Help with Loose Passive Players?

[HobbyHorse]

I know, I know, most of you are already salivating at the mere mention of loose passive players, yet I find that I am having some difficulty trying to figure out where I am in the hands because these loose passive players rarely bet/raise...they just call...which is fine if I have a drawing hand, but in other situations, I find that I am uncertain about what they could be holding...

For example, here is a hypothetical situation: live full ring NL 5/5 game, Hero has around $300 and villain the same. Say Hero limps in from BB with 9 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 10 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. (For simplicity's sake, say there are only two callers - Hero and Villain. Normally, there would be 4+ callers in this game)
Flop comes 7 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
Villain (in MP) checks, Hero bets $15, Villan calls.
Turn comes 7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
Villain checks, Hero ???

Now, obviously this would be a great flop for me since I flopped the nut straight, but I have such difficulty trying to figure out what the other players could have because they are so passive. I have seen players in this game not bet their flushes until the river, and then bet them very weakly. And because these players are so loose, it is equally likely that they could have limped in with J7o. They rarely bet straight out other than on the river - but they will continue to call down on all streets. And their bet sizing is messed up too because they rarely vary their bets with the size of the pot. They'll just bet the same amounts on the flop, the turn, and the river. I start second-guessing myself because I continue to bet and they just call and call and call. In this situation, it feels like my bets are more like checks and I'm gaining no real information.

Any advice? Sorry for the remedial nature of the question...

[Quicksilvre]

I don't see how you can possibly stop betting in a situation like this. The three diamonds are pretty scary, but if the villains are loose enough, they ought to pay you off with hands like AJ or A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] enough to make up for losses to flushes.

A fourth diamond would cause me to hit the breaks. But I would keep betting on the turn and probably the river if it's offsuit.

[RyverRat]

Against loose passive players you make your money from betting into them when you have good hands. You will not find yourself in many tricky situations as they do not play back at you.
Like you above example you should bet enough to make them play incorrect odds at drawing ot a flush. Hitting a flush on the flop is so rare and that type of player will call bets when drawing to the flush. take note of how high a bet the player will call to make the most money out of them. as said if the 4th diamond hits then slow right down, if it doesnt bet again and let them keep calling you. Just dont bluff these types of players.

loose passive - value bet = $$
loose passive - bluff = -$$

[Quicksilvre]

[ QUOTE ]
Just dont bluff these types of players.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT...probably the most important thing to remember.

[MoonOrb]

When a loose passive player re-raises you, that's when you know you're in trouble. Until then, it's value betting all the way.

The reason these situations are value bets is that because they play so loosely, whatever they're holding is so often inferior to whatever you're holding that more often than not you're getting the best of it. And because they robotically call your raises when you usually have the best of it, you're betting for value even on these scary boards.

Even the fourth diamond might not be a loser for you as many loose players will call you down with any part of the flop...or none of it. So if your only read on the villain is that he's loose passive, you can still bet the river for value. You'll just have to be ready to fold to a raise (unless you know he's capable of a bluff raise, which would be the unusual case for someone that's truly loose passive).
So if you check behind on the river in a hand like this you could be missing out on big value.

In the example you give, you should be just be betting enough of the pot on each street to make their calls unprofitable.

Sometimes you'll bet out all the way to the river only to find out that they were holding KQd and you never stood a chance. But that's rare. More often they'll show down A8 or Q9 or something equally hopeless.

And that don't bluff stuff...definitely. What you lose from your games in being denied the opportunity to bluff you gain back in opportunities to extract value.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
I find that I am having some difficulty trying to figure out where I am in the hands because these loose passive players rarely bet/raise...they just call.

[/ QUOTE ]
My goal at the poker table is to make money, not to find out where I am during the hand. I'll find out at showdown.

Against loose, passive players, value bet relentlessly. This does not mean betting only the locks. It means betting when you are ahead on average when called or raised.

[ QUOTE ]
it feels like my bets are more like checks and I'm gaining no real information.

[/ QUOTE ]
Information is not the goal. Information is a tool for winning money. Unselective players give you the money directly.

