Killing grinders getting killed by fish

TravisTravis Red Chipper Posts: 455 ✭✭✭
So of late when at a table of grinders i do very well. And consistently have very winning session. But when it is a table of fish and unstudied players i am losing. Some is run bad... 3 times in past month flopped top set over middle set and lost when they rivered quads or four flush. Thats just the tip of iceberg.
Suggestions for what i should examine in my play thats not working versus fish but does work versus grinders?
«1

Comments

  • Jaymes BJaymes B Red Chipper Posts: 64 ✭✭
    I have had the same sort of run lately. Constantly getting drawn out on. Maybe its my bet sizing pre-flop. I need to do some further investigation. I am looking forward to some advice on this thread.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Result oriented
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 5,001 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Grinders look to protect to their stack. They'll over-fold, even with good hands and better ranges.

    It might be an interesting question for another thread - what exactly are grinders and do they have a particular style? Because this doesn't necessarily match my definition, but I'm open to having my opinion changed.

  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    jeffnc wrote: »
    Grinders look to protect to their stack. They'll over-fold, even with good hands and better ranges.

    It might be an interesting question for another thread - what exactly are grinders and do they have a particular style? Because this doesn't necessarily match my definition, but I'm open to having my opinion changed.

    Start the new thread -- I'm in! :)
  • N AN A Red Chipper Posts: 147 ✭✭

    bet with made hands against fish who wouldn't fold earlier and who will pay you off on your made hands.

    That's a good starting point, IMO.

    I'm a grinder in a pool of fish. I try to avoid other strong grinders if possible.

    I like playing against fish and weak grinders. I agree betting with made hands against fish is a good start.

  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,308 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It's one of two things: the idea that you would struggle with weaker players and beat regs means something is wrong with your underlying understanding of the game, or you are really just complaining about running poorly (which is strongly hinted at).
  • Fernando OFernando O Red Chipper Posts: 78 ✭✭
    I wasn't aware that grinders and fish are mutually exclusive.

    F
  • EazzyEazzy Red Chipper Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭✭
    because its hard to hit hands. By definition, you should have wider variance against fish then against regulars (grinders).

    If most of your money comes from value betting, well you need some value. And to really maximize against fish you have to bet (call against lagy fish) with a weaker range. If your not getting much, and/or the fish are hitting (not biting) you are going to loose.
    grinders tend to be easy to read....its often easier to beat grinders consistently . But its not as profitable.

    Its to some degree the same argument I make for embarrassing multi way pots. Harder to steal easier to value bet.....Many players here, insists that bingo poker or whatever, and seem to live in fear of letting a pot get multi way. forcing pots heads up makes its easier to gain consistent profits from bluffing, but may not be as profitable as playing multi way.l

    If you approach poker in a systematic way, you need a different system for beating fish then you do for beating grinders. I believe the problem many players face include myself, is I adjust from my basic game against fish, but they (we) do not do it nearly enough to fully take advantage of the fish. And most of are basic game, is developed around regulars. Its usually assumed that playing against fish is easy, but if you trained yourself to take pots away from grinders, it can often be hard to make the adjustments on the

    And most if not all adjustments mean embracing greater variance, which means a bad feedback loop. There is only so many times most layers can isolated fish with Q7s, completely miss and give up, or 3 barrel kJ on a QJxxx and loose before you begin to question your play.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,354 ✭✭✭✭
    Travis wrote: »
    So of late when at a table of grinders i do very well. And consistently have very winning session. But when it is a table of fish and unstudied players i am losing. Some is run bad... 3 times in past month flopped top set over middle set and lost when they rivered quads or four flush. Thats just the tip of iceberg.
    Suggestions for what i should examine in my play thats not working versus fish but does work versus grinders?

    Different doors require different key to be opened
  • N AN A Red Chipper Posts: 147 ✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    It's one of two things: the idea that you would struggle with weaker players and beat regs means something is wrong with your underlying understanding of the game, or you are really just complaining about running poorly (which is strongly hinted at).

