Tip to all..loose players on your left

[foodbanker 0]

From most books and and old school poker which i followed for a while...The mode is loose crazies on your right and tight ones on your left. After a many years of trial and error I've discovered its maybe a huge misconception.I currently want loose players on my left and tight ones on my right. I don't want to go into details how it helps me...But I make allot more money this way and seems to always be good for me. Loose players are going to call no matter if you raise or don't and with the tight ones in front you get good info from them before you act rather than some loose player in front of you, whose information can be wild guesses.Just got home from playing poker..see there been some discussion..thought i eleborate why i've found loose player on my left great for me.. For me, information is a big thing for me. Obviously, with the loose players on my left...I am left with solid players on the right. They act before me. Most of the time I have a good idea what they playing with when they enter the pot. Then I can act according to my hand. With loose players on my right...I have fuzzy ideas what they may have. .. Loose players are also not stupid. If i come in for a raise before the flop..they will probably lay down there hands (knowing i'm a good tight player). Thus I eliminated bad drawing hand and dont' have to worry about those. IF loose players on my right...If i raise..they are already commited and will call. The second thing i noticed with loose aggressive players on my left..for example this hand came up...I had AA and raised..loose aggressive player re-raised and drove everyone out...The board ended up looking like 8-9-10-jack..and a small card. I ended up winning the hand..if the loose player did not re-raise me pre-flop..i'm sure to have lost. Most people you talk about loose callers on your right because you want to win more money when you make a great hand and so you can 3 bet or whatever...But guess what...the money is still there with the crazies on you left. ...............YOu check..let the guy on your left bet ..let everyone at the table call because they don't put the loose player on a strong hand and then you raise and get everyone's money in Secondly...if you have top pair or 2 pair..if someone in front of you bet..you can raise to drive out the goofy stuff the loose players have .sitting on your left. ..If the loose players on your right..if you raise..they are already in the pot..will call your raise and continue drawing. Good players on your right... 1) you get good information from them ..if they raise you know what is going on 2)with bad players on your left you can drive them out with raises..loose -crazies are also not stupid 3)you can maximize you winning on a strong hand by letting the loose players bet for you and everyone will call and then you maximum by check raising and not only trapping the loose player but the whole table money.. anyways..enough writing..more later....but i'm really happy there has been some discussion on this. I was wondering if i was the only one that discovered this or is it only a enigma with me?

[JaysonWeber 0]

hmmm.. thats interesting.. I go with the poker theory, and unless you can really back that up I don't see how you could prefer having the aggresive person trying to buy the pot from you while you are in position and essentially "handcuffing" them with your position every hand.

[foodbanker 0]

I'm talking strickly in ring games now...But give it a try...the proof is in the pudding or chips you cash out. Like trying to convince the world was round in 1500...anthing new different from established theory is hard to convince. thus I only have...try it.You want more proof...come to seattle and play with me

[the_stein 0]

i think you are talking about calling stations but most poker pooks are referring to aggressive players who yes are loose, but also raise a lot ie gus hansen, good luck having him on your left

[wrto4556 0]

A loose person will call a raise no matter what, so if they limp in, you can raise AND you have position on them. I've made so much money having a maniac on my right: He raises, I re-raise, getting the two of us head-up. What more could you want? He limps I raise. Also, If he notices that you only raise strong hands, he'll start folding. I'de rather him limp in hoping that I don't raise. Tight players on your left you can bet into if head-up and they will fold more times than not. It's actually +EV if they fold too much.The opposite may work for you, i'm not denying that, but I just don't see how.

[tekn0wledg 0]

hmmm.. thats interesting.. I go with the poker theory, and unless you can really back that up I don't see how you could prefer having the aggresive person trying to buy the pot from you while you are in position and essentially "handcuffing" them with your position every hand.

I have an example of this from yesterday. There was a guy who was raising 3-5xBB before every flop for like five hands. I knew he was going to do it again so I limped with my pocket aces from UTG. He raised and two people called so I smooth called. I could've easly raised here, but with several others in the pot I decided to wait. Long story short, the board was rags and he continued to bet and on the turn I laid down the law and raised him, at which point he re-raised and I put him all-in [i had him beat in chip stack 3.5 to 1] and I won with a pair of aces vs his ace high with jack kicker.This worked to my advantage with him being to my left.I think if you have a big hand or a hand that plays well in multi-way pots, then you might want a loose guy to your left. This way other players get tired of the looseness and may start limping when he raises giving you good pot odds to draw out.I don't prefer this play, but I will use it on occassion, the pocket Aces is a good example, but I could've played it either way.

