start to change their play agaisnt you and will start to play less aggressively.

I think you have to be patient and focus on not being caught chasing with marginal hands because this will cost you a lot of money.

Position is the key, the worst scenario is getting stuck between to aggressive people and you aren't sure if you have the best hand.

[Zeldark]

<font color="red">ISOLATE THEM!</font>