optimal strategy for tight-typical/passive live game

[thegoingoforit]

I'm currently using the strategies suggested in SSHE but as you can see I don't really play in a loose game. Most of the people in the games I play are not very talented but experienced enough to play fewer hands. They're the kind of players that only raise with the nuts and so on. I also have trouble raising pre-flop for value because on all of the future betting rounds I only get action if I'm beat. Any ideas on changing my strategy from SSHE to one that better fits the tables I play would be helpful.

[BigBadBabar]

how tight is tight
how many are seeing the flop typically
and how many see the showdown typically

generally the maxim is in tight games to loosen up and in loose games to tighten up, i believe

blind steal more if they'll fold, isoraise limpers, be more aggressive postflop, etc?

[atnels]

1. Even if you raise AA preflop, get three callers, and all of them fold to your flop bet, that's fine with me.

2. Even if you raise TT preflop, get three callers, and all of them fold to your flop bet, that's fine with me.

3. Even if you raise 72o preflop, get three callers, and all of them fold to your flop bet....

Obviously this is an oversimplification, but the key to winning money in tight games is stealing pots/blinds/wallets whatever you can get your hands on. You also have to be a good enough player to understand that when you raise black aces and one of your opponents raises a diamond flush that comes in on the turn, you should probably let them go.

That is, if the players you play against are as tight and straightforward as you describe.

[Hyperrrprank]

If the table is passive and tight, you need to tighten up preflop, but you can loosen up on semi-bluff and bluffing a bit and steal a few additional pots. There's a great chapter in "The Theory of Poker" by Sklanisky on exactly these types of situations.

Raise preflop when you've got the hands to do so. If they aren't paying you off on future betting rounds it is even more important you get those bets in before they see they missed the flop.

[fishyak]

If they are actually folding to your PF raises, adjust by position this way:

From early positions, raise your weaker hands. Choose whether you want to keep raising the "monsters" or whether to just limp from early positions to get some action.
From later positions and the blinds, raise the strong ones.
Every 5th (pick a #) raisable hand, don't raise it.

[ProfessorBen]

Haven't read the OP or the thread, but the answer is to switch games.

[terencetsao]

ya.. those games are not typically good to make money and they are boring..
if i was you.. i would start stealing a lot more.. play aggressively post flop, try to see a lot of flop with them.

[Hair_of_the_Dog]

Yeah, it's kind of like fighting for scraps. I'd either find a new game (if you can) or try to steal a lot more. I like fishyak's idea, but I would use Game Theory instead of a number of hands. Something that would happen a percentage of time that you feel is right.

[James.]

if you need more action pf, raise more.

if you need more action postflop, bluff more.

[HoneyBadger]

[ QUOTE ]
if you need more action pf, raise more.

if you need more action postflop, bluff more.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, I've been running a sort-of-experiment where I either limp-reraised the monsters at very tight tables, or just added more weak hands to raise, such as T9s for example. All that from early position only. While it was true they sometimes isolate you with a weaker hand when limp-reraising, winnin you a good pot, in general I found it was more profitable to conceil your range by raising more: not less. The only exception maybe being AQo, which is a pretty good hand to limp-reraise. (hence all the hands where I limped big pairs earlier)