Evaluating Opponents

Ed Miller has taught me that players I’m going to face in low stakes game essentially fall into the loose-passive category.  The big mistake these opponents make is that they play too many hands, are too willing to put money in the pot pre-flop and on the flop and use a “fit or fold” strategy post-flop.  By the turn, almost all the time, they are faced with two options with weak hands (bottom pair, gut shot), calling down or folding.  In fixed limit, the option is most often calling down.  In no-limit the option is mostly folding.  What this means for my strategy is that I need to bluff less often in fixed limit but bet my marginal hands for value.  In no limit I need to build pots early in a hand to set up a big turn bet to steal.

This is a good basic strategy but occasionally I run across players who don’t behave in ways I expect.  A fellow I faced in a 4/8 FL game recently was doing the usual loose-passive thing.  He won a good sized pot and open raised the next hand, bet flop and turn and won another pot.  This game had a “kill” on.  When players win back to back hands, the stakes double for the next hand.  This player open raised on his kill but this time another player played back, three betting.  A raising war broke out for the rest of the hand and this follow turned 4-6 off suit at showdown for bottom pair and lost an enormous pot.  He then returned to his usual limping preflop and “fit or fold” post flop.  This pattern repeated a few times and I realized something.  This guy was superstitious and after winning a big pot was talking himself into thinking a heater was starting.  He started talking about this (I think embarrassed and trying to justify himself to the table) in terms of “I have to play my run.”  I’ve done this myself, feeling frisky on occasion, doing things like raising and betting down blind when I get a kill.  It’s fun and can be profitable if there are weak-tight players at the table.  But, this fellow in my story here was doing this as a habit.  He was doing it every time he won a pot or two.  That’s a significant tell and led to a hand I played with him:

Hero in cutoff with 4c-7c
Three limpers, hero limps
Villain (on button) raises
Big blind calls, first limper 3-bets
One limper calls, hero calls
Villain caps, bb calls, Limper calls, hero calls
Four players, 10 big bets
Flop Kc-5d-8s
Checks to hero who checks
Villain bets, limpers call
Hero raises
Villian 3-bets
BB and limper fold
Hero calls
Heads up, 15 big bets
Turn 6d

Hero bets
Villain raises
Hero 3-bets
Villain calls
Heads up, 21 big bets
River Ah
Hero bets, villain calls
Hero show straight, villain mucks, says he had A-K

My turn 3-bet is an example of exploiting villain’s tendency to over play what he believed was a streak.  Against “normal” players I have to consider that my straight isn’t the nuts (9-7 beats me) and just calling the raise might be the way to go.  But, because villain’s range is so wide (literally any two cards) my small straight is miles ahead and I feel great raising away.

Having a solid basic strategy to beat most run-of-the-mill players is important but to really profit, watching what’s going on at my table and trying to come up with a theory of what players are trying to do is the way to go.  Player’s behavior isn’t random.  There is purpose in what they are doing.  The more I can understand what my opponents are trying to accomplish, the better I will be at putting a counter strategy together and profit.