    He has a great point
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,654 -
    One way to attack this problem is by recognizing that you're playing against two very different ranges in the two game textures. This impacts all your decisions, as shown clearly in many of the CREV-based videos here.

    I agree with Eazzy that fishy games have wider variance for the reasons he stated. One question you might ask yourself is whether you're truncating winning sessions in such games by locking up a win. That can have a major impact on your bottom line and your perception of how profitable these games are.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    By definition, you should have wider variance against fish then against regulars (grinders).

    I think if you do not adapt your game to fish, then you can experience more variance. For example people that try some high stake lines at low stakes and try and make these over bet bluffs that just get snapped off by tpWK then wonder why the play didn't work. If they do not fold then you just need to make hands and value bet. @Eazzy looking back at y our $50k graph there is very little variance in it. Hard to imagine there is more variance in these fishy $1/2 games than $2/5 games against a bunch of regs.

    maybe i'm missing the point but fishy games are always less variance imo. When the games are aggressive just tighten up your preflop range and there should still be pretty low variance.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,654 -
    I think one thing that drives up the variance in fishy games is that many pots are multiway. In typical live sessions of less than 200 hands I can see this producing significant session-to-session variance. I guess if the players are super weak you'll have such a large win-rate that you won't book many losses, but the variance about the mean might still be significant.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • EazzyEazzy Red Chipper Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    By definition, you should have wider variance against fish then against regulars (grinders).

    I think if you do not adapt your game to fish, then you can experience more variance. For example people that try some high stake lines at low stakes and try and make these over bet bluffs that just get snapped off by tpWK then wonder why the play didn't work. If they do not fold then you just need to make hands and value bet. @Eazzy looking back at y our $50k graph there is very little variance in it. Hard to imagine there is more variance in these fishy $1/2 games than $2/5 games against a bunch of regs.

    maybe i'm missing the point but fishy games are always less variance imo. When the games are aggressive just tighten up your preflop range and there should still be pretty low variance.

    Well there is two reasons for my low variance.
    1) my data on that chart is based on trips not sessions (I count the money when I leave home and when I return.) so its not 3 to 8 hours, its 20 to 30 hours of play.

    2) I play a lot of my poker against regs, yes often bad regs but regs....I play a lot in the after-noon's and early evenings...and very little past midnight. I play in a casino that attracts regs...rake back, and free food and room type promotions rather then one that offers, a lot of bingo type promotions.



    This is also a definition question....I consider grinders mentioned to be regs, who for the most part are wet noodles or nits. Most of my regs, would often be consider the fish at a 1-2 online game, that games develop around. If you compare Fish to good tags and good lags, then I agree, the fish are probably lower variance..

  • jfarrow13jfarrow13 Red Chipper Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭✭
    I played twice this weekend on vacation, and had two losing sessions. The first one at $1/2, my traditional style of “attack limpers who aren’t comfortable playing big pots without the goods.” Well, they my first buy in went very quickly, so I switched to “OK value town time.” And showing down twice with the goods, I thought “alright, now they will give me credit for having real hands.” They did not. Lol. THe ole correct adjustment into back what wasn’t working before trick eh? El classico. Other session at $2/5 was WP just didn’t go my way, but I believe I was due for at least a bit of run-had after what I perceived as a rather good run of luck in March.
  • Darren DirtDarren Dirt Red Chipper Posts: 30 ✭✭
    Even though it is 2018 I am also seeing confirmation that live 200nl games are still mostly nut-peddling nits plus call-any-pfr-to-hit-the-flop gamblers... Which means I guess adapting to "fit or fold" myself OTF if facing even one of those gamblers (but going to Value Town when flop/turn I can beat TPWK since they are never folding except maybe on the river).