[TheIceman05 0]

If you've got a very marginal hand from middle position- say KJs- you'll probably cold call with it hoping to see a flop and make a hand in middle position. But if you've got some crazy-a ss on your left who is going to bump you, you're in trouble. You've gotta lay it down, or commit to playing it for AT LEAST 2 bets. AND, worst case scenario, someone smart is on HIS left, so he's going to Three-bet him with a marginal hand to get the pot heads up. Then you're committed to playing for 3 bets, out of position, with KJs. Now, but that player on my right, then I can 3 bet him with my hand, and the only way I'm in trouble is if someone wakes up in late position or in the blinds. All the hands that dominate me except for KK or AK would probably lay it down here (unless, GOD FORBID, someone picks up on what I'm doing and decides to regularly 4-bet me... which happened to me once, until we engaged in a seat-change war that ended with us both broke...). If you've got any kind of aggression at the table, you want to be able to reign it in effectively.... OR you're going to have to play a big pot out of position. What if the flop comes down A-J-10? Do you bet and risk being raised by a hand as bad as A-2? Then you've got TWO bets in there with your gutshot draw..... On the other hand, if you're in position, you can either check to see a free-card, or raise him and take control of the hand, thereby likely slowing him down, getting a heads up on the strength of his hand if he 3 bets, or getting a free card.Look, it might work for you, but I don't see how it could work BEST. Unless you hit a lot of flops and make a LOT of hands you can get tricky with out of position, you're going to find yourself with many difficult decisions.Ice

[foodbanker 0]

Just got home from playing poker..see there been some discussion..thought i eleborate why i've found loose player on my left great for me..For me, information is a big thing for me. Obviously, with the loose players on my left...I am left with solid players on the right. They act before me. Most of the time I have a good idea what they playing with when they enter the pot. Then I can act according to my hand. With loose players on my right...I have fuzzy ideas what they may have. ..Loose players are also not stupid. If i come in for a raise before the flop..they will probably lay down there hands (knowing i'm a good tight player). Thus I eliminated bad drawing hand and dont' have to worry about those. IF loose players on my right...If i raise..they are already commited and will call. The second thing i noticed with loose aggressive players on my left..for example this hand came up...I had AA and raised..loose aggressive player re-raised and drove everyone out...The board ended up looking like 8-9-10-jack..and a small card. I ended up winning the hand..if the loose player did not re-raise me pre-flop..i'm sure to have lost. Most people you talk about loose callers on your right because you want to win more money when you make a great hand and so you can 3 bet or whatever...But guess what...the money is still there with the crazies on you left. ...............YOu check..let the guy on your left bet ..let everyone at the table call because they don't put the loose player on a strong hand and then you raise and get everyone's money inSecondly...if you have top pair or 2 pair..if someone in front of you bet..you can raise to drive out the goofy stuff the loose players have .sitting on your left. ..If the loose players on your right..if you raise..they are already in the pot..will call your raise and continue drawing.Good players on your right...1) you get good information from them ..if they raise you know what is going on2)with bad players on your left you can drive them out with raises..loose -crazies are also not stupid3)you can maximize you winning on a strong hand by letting the loose players bet for you and everyone will call and then you maximum by check raising and not only trapping the loose player but the whole table money..anyways..enough writing..more later....but i'm really happy there has been some discussion on this. I was wondering if i was the only one that discovered this or is it only a enigma with me?

[jogsxyz 0]

I like the loose/aggressive player to my left. Most players tend to defer to him. Then forthe final 3 rounds I get to act last.Example: You have a draw to a open endstraight. When he bets, you know whatkind of pot odds you're getting to draw.If he were to your right, you would have toact before you know what the other tightplayers are doing.

