Discussion:
Desperately Need Advice For Wildly Loose Play
(too old to reply)
Bone
2003-07-21 14:06:07 UTC
Permalink
Okay, I'm at my wits' end, and need some advice.

I seem to have little problem cracking your average game (semi-tight,
semi-passive). I like to play a lot of 5/10 HE, and usually do pretty
well, so long as the game isn't too tough or too loose.

Now, when it comes to the tougher games, I do know what my problem is. I
only have a basic understanding of pot odds and implied idds, whereas the
tougher players live by these skills. I can accept that and can accept
that it's a leak I need to fix. I have no problem with leaks like this,
since I can identify them and work to correct them.

Here's my real problem: I can't beat the "juicy" games... the games where
the true fish swim and the money is flowing. You see, my biggest strength
is my ability to put people on their hands. I literally woke up one day
and was able to do it, and I do it with an accuracy that makes me quite
proud of myself and quite able to hang in any game that is moderately
tight. Obviously, though, this skill does me no good in games where 7 out
of 10 players see the flop every round, and you can count on *at least* 5
of them seeing it down to the river.

There are a few basic principles in this type of situation that I am aware
of, but the overall picture of how to play in extremely loose games eludes
me.

- I understand that the high pairs go down in value, and you should do
less pre-flop raising with them since no one is going to respect it, and
you'll like get drawn out on.

- I understand that hands like JTs skyrocket in value, and some will even
argue that you should raise pre-flop with it to help create the correct
odds in later rounds. Is this correct?

If anyone could offer me some pointers, I would surely appreciate it.
Likewise, if you could recommend some reading that addresses this, that
would be great. I refer to Sklansky's "Hold-em For Advanced Players" on a
daily basis (and his "Theory of Poker"), but his prescribed methods are
getting me smeared in the extremely loose low-limits. Sklanksy does have
an entire section dedicated to this, but surprisingly, it seems to deal
primarily with your table image (not thinking too long about decisions,
etc). In contrast to the rest of his book, he offers little concrete
advice on this.

I know that there are major adjustments that I need to make, but I'm
killing myself trying to identify them. One possible book I've seen with
good reviews is Mr. Carson's, but I can't tell from the reviews if it
really hits the aspect of loose games. I see that Lee Jones has a
low-limit book, too - can anyone tell me which of these is the better read
with regard to combatting loose play (whether it be loose-passive or
loose-aggresive)?

Thank you

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
MrBuckeye
2003-07-21 14:37:03 UTC
Permalink
Get the 2nd Edition of Lee Jones' book "Winning Low Limit Hold'Em"

His discussion about "raising wars" on P58-59 is pretty good.

WLLH is the only text I've found that exclusively deals with <15/30 games
and all the silly crap that goes along with them.

Good Luck!
MrBuckeye

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Gary Carson
2003-07-21 18:21:46 UTC
Permalink
He really doesn't address the really wild games, he has a short
paragraph or two on it and he got it wrong in the first edition. He
may have done better in the 2nd edition, I don't know.

I think Jone's is a good book, but I don't think it's appropriate for
the problem that needs addressing here.

The limit of the game isn't really relevant.
Post by MrBuckeye
Get the 2nd Edition of Lee Jones' book "Winning Low Limit Hold'Em"
His discussion about "raising wars" on P58-59 is pretty good.
WLLH is the only text I've found that exclusively deals with <15/30 games
and all the silly crap that goes along with them.
Good Luck!
MrBuckeye
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Gary Carson
List of Top Ten Gambling Books
http://garycarson.rediffblogs.com/
updated July, 20th
Warren's Winner's Guide to Texas Holdem #12 last week
Gary Carson
2003-07-21 19:00:54 UTC
Permalink
You've got it backwards, odds are what's important in the wild games.

I"ll suggest two books to you, Sklansky's Getting the Best of It, and
Carson's Complete Book of Hold'em Poker

I hype my book some but I usually don't recommend it in these threads
unless someone else mentions it first. In this case however, I think
it's an ideal book for you and I've noticed that the book that's being
recommend to you is being recommened on the basis of it's title, not
the content.