    Just frustrating getting premiums in EP because you can't raise too small but even when bigger size you so often find a first early caller who thus "gives pot odds" to everyone else so now you have 5 or more seeing a flop with a single overcard to your KK..88 or whatever and you have to check-fold even with a low SPR as a result of so many callers and your reasonable raise size that you hoped would get a single caller... :-\
  • jfarrow13jfarrow13 Red Chipper Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭✭
    @Darren Dirt so I think it’s a mixed bag. If you open from EP and everyone is always folding...I’m logically gonna expand my range and just pick up 1.5 BBs. It’s awful and it’s boring. But you know what else is boring? Folding. And eventually they will stop always folding. And so it’s a constant game of manipulation. I strive to have a good balance, but I always come out firing at the table. If I find them being too soft, I don’t slow down. If I find them way too sticky and won’t fold, I really tighten up and generally play fit or fold OTF but will go for 3 streets of light value.
  • TravisTravis Red Chipper Posts: 455 ✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    It's one of two things: the idea that you would struggle with weaker players and beat regs means something is wrong with your underlying understanding of the game, or you are really just complaining about running poorly (which is strongly hinted at).

    Was quite serious, as this is a pattern in my play. Moise comments, the line in Sweeney's new 1percent vid "when I play fish I focus more on absolute hand value than ranges, absorbing and evaluating comments here, etc... Helped me to readjust and do better at adjusting to table Dynamics.
    Still winning learning and growing :)
  • TravisTravis Red Chipper Posts: 455 ✭✭✭
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    One way to attack this problem is by recognizing that you're playing against two very different ranges in the two game textures. This impacts all your decisions, as shown clearly in many of the CREV-based videos here.

    I agree with Eazzy that fishy games have wider variance for the reasons he stated. One question you might ask yourself is whether you're truncating winning sessions in such games by locking up a win. That can have a major impact on your bottom line and your perception of how profitable these games are.

    Thanks I will check out the Crev vids
  • dnoyeBdnoyeB DetroitRed Chipper Posts: 284 ✭✭
    Just left the casino where I got slaughtered by fish. You see so many showdowns. If there is 1 good hand on the table there will be 3 bad ones to follow. Any hand wins.

    The players are fishier, the hand rate is slower, and I don't have 5 buyins to make people straighten up vs online.

    They say punish the limpers and wide callers. I guess honestly I just need to sac up pre flop. Start making bigger until people start folding.

    The problem is the 1 or 2 solid players that will effectively make you play for stacks when you raise big enough to make the fish pay... Seems like some of the solid players can use the fish to their advantage against other players. I can't figure it out.

    I raise my good hands and the fish often just fold on the flop. But out of 4 fish one might hit big and you loose significantly. So I guess one of my problems is I'm not raising the hands I'm willing to fold because I don't like giving to the limpers. But probably I should raise JTs as strong as QQ..
  • jfarrow13jfarrow13 Red Chipper Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭✭
    Soooo if they never fold, why not just play hands that can stack them? Drawing hands go down in value, hands that hit flops strong go up. Build a small pot with PP's to set mine, raise hands like KQ+ big, hit flops, see ya on the river.
  • dnoyeBdnoyeB DetroitRed Chipper Posts: 284 ✭✭
    They don't fold preflop. They fold the flop if they miss. but since there is a team of them some will hit. Some will smash. In this pot your TPTK is not that strong.

    You say drop the speculative hands but I don't know. The implied odds are huge. But TPTK actually has reverse implied odds. It's tough. If it's going to the river you want more than TPTK? I might just be having a recent hand bias. Maybe I'm tilted.
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    dnoyeB wrote: »
    They don't fold preflop. They fold the flop if they miss. but since there is a team of them some will hit. Some will smash. In this pot your TPTK is not that strong.

    You say drop the speculative hands but I don't know. The implied odds are huge. But TPTK actually has reverse implied odds.

    Nope -- you're correct given how your game plays. I wouldn't be eager to get my stack in with anything less than 2 pair on the river. Essentially, you are forced to play your equity post-flop. But, against fish, that's not bad because they'll pay you off if/when you hit and you don't need to push your semi-bluff hands against them.