[wrto4556 0]

Loose players are also not stupid. If i come in for a raise before the flop..they will probably lay down there hands (knowing i'm a good tight player). Thus I eliminated bad drawing hand and dont' have to worry about those. This isn't logical at all. You WANT bad players drawing to long shots when you're ahead! It's rediculous not to want that. That's like saying, id'e rather play with the greatest players in the world instead of fish, because the good players will fold to my strong bets. Thats retarded.

[jogsxyz 0]

Loose players are also not stupid. If i come in for a raise before the flop..they will probably lay down there hands (knowing i'm a good tight player). Thus I eliminated bad drawing hand and dont' have to worry about those.

This isn't logical at all. You WANT bad players drawing to long shots when you're ahead!

We're talking about dangerous loose players like Gus Hansen and Layne Flack.I don't care where stupid loose players sit.

[foodbanker 0]

This isn't logical at all. You WANT bad players drawing to long shots when you're ahead! It's rediculous not to want that. That's like saying, id'e rather play with the greatest players in the world instead of fish, because the good players will fold to my strong bets. Thats retarded---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is my reply to whoever wrote that. In most part, lose players will call your raise with a flush draw or open ended straight draw even if they are sitting behind you. what happens when i raise, and its called behind me:A)loose players on my left that called my raise...I can now see what kind of draw they are on..reading the board..straight or flush or some weak top pair.b)If tight players were on my left and called----ALARM BELLS go OFF!!!!..If the tight player was on my right..he had to act and i can already see the strength of his hand....YOu talk about Gus Hansen..Like I say..I want him on my right..not on my left...He is not a loose player...He is a strong aggressive player..Not loose and aggressive.I dont' know how long you been playing poker but calling things I"ve written as "retarded" shows a real lack of long term experience in ring games. When I'm in a hand..I'm not concerned about the size of the pot. I want to win that pot!!!. And the less people in ..the better. I'm not a bit concerned about pot sizes I win. How big the pot size I win are factors out of my control. My main goal is to win that Pot with every arsenal I can think off. Bluffing..check raisin..are all arsenals...Anyways..the less people in drawing the more happy I am. I don't even want the guy calling me with bottom pair in. Plus..I rather have the strong players in front of me..Thus if I have to dump ..I'll dump knowing I'm beat. For example. Ace flops and you have KK...Head ups with strong player in front Of me..I know when to dump...With the loose player in front of me, He bets..I'm in a big qualdrum about if I should call. Good chance I may have him beat but I really hate to take the chance..Seriously, the guy who thinks anything I wrote has been "retarded", PLEASE..have some respect for peoples views and second...obviously, you haven't given this thing some thought...Remember , we talking about a normal 20-40 holdem game here.

[foodbanker 0]

Gus and Layne are not "LOOSE" They are strong and aggressive and not as loose as you think they are. Of course I want them on my right. WOW..if you guys think they are loose..We're talking about ring games here. They may play and raise with two little cards suited but that is not what I call loose. I even do that on occasions myself.

[foodbanker 0]

Hey if I"m wrong on this , then I'm wrong. No problem. But I was wondering if someone else will go out and purposely sit to the right of a loose aggressive player at the table and let me know how they fared. I've found it been good to me. Maybe its just my style. But it would be nice to hear from anyone whose tried it and how they came out. Its hard to just get one guys opinion. It would be nice to hear on how others fare when they do it.

[TheIceman05 0]

Gus and Layne are not "LOOSE" They are strong and aggressive and not as loose as you think they are. Of course I want them on my right.

What do you mean? Of course they're loose, assuming people are using the word "loose" to mean "calls and raises with more hands than the typical strong player," you know, which is what it means. Loose does not mean bad, it just means loose. I consider myself a pretty solid hold'em player, and when I'm playing NL, I'll play very loose-aggressive, if the game merits it. Phil Hellmuth is tight. Layne Flack (and Gus Hansen, and Daniel Negreanu) is loose... strong, good, aggressive, better than any of us. BUT LOOSE. Loose for a reason, strategically-soundly loose, but LOOSEIce

[jogsxyz 0]

On the subject line you wrote loose. Then on the body of the message you said loose crazies. Loose crazies are called live players.