I interpressed some comments below.
Post by Bone
Okay, I'm at my wits' end, and need some advice.
I seem to have little problem cracking your average game (semi-tight,
semi-passive). I like to play a lot of 5/10 HE, and usually do
pretty
Post by Bone
well, so long as the game isn't too tough or too loose.
When the game conditions change, you need to change the way you think
about things, not just change what you do.
Post by Bone
Now, when it comes to the tougher games, I do know what my problem is. I
only have a basic understanding of pot odds and implied idds, whereas the
tougher players live by these skills.
I doubt that's your leak in the tougher games.
Post by Bone
I can accept that and can accept
that it's a leak I need to fix. I have no problem with leaks like this,
since I can identify them and work to correct them.
How did you indentify that leak? What is it that makes you think it's
your problem in those games? What are you doing to fix it?
Post by Bone
Here's my real problem: I can't beat the "juicy" games... the games where
the true fish swim and the money is flowing. You see, my biggest strength
is my ability to put people on their hands.
That's a tremondous strength in those games If you can put players
on hands you can fold when you're drawing dead, you''ll know who's
gonna bet and who's gonna call so that you always get the maximum out
of your draws by appropriate bets, check/raise, and raises


I literally woke up one day
Post by Bone
and was able to do it, and I do it with an accuracy that makes me quite
proud of myself and quite able to hang in any game that is moderately
tight. Obviously, though, this skill does me no good in games where 7 out
of 10 players see the flop every round, and you can count on *at least* 5
of them seeing it down to the river.
Why do you think that skill does you no good in those games?
Post by Bone
- I understand that the high pairs go down in value, and you should do
less pre-flop raising with them since no one is going to respect it, and
you'll like get drawn out on.
Well, that's part of your problem. What you do think you understand
is just wrong.
Post by Bone
- I understand that hands like JTs skyrocket in value, and some will even
argue that you should raise pre-flop with it to help create the
correct
Post by Bone
odds in later rounds. Is this correct?
You should often raise with it because you're getting the right odds
to raise with it, not to create odds in later rounds.
Post by Bone
If anyone could offer me some pointers, I would surely appreciate it.
Likewise, if you could recommend some reading that addresses this, that
would be great. I refer to Sklansky's "Hold-em For Advanced Players" on a
daily basis
I could tell that from some of the misconceptions about poker you seem
to have.


(and his "Theory of Poker"), but his prescribed methods are
Post by Bone
getting me smeared in the extremely loose low-limits. Sklanksy does have
an entire section dedicated to this, but surprisingly, it seems to deal
primarily with your table image (not thinking too long about
decisions,
Post by Bone
etc). In contrast to the rest of his book, he offers little concrete
advice on this.
Theory of Poker is a book about tactics, it's not a book that
addresses thinking about the game.
Post by Bone
I know that there are major adjustments that I need to make, but I'm
killing myself trying to identify them. One possible book I've seen with
good reviews is Mr. Carson's, but I can't tell from the reviews if it
really hits the aspect of loose games. I see that Lee Jones has a
low-limit book, too - can anyone tell me which of these is the better read
with regard to combatting loose play (whether it be loose-passive or
loose-aggresive)?
They are both good books. Jones is a short book that pretty much
limits itlself to generally loose/passive games. That's 5-6 players
without much raising. When you start getting into games with 7-8
active players and a lot of raises much of what you'll find in Jones
is inappropriate.
Post by Bone
Thank you
_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Gary Carson
List of Top Ten Gambling Books
http://garycarson.rediffblogs.com/
updated July, 20th
Warren's Winner's Guide to Texas Holdem #12 last week
JBice
2003-07-21 21:10:27 UTC
Permalink
Thank you everyone for your replies. Gary, since you've actually pressed
some questions to me, I'll see what I can do to answer them. Thanks for
the advice.
Post by Gary Carson
When the game conditions change, you need to change the way you think
about things, not just change what you do.
Well said - I guess one of my problems is that I don't know how to "think"
when playing in loose-aggressive games (ie, 7 - 10 players, most of whom
are maniacs). My natural instinct is to revert to rock-like play when I
get drawn out on a few times, but I also know that's incorrect.
Post by Gary Carson
How did you indentify that leak? What is it that makes you think it's
your problem in those games? What are you doing to fix it?
Basically, I very rarely sit there and calculate the odds to an exact
figure. I take a look at the pot, take a guess at my chances of hitting
my hand (and winning, based on my reads), and make my move based on that.
In no uncertain terms, it can be pretty fuzzy math at times. Now, in the
real tough games, I still do well placing people on their hands, yet my
'round about way of calculating odds causes me to overvalue or undervalue
my drawing hands on the flop relative to what I feel my opponents have
hit. With less aggressive players, these mistakes aren't nearly as
costly... but in tough games, I feel that it's holding me back.