    This is a rare situation where I would actually make my pre-flop raises a smaller amount. If they're not going to fold at any point, even AA vs. 3 or 4 hands of somewhat random distribution isn't the best way to get your money in. Raise less (not less often) pre-flop: it will cost you less when you have to fold and win you the same amount when you hit.
  • Darren DirtDarren Dirt Red Chipper Posts: 30 ✭✭
    I am finding in live 200nl games that bet size does not really impact callers, their hands do.

    Which of course means that often you will be multiway with a low SPR... and either WA or WB on a seemingly safe flop.

    Ideally the loose-preflop opponents aren't tight OTF but often the table is mostly fit-or-fold because it is multiway... which means your strong one pair is up against "the best of the rest" which is why GII with one pair even with <2 SPR seems to be longterm losing... it is. That damn "schooling" effect, it's like LHE only more costly.

    Seems that if not HU OTF it truly might be better to actually never airball bluff even IP as a cbet... but the converse is you can bet smallish for all 3 streets when you do have a decent hand even "just" one pair -- as long as you believe them if they raise you at any point with their insanely wide range... they played those cards in order to crack aces (they even say it out loud!)

    "EZGAME" :--\

    PS: unless there are solid aware 3betting regs to your left, maybe radically increase your PFR range to include all them Aces-cracking speculative hands... but reduce the size as an adjustment esp. so you are never pot committed OTF (since if they are sticky you can get 3 streets of value when you hit with your non premium starter right?)

    ...in theory... of course it takes time to test if these are the correct kind of adjustments to the schooling which puts you into the low SPR spots with one pair. More time than some of us have who just want to play a couple hours every Friday night :(
  • Darren DirtDarren Dirt Red Chipper Posts: 30 ✭✭
    If you're playing against purely recreational players, as it sounds like many of you are doing:

    1) Put in money with strong hands and strong bluffs and play really snug pre-flop and 3-bet with a linear range favoring high cards (ATo rather than 76s). Always 3-bet AK and QQ.

    2) Bet near pot when you have it and value bet relentlessly until raised and ignore balance.

    3) Check-fold a lot when you don't have it, especially OOP.

    I think those 3 instructions beats home games and SSNL for like 20-30bb/100.


    Except "put in money" is the subjective part -- preflop raise sizes lead to flop SPR values that lead to commitment (or not)... Sometimes it seems the recreational players do not actually have a "threshhold" for preflop raise sizes, if they have to call 30-40% of effective stack to see a flop they will do so. With low pocket pairs or offsuit Ace-Wheel or KJ, that doesn't matter, the decision to see a flop has already been made. You get 4 of those seeing a flop, and you have 2 or 1 or even less SPR with even an overpair and it's time to enjoy the Variance Rollercoaster because you get called by "the best of the rest" at that point #Inelastic #Schooling
  • NYCRyNYCRy Red Chipper Posts: 336 ✭✭✭
    If you're playing against purely recreational players, as it sounds like many of you are doing:

    1) Put in money with strong hands and strong bluffs and play really snug pre-flop and 3-bet with a linear range favoring high cards (ATo rather than 76s). Always 3-bet AK and QQ.

    2) Bet near pot when you have it and value bet relentlessly until raised and ignore balance.

    3) Check-fold a lot when you don't have it, especially OOP.

    I think those 3 instructions beats home games and SSNL for like 20-30bb/100.


    Except "put in money" is the subjective part -- preflop raise sizes lead to flop SPR values that lead to commitment (or not)... Sometimes it seems the recreational players do not actually have a "threshhold" for preflop raise sizes, if they have to call 30-40% of effective stack to see a flop they will do so. With low pocket pairs or offsuit Ace-Wheel or KJ, that doesn't matter, the decision to see a flop has already been made. You get 4 of the seeing a flop, and you have 2 or 1 or even less SPR with even an overpair and it's time to enjoy the Variance Rollercoaster because you get called by "the best of the rest" at that point #Inelastic #Schooling

    So you don't want to put in money with strong hands vs. bad players? Seems like what you're saying is there is variance in poker. We know. AA and KK still do pretty damn well 4 ways

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file