[foodbanker 0]

We're going to have a difficult time trying to label people here because the definition between people can vary. But if we goinig on your definition of their play "loose loose loose" and of course aggressive. Then in a "ring" game..I'll take them on my left. Incidently, all you have to think about is this.pretend a loose aggressive player is on your left and a solid player is on your right. ..Pretend you three take a flop. No matter what hands we have and what the flop is...I can pretty much debate that the advantage is solid on right and crazy on left. For example...lets say the flop is A-7-6. and you are holding A-8..If the solid person on my right bets...75% of the time i'll probably fold. For i'm probably beat and the aggressive guy on my right may raise.On the flip side...Let say it was the loose aggreessive on my right (like the way everyone prefers)..ON the flop..if he bets..90% of the time..I"m calling. And then what happens if the solid on my left raises. Then i'm stuck in there for another bet. With the the solid on my right..I have the option to fold quickly with no money invested. With the solid on the my left, if he raises ,i fold i lost one bet and most of the time we will call the raise after he raises and so we lose 2 bets and more if we keep drawing because of odds.

[foodbanker 0]

Here are more replies to some of you who wish to debate this with some really inexperienced arguements on this game.qoute from a reply "AND, worst case scenario, someone smart is on HIS left, so he's going to Three-bet him with a marginal hand to get the pot heads up. Then you're committed to playing for 3 bets, out of position, with KJs. "First of all, Kj is not in my arsenal too much and to say "you're committed" to play for 3 bets show's you need to improve other aspects of your game. Lay it down brother!!!One more thing on "trapping"..I read you guys want the loose on your right so if he raises...you can reraise and lock out the table and get headups with our strong hand. ARE YOU GUYS KIDDING!!!...if you got that strong of hand..why you locking out the field and only getting 1 persons money? With my stategy we don't get one person's money but the whole tables money. Why get one person's money when you can get 4 or 5 people's. you got AA and and A flops. let the maniac on your left bet..let everyone who wants to call and then check raise and trap the whole table. Why trap one person when you can trap 9 people?

[JaysonWeber 0]

Just got home from playing poker..see there been some discussion..thought i eleborate why i've found loose player on my left great for me..For me, information is a big thing for me. Obviously, with the loose players on my left...I am left with solid players on the right. They act before me. Most of the time I have a good idea what they playing with when they enter the pot. Then I can act according to my hand. With loose players on my right...I have fuzzy ideas what they may have. ..Loose players are also not stupid. If i come in for a raise before the flop..they will probably lay down there hands (knowing i'm a good tight player). Thus I eliminated bad drawing hand and dont' have to worry about those. IF loose players on my right...If i raise..they are already commited and will call.  The second thing i noticed with loose aggressive players on my left..for example this hand came up...I had AA and raised..loose aggressive player re-raised and drove everyone out...The board ended up looking like 8-9-10-jack..and a small card. I ended up winning the hand..if the loose player did not re-raise me pre-flop..i'm sure to have lost.  Most people you talk about loose callers on your right because you want to win more money when you make a great hand and so you can 3 bet or whatever...But guess what...the money is still there with the crazies on you left. ...............YOu check..let the guy on your left bet ..let everyone at the table call because they don't put the loose player on a strong hand and then you raise and get everyone's money inSecondly...if you have top pair or 2 pair..if someone in front of you bet..you can raise to drive out the goofy stuff the loose players have .sitting on your left. ..If the loose players on your right..if you raise..they are already in the pot..will call your raise and continue drawing.Good players on your right...1) you get good information from them ..if they raise you know what is going on2)with bad players on your left you can drive them out with raises..loose -crazies are also not stupid3)you can maximize you winning on a strong hand by letting the loose players bet for you and everyone will call and then you maximum by check raising and not only trapping the loose player but the whole table money..anyways..enough writing..more later....but i'm really happy there has been some discussion on this. I was wondering if i was the only one that discovered this or is it only a enigma with me?