As for what I'm doing to fix it, I've been studying the "odds" chapters
more closely in "The Theory of Poker". The first time I read it, I
lazilly skimmed it rather than reading it to understand it.
Post by Gary Carson
That's a tremondous strength in those games If you can put players
on hands you can fold when you're drawing dead, you''ll know who's
gonna bet and who's gonna call so that you always get the maximum out
of your draws by appropriate bets, check/raise, and raises
I guess what I was trying to say is that, with loose crazies in the game,
I can't gauge anyone's hands because their betting is so
spontaneous/erratic. It's not uncommon (especially at Party Poker's low
limits) for someone to raise every round, whether they have AA or 49o.
Post by Gary Carson
Post by Bone
- I understand that the high pairs go down in value, and you should
do
Post by Bone
less pre-flop raising with them since no one is going to respect it,
and
Post by Bone
you'll like get drawn out on.
Well, that's part of your problem. What you do think you understand
is just wrong.
Are you saying that the high pairs do not decrease in value and I should
still raise with them, even though no one will fold to my raise? I do
realize that my mind has been cast to a certain mold by "Hold'Em for
Advanced Players", so I'm having a difficult time judging how these
thought processes should be changed. The book has been very profitable in
"normal" games... but I'm exploited in games where too many people (60%?)
see the flop.
Post by Gary Carson
You should often raise with it because you're getting the right odds
to raise with it, not to create odds in later rounds.
Just to clarify: I'm getting the right odds with it (JTs) because I *know*
that everyone will call? I think that's what you're implying, but I just
want to make sure.

Thanks again for the advice - I really appreciate it.

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com
Gary Carson
2003-07-21 21:57:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by JBice
Thank you everyone for your replies. Gary, since you've actually pressed
some questions to me, I'll see what I can do to answer them. Thanks for
the advice.
Post by Gary Carson
When the game conditions change, you need to change the way you think
about things, not just change what you do.
Well said - I guess one of my problems is that I don't know how to "think"
when playing in loose-aggressive games (ie, 7 - 10 players, most of whom
are maniacs). My natural instinct is to revert to rock-like play when I
get drawn out on a few times, but I also know that's incorrect.
You're going to lose most hands you compete for. Get used to losing.

One of the things Sklansky and Malmuth emphasis in HEFAP is the idea
of doing things to increase your chances of wnning the pot. Although
that's generally a good idea when the pot gets big, which often
happens in loose games, they emphasis they put on the idea will lead
you down the wrong path.

There are many situations in very loose games when you'll be raising
and you want everyone to call the raise, you aren't raising to reduce
the field size. That's something that people who read HEFAP over and
over again have trouble grasping.

Rather than thinking about what you need to do to win the pot, think
about what you need to do to increase the price you're getting. It's
all about price, about odds.
Post by JBice
Post by Gary Carson
How did you indentify that leak? What is it that makes you think it's
your problem in those games? What are you doing to fix it?
Basically, I very rarely sit there and calculate the odds to an exact
figure. I take a look at the pot, take a guess at my chances of hitting
my hand (and winning, based on my reads), and make my move based on that.
In no uncertain terms, it can be pretty fuzzy math at times.
That's not a leak.

Now, in the
Post by JBice
real tough games, I still do well placing people on their hands, yet my
'round about way of calculating odds causes me to overvalue or
undervalue
Post by JBice
my drawing hands on the flop relative to what I feel my opponents have
hit.
In really tough games if you're drawing then most of the time you
aren't in good shape.

Just count your outs. With two cards to come, 14 outs you're even
money against top pair. Flush draw you're a 2-1 dog. Flush draw with
two overcards is between even money and 2-1. Straight draw with two
overcards is about the same as a flush draw. Straight draw by itself
is about a 3-1 dog, a little better than that if you have a backdoor
flush draw.

A flopped set against a flopped flush is about a 2-1 dog.

Second pair with a live kicker is about the same as a gutshot, about
10-1 to take off one card.

That's about it. There's really not that many unique odds situations.





With less aggressive players, these mistakes aren't nearly as
Post by JBice
costly... but in tough games, I feel that it's holding me back.
With less aggresive players any mistake is less costly.
Post by JBice
As for what I'm doing to fix it, I've been studying the "odds"
chapters
Post by JBice
more closely in "The Theory of Poker". The first time I read it, I
lazilly skimmed it rather than reading it to understand it.
That's probably better than nothing, but I'm not sure it's your best
source.

