interest in a video? NLCASH

[flooky7]

There is no question you play optimal poker vs the passive tight player. Get them to play lots of pots oop for 3x the bb while being cautious of a trap and never overplaying your hand. Enough said there.

I'd like to see what you think about adaptation vs unknown opponents primarily in sng situations. You mention that its almost never right to limp from the SB, I strongly disagree. In my experience, which is probably more limited than yours, when playing vs a station or a maniac I tend to either limp or min raise very often depending on how extreme their passive or maniac quality's are.

VS a true maniac I lean towards using a standard raise of either 2x or 2.5x the BB in position. I know hes going to re-raise me more often pre. He will also c/r my c-bet more often, and because of this I want keep the pots slightly smaller when in position so I don't open my self up too much vs some nutty 3 barrel. My ultimate goal is to increase the longevity of the sng allowing me to set lots of little traps and take advantage of his inherent weakness. By the end I want him to think I'm kinda a nit so the few bluffs I do make, very aggressively, tend to work almost every time.

On the other hand, against a passive player who is also a loose caller I will keep the pots very small and make lots of tiny bets. I will limp most of my implied odds hands and raise maybe 30% of the time from the SB. If you can limp in position with a low risk of getting raised against a person who likes to call you down with mid pair, isn't the best way to maximize your profits by playing a ton of hands? Setting a very lag image by playing the small pots aggressively seems to get me paid off more than playing bigger pots tighter vs this type of player.

I'd like to hear what you think about all this and how it does or doesn't relate to cash/higher stakes games.

ps: Also I don't understand the 10$ automated c-bet on dry boards.