Okay.. you seem to be contradicting yourself a lot here though, the stuff you bring up is true.. but your presenting both sides... This is what I understood from your post-- You state that the loose player is not stupid, takes you for a tight-solid player, so he folds when you raise, knocking them out on there "bad drawing hand". Well.. if I had it my way, I'd always want people to stay in on bad drawing hands, its given that name for a reason.. its a Bad Drawing hand, they won't hit it much... so I want them in there everytime!--You also state in the next section that you held AA and Raised, he then re-raised you.I thought he knew you were a solid player and would fold? That seems to contradict what you just said about him folding doesn't it? Thats what I got from it... But Carrying on.--the very next paragraph you say that you know the crazie is on your left, so when you have a hand you check knowing there going to bet and others will call knowing he's weak and you raise... But when you had the good hand, not only a good hand but the Best hand.. AA You raised, knowing he's on your immediate left... Going against both of the things you've said. --You went on to say that if you hold top pair or 2 pair, thats your example we'll stay with it. You said that they'll call your raise because they already bet once.Well... How much are you betting? Make it costly, extremely costly for them to call your bet! BET BET BET, Bet hard! Push your chips in if you have too, I know that you have to bet more against a loose player simply because they will call bets more often, but not if you're moving all your chips in they're not. And even if they are gonna call you, with top two pair, unless the boards suited up or connected you will almost always have the best hand wont you?You said if the loose player is on your right "obviously" the tight player is on your right... --Why? There can be more than one loose person at a table, and some players don't really fit into either, are kind of.. down the middle, especially newer people who are semi-educated about the game.These are all from your post dated Friday, December 3rd, 2004"I see you've done some more posting, and I will be reading further down and will possibly reply to those as well.

[JaysonWeber 0]

Allright, I don't want to quote the entire thing, you can refer to the entire post, dated: Friday, December 3rd, 2004 5:58... I'll be taking out the quotes I'm responding too, I won't answer the A or B part as I feel I've answered that im the last postYou wrote:--- When I'm in a hand.. I'm not concerned about the size of the pot. I want to win that pot!!!. And the less people in.. the better. I'm not a bit concerned about pot sizes I win. How big the pot size I win are factors out of my control... (I will get to the last sentence of this paragraph right after this)Now... The game is about winning money not winning pots allright, we all know that. Heres how it goes, Player X thinks poker is winning pots, so he wins more pots than anyone in the world! He does this, but on the way to doing this, he's lost all his money! Who cares though, He won the most pots! HE WON THAT POT!! It's not about pots... its about the pot size.You continued on saying that "How big the pot size I win are factors out of my control" Really? I would have thought that poker was about tricking the other people, I mean we have moves called "Bluff" "Check-Raise" "Re-Raise" "Weak Leads" Etc... now playing to make the pot size bigger, and succeeding is what all the pro's do when they know they're going to win. It most certainly IS within your control.You Wrote at the end of that paragraph--My main goal is to win that Pot with every arsenal I can think of. Bluffing, check-raising, are all arsenalsWell... Don't mind if I get critical, but I've noticed everyone is getting critical within this thread, so here I go in critical mode.according to www.dictionary.comArsenal means1.) A governmental establishment for the storing, development, manufacturing, testing, or repairing of arms, ammunition, and other war materiel. 2.) A stock of weapons. 3.) A store or supply: an arsenal of retorts. So, if the dictionary serves me correct those aren't arsenals.. those would be poker moves you "store" in your poker arsenal... And wait, the Check-Raise is in your arsenal... I thought all you cared about was "Winning the Pot!" If so.. why are you checking, to induce a raise, when you have a better hand, to get more money in the pot?You wrote:--I don't even want the guy calling me with bottom pair in.Why? You've stated over and over you are a tight player, and play premium hands, so if you've got a premium hand, holding top pair, or whatever it is you have, and he has bottom pair, why don't you want him calling? The odds say, you DO want him in.. because the odds are in your favor, or am I wrong in saying that? According to the Texas Hold 'Em Calculator in a theoretical hand where you hold Top Pair with a High Kicker (Used A-10, semi-premium hand) And he is a bad player holding something like say... K-6 he has bottom pair on the board and you have top pair the odds are, in a basic sense (no one holds suited cards with like 2-3 of that suit on the board etc etc) 80% In your favor! So why don't you want him in the hand?I'd like to see peoples responses to this because personally I don't see where I am wrong in this, I think I've for the percentages and most the books i've read behind me on it, and experience as well.I will be reading lower... seeing if there is anything else I should give my input on

[JaysonWeber 0]