[HobbyHorse]

OK, so basically I sacrifice getting any sort of a read on what the loose-passive player might have in favor of continuous value betting. Do you think position makes any difference - I've realized that I actually get more unnerved when I have position on the loose passive because it's always check - bet (me)-call, check - bet(me)-call, and I keep thinking what the heck could they have that they can't bet but yet keep calling...

Moon Orb: you said that I should just be betting enough of the pot on each street to make their calls unprofitable - but how do I do that with little to no read on what they are holding? In my example, should I just assume the most obvious - i.e., the flush, and bet accordingly? Basically, I should be using the board to determine my bets and not really any type of estimated hand ranges for the loose passives...?

PS. Oops...Messed up my hypothetical situtation. On the turn, I would be betting first, not the Villain.

[redfisher]

Make sure your read is right. Is this guy loose-passive on all streets or just loose preflop and then fit or fold post-flop?

Your example hand is wrong. You're in the BB, but villain acts before you on all streets. I'm going to assume you're on the button.

This pot is small with dangerous board that gets worse on the turn. I'd probably check behind on either the flop or turn and check/call the river. Your hand has some value, but even a loose passive has to have something to call with.

[MoonOrb]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, so basically I sacrifice getting any sort of a read on what the loose-passive player might have in favor of continuous value betting. Do you think position makes any difference - I've realized that I actually get more unnerved when I have position on the loose passive because it's always check - bet (me)-call, check - bet(me)-call, and I keep thinking what the heck could they have that they can't bet but yet keep calling...

Moon Orb: you said that I should just be betting enough of the pot on each street to make their calls unprofitable - but how do I do that with little to no read on what they are holding? In my example, should I just assume the most obvious - i.e., the flush, and bet accordingly? Basically, I should be using the board to determine my bets and not really any type of estimated hand ranges for the loose passives...?



[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the thing about loose-passives is that you can't really put them on a hand unless they raise. You're not missing out on any information by raising them. If you check and they check, do you know anything more about the strength of their hand? Or worse yet, if you're in position and you check because you're afraid of what they might have, what do you know about the strength of their hand when they donkbet the turn? Even loose passive players will bet when they sense you're weak.

Note that we're talking about value betting with your marginal holdings here. Obviously, you bet your strong holdings. Against a loose-passive this is imperative, btw, since you can't count on them to bet your hand for you. So, generally, avoid slowplaying. They're going to do what they do most of the time, which is call you.

And as many people mentioned, you're not bluffing against them.

But you are betting your more marginal holdings, like TPNK and even second and bottom pair. Keep doing this until they play back at you, then bail. This way you punish them for playing weaker cards than you do and you're able to get away without much damage if they're holding a monster. The times you get drawn out on or the time they slowplay a flopped set will be more than outweighed by the times they pay you off.

Regarding position, it's much better to be in position than OOP. This way you can take a free card when you need to. So many loose-passives will call any continuation bet you make that you can throw money away firing bullet after bullet with UI overcards or a pocket pair that sees overcards hit the flop. If you're HU, though, you can often bet your UI OCs or PP for value...they fall in the category of marginal hands that you can bet for value.

To make the bet unprofitable for them, you'll have to assume they're drawing on whatever the board allows. So if there is a two tone or monotone flop then you'll want to deny them the odds to draw for that last flush card. You actually want them to call you so you don't need to bet half the pot every time. Of course, it depends how many people are in the hand with you. We've been talking about this like it's heads up, but in cases where you have a couple villains, you'll need to make your bet bigger so that both are denied the odds to call.

I don't agree with what you said about not using hand ranges. You definitely should be using hand ranges--you just don't have as much information on what their range is. But I think we agree on the main point which is that if you're going to value bet them, you had best be sure that you're not giving them the proper odds to call you. That's throwing money away and rewarding their play. So, since you can't be sure whether he's holding 55 or the Ad and a rag, bet as if he's holding the nut flush draw. It's not a complete disaster if he folds, you know. It's just that you'd rather have him keep throwing chips in the pot while you have the best of it.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter for what they're worth.