Try doing some hand simulations. Deal out some hands and then guess
what you think the odds are and check it by dealing out 20 different
flops.
Post by JBice
Post by Gary Carson
That's a tremondous strength in those games If you can put
players
Post by JBice
Post by Gary Carson
on hands you can fold when you're drawing dead, you''ll know who's
gonna bet and who's gonna call so that you always get the maximum out
of your draws by appropriate bets, check/raise, and raises
I guess what I was trying to say is that, with loose crazies in the game,
I can't gauge anyone's hands because their betting is so
spontaneous/erratic.
Ah. You're hand reading skills aren't as good as you think they are.
Post by JBice
It's not uncommon (especially at Party Poker's low
limits) for someone to raise every round, whether they have AA or 49o.
Are you sure about that? If that's really true you just ignore them
is all.
Post by JBice
Post by Gary Carson
Post by Bone
- I understand that the high pairs go down in value, and you
should
Post by JBice
Post by Gary Carson
do
Post by Bone
less pre-flop raising with them since no one is going to respect it,
and
Post by Bone
you'll like get drawn out on.
Well, that's part of your problem. What you do think you
understand
Post by JBice
Post by Gary Carson
is just wrong.
Are you saying that the high pairs do not decrease in value and I should
still raise with them, even though no one will fold to my raise?
That's correct.
Post by JBice
I do
realize that my mind has been cast to a certain mold by "Hold'Em for
Advanced Players", so I'm having a difficult time judging how these
thought processes should be changed. The book has been very
profitable in
Post by JBice
"normal" games... but I'm exploited in games where too many people (60%?)
see the flop.
There's a lot in that book that's just flat out wrong.

That includes the statements that high pairs and big unsuited cards go
down in value in loose games. That's just wrong.

The win percentage of those hands goes down. The win percetage of
every hand goes down as the number of callers goes up. But, that
doesn't mean the hands value goes down.

Figure it out on your own with AA. Heads up you're a 4-1 favorite,
getting even money. Against 8 opponnnts you're about a 3-7 dog
getting 8-1 on your money. Figure out which is the more profitable
situation. It's a good excersise. The comparision there is even
money 80% of the time versus 8-1 30% of the time.

The loose games section in that book is almost completely wrong. That
chapter is the worst peice of poker writing I've ever seen.
Post by JBice
Post by Gary Carson
You should often raise with it because you're getting the right odds
to raise with it, not to create odds in later rounds.
Just to clarify: I'm getting the right odds with it (JTs) because I *know*
that everyone will call? I think that's what you're implying, but I just
want to make sure.
If the hand is expected to win 20% of the time, and you know 6 people
will call your raise, then you're getting 6-1 on a 4-1 proposition.
That's a good bet.



Gary Carson
List of Top Ten Gambling Books
http://garycarson.rediffblogs.com/
updated July, 20th
Warren's Winner's Guide to Texas Holdem #12 last week
Gary Carson
2003-07-22 17:57:57 UTC
Permalink
This is a tremendous response, Gary. Thanks for taking the time to
help
with this. I've ordered your book from Amazon, and I look forward
to
studying it. That, along with Wilson's Hold'em simulator, should
keep me
busy for awhile.
I think that Gary's responses here have been very valuable to me as
well and I want to join you in thanking him. I already have his book
and I have read it once. I would like to say, though, that one thing
you should NOT learn from Gary is to ignore whatever poker writer has
last drawn his ire. He is right about the flaws in Sklansky's work
concerning low-limit loose-aggressive games (largely because Sklansky
doesn't play for low stakes and may never have SEEN a table full of
real maniacs; mabye when he was younger) but don't get the impression
(which Gary probably didn't mean to convey) that you can't learn a
great deal from Sklansky. The Lee Jones book isn't quite the thing
for
the game you describe either but there is much useful information in
it. If you throw in Mike Caro, who has also had his problems with
Gary, I think you get the picture. Listen to Gary about POKER, but
learn to keep an open mind about writers he criticizes. Most of them
have something useful to say.
I don't think I said anybody had nothing useful to say.

At one time Hold'em For Advanced Players was a good book. It was the
one eyed man in the land of the blind. But, over time it's become
less and less a good book. It's badly written, over-priced, contains
important errors, the new edition added new material that involves
huge erros in thinking, and there are more and more competing books on
the market which simply don't have these drawbacks.

That doesn't mean Sklansky doesn't have anything interesting,
worthwhile, and unique to say. If just means he doesn't say it in
that book.

That's not a critism of Sklansky, btw. It's just a critism of the
book. The writer and the work aren't the same thing.

Gary Carson
List of Top Ten Gambling Books
http://garycarson.rediffblogs.com/
Ken Warren had two books in the top 15 last week
Winner's Guide to Texas Holdem #12
Ken Warren Teaches Texas Hold #14

Loading...