This post is regarding foodbankers replies, answering back to a few things others said.Dated: Saturday, December 4th, 2004 6:32Allright, this one really shocked me! It seems you've changed your mind on something in this one.Foodbanker Wrote:-- One more thing on "trapping"......(unimportant)... ARE YOU GUYS KIDDING!!!... if you got that strong of hand.. why you locking out the field and only getting 1 persons money? With my strategy we don't get one person's money but the whole tables money. Why get one person's money when you can get 4 or 5 people's.Hmmm... In your earlier post, you wrote: -- "When I'm in a hand.. I'm not concerned about the size of the pot. I want to win that pot!!!. And the less people in.. the better. I'm not a bit concerned about pot sized I win. How big the pot size I win are factors out of my control. My main goal is to win that Pot."Wait... both of those statements are from you... Huh? So now you DO want more people in the pot to win more money? Now I'm utterly confused... please tell me what you were thinking with both of those because you seem to be contradicting yourself... no you don't seem to. thats a contradiction out and out...

[jogsxyz 0]

I happen to prefer the loose/aggressive on my left myself.I stated the reasons on a previous post.

I like the loose/aggressive player to my left.  Most players tend to defer to him.  Then forthe final 3 rounds I get to act last.Example:  You have a draw to a open endstraight.  When he bets, you know whatkind of pot odds you're getting to draw.If he were to your right, you would have toact before you know what the other tightplayers are doing.

Another reason is you never get a walk when the loose/aggressiveplayer is on your right.But Foodbanker is not really attempting to have a discussion.He just wants to lecture us. I was annoyed and refused toread his post in red. It hurts my eyes.One poster said he would hate to have Gus Hansen on his left.Probably saw what Layne Flack was doing to Freddy Deeb inpoker at the Plaza. You don't have to worry about raises. Juststop playing those ruff hands. Raise him back if you get raised.

[foodbanker 0]

Ok..forget it..no more posting replies to debate this subject. I'm a moron and a the few people who are too closed minded to have at least a good discussion on this are great poker players.All I'm saying is that the game is evolving. Everyone knows what are good hands and what supposedly are the edge to the game. All i'm saying is. I know what other people know and what they are doing and I trying to take advantage of that knowledge. I know most other players want to be on the right of loose aggressive players, so I purposely do the opposite. And then I try to exploit their mistake of calling the loose aggressive player with semi-solid hands.Anyways..I feel i'm not getting anywhere with this. IT is truly like trying to tell the world..Earth is round in the 1300's.

[foodbanker 0]

The contradiction you are referring to is pre-flop and post-flop.My desire to drive people out is always the number one goal. LEss draws the better. I do what I can pre-flop. I raise..Should the loose people behind me call and then so be it. The trapping post-flop is down with caution. I want to trap the whole table is my hand is a very strong one. Of course with only top pair that is not a trapping hand. So check raising to trap the whole table is out the question. Betting the flop and letting the aggressive man behind me help drive out the table may be the solution.Every hand has a different answer to what to do post flop. With a loose aggressive player on the left..check raising is so huge and used very often. In most ring games these days, especially 10-30 or higher, its never checked around on the flop. You can almost always gaurantee someone will bet the flop. So if you find yourself in early position with top pair, and a loose cannon behind you. I find there are two ways to go about it. Either bet and hope the the loose cannon raises to help you out. Or I prefer to check and see how things develope. I'm checking..hoping someone in late position will bet and So I can check raise to drive out the people behind me. I'm always looking to find ways to thing out the field. That is always my goal in limit ring games. UNLESS..i have a such a strong flop with my hand that i want to trap the whole table. Yes it sounds like contradictions but different situations may have the same play but different intentions in mind....Sorry if I sound like i'm lecturing..I"m not. I just feel like I have a ligitimate theory on this thing. I may be wrong. And I can accept that. Just top the pro's and con's and I hope someone will show me there are more con's then Pro's on my theory. Please keep in mind i'm talking ring games and not NL. I accept fully in NL that the loose aggressive is on the right.

[jogsxyz 0]

Ok..forget it..no more posting replies to debate this subject. I'm a moron and a the few people who are too closed minded to have at least a good discussion on this are great poker players.

I love it. If you don't savor foodbanker's words of wisdom, you have a closed mind. Should we be on our knees when we read your posts?