how do i beat passive pre-flop super aggressive postflop players

[GinaSD]

I disagree. This is my favorite game (very LP pre- and very TA postflop)

I tend to play this way (live) and now moreso online, splashing my chips around in many pots and looking like an idiot calling station. My stats can look something like 66/5.

If I miss the flop, I dump the hand. When I hit, the wonderful hud-stats lead others to believe I'm much worse than I actually am- and I usually get paid with my big hands while I play them as aggressively/deceptively/whatever as possible. What people don't seem to get is that my ranges for raising or jamming are TAG once that flop hits, and I benefit by people thinking they are ahead of my range (thank you again, HUD) and calling me down.

I play this type of game a few times a week, with the rest of the week playing solid TAG. It really depends on the table.. but it is definitely profitable-- but has much more variance than the standard TAG game.

[You're No Daisy]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree. This is my favorite game (very LP pre- and very TA postflop)

I tend to play this way (live) and now moreso online, splashing my chips around in many pots and looking like an idiot calling station. My stats can look something like 66/5.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hopefully they don't look like 66/5 too often. You won't beat the game playing like that. I'm assuming they might look like that over the first 30 hands if you get a good run of cards, then even out the longer the session runs.

AC

[2hi4me2cu]

[ QUOTE ]
Be prepared to concede a lot of smaller pots in exchange for huge edges in medium and large pots. These types of opponents are gold mines once you get past the frustration of missing and giving up most small pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

[GinaSD]

No, my stats don't look like that very often, but there are times when this style of play is VERY effective. I like it most when I am at a table of Tight players, or players who don't play the flop/turn very well. When I'm up against a TAG player, if I'm playing back on the flop, it's only because my hand holding is ahead of a typical TAG range.

If everyone played against this style correctly, it would be a sure loser. However people don't. They think a super LAG preflop player is the same post-flop. They don't sniff out the sneaky hand that has just made it big. The superloose style of play and table image brings the possibility of stacking opponents that makes the 1BB bleed hands worthwhile.

I hesiatated to write this, but the best way to counter this style (or frustrate me when I'm playing this style) is to play an aggressive pre-flop game. I do not play top top 20-40% hands against a r or rr. The key is to limp the suited connectors, pockets, ace suiteds, two faces,etc., and either outplay or outflop the opponent - if missed, it's a one BB loss, if hit- well- I count on you to discredit my game and believe I'm beat.


Against this style: R or RR a slightly wider range preflop. The maniac limping 40-50% of holdings means many dominated hands are in play. Make it impossible to get in and out cheap for 1BB.

On the flop: Don't discount the possibility of the open ended draw or made two pair against your AQ on the Q 7 5 flop. Play as cautiously against a raise as you would against a TAG player, but keeping in mind the range of hands you must consider being against is FAR wider than usual.

[lucky_mf]

The 66/5 guy is a lot less common than the 25/5 guy. I welcome either variation of this type of player.

Lucky

[SellingtheDrama]

Great post - also because it introduces what I consider the optimal style - adaptive poker.

There is absolutely no player that any of us is going to play who does not play in a manner that is exploitable. One of the single most important things you can learn as a poker player (after basic fundamentals of course) is how to play several variations on your basic game and who to use each of them against. Personally I play a slightly unorthodox style, but I have tested it and find it very effective against the TAGs of the world. Too many of them play predictably, and that's just asking for a thinking player (me) to find something to mess them up somehow.

One of the things in poker that makes me either wince or laugh out loud is when someone says 'always' in conjunction with a certain play. There is basically no play outside of a couple extreme cases that are absolutes in this game. There are definately optimal plays, and 2+2 is great for learning those...but there really aren't absolutes in the game.

Ok enough babbling I'm ready to leave work already [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]