What to do with extremely aggro pre-floppers? - Page 2

winkydinky85 · #1 02-01-2007, 07:46 AM

The objective is not to out lag the lag. But if my preflop reraising standards are say AK, AQs, TT+ then I would open it up to (AK, AQs, AQ, AJs, KQs, 88+) if his stats are like that over a reasonable range. This is considered an UTG raiser with those stats.

Everybody spews against the over aggressive maniacs at times but mostly because more times than not it is correct to put that bet in on a ragged board with ace high. Or value raising with second pair on the river. Thing that sucks is somebody has to feed them to stick around and when you are running bad you are the bait used to lure him to stick around. And then most of the time somebody else gets the money from him.

fabadam · #2 02-01-2007, 09:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Yes, that much is clear, but what exactly is a strong holding here? I mean, I know this is a vague question but as you say - they don't like being played back at.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a bit of gutfeel maths, but in general I think you want to play back (that is, 3-bet) when you are ahead against their range. So if LAGgy villain raises 20% of his hands, you raise the top 10%, cause they are ahead against his range: the odds you are ahead are 50% or more.

Yoy say it's not easy to do seat selection, and you're right: very often you can sit at the one available seat or not at all.
Still, having a guy like this to my immediate left, or 2 or 3 seats away, would be enough reason for me to get off the table, and try to get a better seat at another table.

fretelöo · #3 02-01-2007, 09:41 AM

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...

22pajo · #4 02-01-2007, 07:04 AM

Any offsuit holding (AJ, KQ etc.) is at an inherent disadvantage against a raiser (due to threat of domination), AK being the exception.
These hands are also weak in a multiway pot so you can pretty much throw them away every time unless you have a read that the LAG that raised before you will raise very light. Even then these hands may be difficult to play post flop.

The suited versions of these hands play a little better as they are strong HU and multiway. Again, i'd still be a little hesitant to cold call with them against a raise but if you know the LAG's you face will raise very light then i'd think about cold calling. The threat of domination with AJs, ATs, KJs, KTs still exists so tread carefully.

Thats my view on the hands. As for the plays with these hands against these villains you mention i'd be keen to hear what the more experienced posters have to say about them.

pena · #5 02-01-2007, 07:17 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Any offsuit holding (AJ, KQ etc.) is at an inherent disadvantage against a raiser (due to threat of domination), AK being the exception.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm keen to 3-bet at MP and LP w/ AJ against 25/20/2.5 raiser.

22pajo · #6 02-01-2007, 07:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any offsuit holding (AJ, KQ etc.) is at an inherent disadvantage against a raiser (due to threat of domination), AK being the exception.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm keen to 3-bet at MP and LP w/ AJ against 25/20/2.5 raiser.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here if the conditions warrant it, but we need to be aware of the threat of domination with this hand as making top pair top kicker on the flop facing a guy holding AQ/AK can get expensive.

mmctrab · #7 02-01-2007, 08:13 AM

The problem isn't just deciding which hands to play preflop, it's that these guys seem to always bet the flop, and are capable of double or triple barrelling. I had one the other day who raised with two small off suit cards and triple barrelled with air all the way to showdown and I called down with a pair of sevens to win. My read on them was that they were FOS, but that's not something I want to do very often.

Would it make sense to deal with them the way you'd deal with blind stealers? In essence, call with many above average hands, reraise with the top 20% of hands, peel a lot of flops, raise if you hit the floip with anything decent, etc.

What's especially frustrating about these guys is that the other people at the table don't seem to understand what's going on or don't know what to do about it. If they did, the table as a whole could certainly go after them and get them to settle down.

fretelöo · #8 02-01-2007, 08:18 AM

Yes, that's sort of the range I'd say myself (at least I started debating with myself everytime I had A8s or better)...

Do you ever cold call (say, 89s - JQs, maybe 22-55)?

winkydinky85 · #9 02-01-2007, 08:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, that's sort of the range I'd say myself (at least I started debating with myself everytime I had A8s or better)...

Do you ever cold call (say, 89s - JQs, maybe 22-55)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on the BB. If he is going to call all day in the BB then my range has to be tighter for me to get involved with him here in these instances. If the BB will fold or is very tight after a raise and a cold caller then calling with hands like that is okay but it must be from the button or cutoff. SB is also worth some consideration, but he has to be super loose from the SB for him to be a consistant considerable factor.

mmctrab · #10 02-01-2007, 08:57 AM

Pocket pairs I'd consider calling one bet with. The suited connectors I think would depend on how many other people are in the pot. I think if there were say 3 in besides me, I'd think about playing big suited connectors like J/10 or 10/9. I think going below there probably isn't worthwhile.