Being passive

P

PoochMasterFlex

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Total posts
161
Chips
0
How bad is being a passive poker player at a cash game. I'm talking about limping in every hand when i have cards like 3 5 off suit raise double the blind with a high card and medium card, and then raise 4x the blind wit someting good. and changing the betting too. like raise with 3 5 offsuit.
 
Stefanicov

Stefanicov

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Total posts
1,631
Chips
0
Ok standard passive play is bad always u got to be agressive always

Passive players get eaten up by the agressive ones as soon as they realise how passive they are :)
 
shinedown.45

shinedown.45

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Total posts
5,389
Chips
0
It will lose you money in the long run, say you bet your 35os, the flop comes up 75K, are you going to bet this? and if you are, by how much?
In the long run this type of play will lose you money because you"ll keep on playing rags, those rags will hit with overs on the board and you'll lose.
Players who play the style you mention become really predictable and tend to overvalue PPs.
If this style of play works for you, go with it, but if you find yourself rebuying into a table because your, lets say pocket 8s didn't hold up to an all-in then I think you have to re-evaluate your play.
 
SudoBoyar33921

SudoBoyar33921

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
May 9, 2007
Total posts
2
Chips
0
Maybe it's just the people I play with, but I have always enjoyed this style of play at my home games and especially in the bodog free rolls. I like to test my table a little bit online to see if I can play this way, if a lot of hands get limped all the way around I usually end up being able to hit/bluff my way into profit as long as I keep a tab on how people bet and don't call a raise at all unless I have something decent. I mix it up a bit of course, avoiding showdowns of the really lucky hits and the bluffs, playing my AA the same way I play my 56 off... but overall I enjoy it if it's possible. There's definitely situations where it isn't, my home game seems to be that way now, I missed out on a few months of play and they all switched up their styles, it's not so friendly pre-flop anymore...
 
TexasHoney

TexasHoney

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Total posts
501
Chips
0
Ok standard passive play is bad always u got to be agressive always

Passive players get eaten up by the agressive ones as soon as they realise how passive they are :)


I agree very true :)
 
Egon Towst

Egon Towst

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Total posts
6,794
Chips
0
There seems to be a problem with the terminology here.

What the OP is describing is Loose play, not Passive. In fact, the style he is describing sounds Loose/Aggressive, since he describes how he will raise preflop.

Briefly:

Loose = plays a lot of hands
Tight = plays only good hands

Passive = checks and calls, rarely raises
Aggressive = often bets and raises, seldom checks

So there are four broad styles:

Loose/Passive
Loose/Aggressive
Tight/Passive
Tight/Aggressive

(though each may be further broken down).

Apologies if all of that sent the more experienced members to sleep. ;)
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Total posts
4,596
Chips
0
I think the question here is "Why is being aggressive better than being passive?".

The simple answer is, being aggressive gives you two ways to win: your opponent can fold, OR you can end up with the best hand. Being passive, you are dependent on the cards; you need to show down the best hand to win.

Ideally we don't want to be dependent on the cards to win at poker (since luck will theoretically break even over the long run for everyone).

Aggression is the key to understanding phrases like "Good players don't need good cards to win".

Certainly we have to know when aggression is unwarranted (e.g., vs a calling station when we don't have a hand), and certainly in some lower limit games you are going to be more card dependent because of this (you will have to show down the best hand). And many of these games can be beaten simply by playing your cards patiently (and perhaps some of these games can NOT be beat with a LAG style?).

But if you want to play non card contingent poker, or play poker at a higher level, aggression is the key.

There are other reason aggression is beneficial (for example, maximizing your gains/wins), but I think the above is really the most distilled basic reason.
 
P

PoochMasterFlex

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Total posts
161
Chips
0
yea but being aggressive can also lose you more chips than being passive.. but i dont know of any passive professional players
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Total posts
4,596
Chips
0
yea but being aggressive can also lose you more chips than being passive.. but i dont know of any passive professional players

This is an extremely simplistic view. Being passive will cost you chips in the long run, in more ways than one. For example, if you check and give a free card to someone who otherwise would have folded. Or you simply failed to make the most money that you could on a hand when you were way ahead-- that's money you "lost" by not maximizing your +EV situations (see this guy w aa).
 
Schatzdog

Schatzdog

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Total posts
693
Chips
0
I think you need to find more of a balance here. Being aggressive against the right opponent in the right situation is, generally, a winning strategy. That said, being passive against the right opponent in the right situation can also be profitable. Each style has a counter style. Mix up your game to include the profitable bits of each.
 
P

PoochMasterFlex

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Total posts
161
Chips
0
how aggressive is too aggressive?
 
Stefanicov

Stefanicov

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Total posts
1,631
Chips
0
too agressive is when u are not winning
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Total posts
4,596
Chips
0
I think you need to find more of a balance here. Being aggressive against the right opponent in the right situation is, generally, a winning strategy. That said, being passive against the right opponent in the right situation can also be profitable. Each style has a counter style. Mix up your game to include the profitable bits of each.

No one is disagreeing with this. I am simply trying to distill aggressive vs. passive down to the most basic argument for aggression, WITHOUT getting into specific situations.
 
P

PoochMasterFlex

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Total posts
161
Chips
0
what about countering aggression with even more aggression?
 
Stefanicov

Stefanicov

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Total posts
1,631
Chips
0
That is where the very top players are coz they are all agressive and if u gain tht skill u will become v rich from this game
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Total posts
4,596
Chips
0
what about countering aggression with even more aggression?

Usually this is a bad idea. Maniacs will usually be better at being maniacs than you will...

Standard procedure:

1. Play big hands fast.
2. Play total nothing hands fast a bit more than you normally would. This will make 1. (above) more effective.
If you want him to stop picking on you specifically, try coming over the top with total garbage one time (94o), and SHOW the hand, whether he folds or reraises and you have to fold; doesn't matter, the point is to warn him that you are capable of playing back, making you a less appealing target.
3. Call down with marginal hands a bit more than you normally would; getting aggro vs. a maniac with something like K9s on a Q92 rainbow flop might seem like a good idea at the time, but he will show you a better hand too often to make it profitable IF you play a big pot; call down if the turn and river are reasonable: i.e., let him do the betting for you.

To sum up, play trash and monsters the same, call down with the middle stuff.
 
2

23rd Paradox

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 13, 2007
Total posts
22
Chips
0
Passive Play

Just be prepared to try and get muscled out of pots. Passive is like playing limit, but use Check Raise to your advantage as a passive player. Its probably the strongest move you can make as a passive presence.
 
joosebuck

joosebuck

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Total posts
4,193
Chips
0
i disagree. this is the most typical thing. if im LAGing ill go over the top of c/r's a lot. the only c/r that works is a shove.
 
Y

young hova

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 14, 2007
Total posts
168
Chips
0
If your worried about losing too many chips being aggressive than you'll easily get pushed around.

Someone said its usually a bad idea countering aggression with aggression, ennnnh, I think this is 50/50 and I actually prefer countering with aggression. It definitely makes sense just to call when you have an aggressive maniac on your hands or you have the absolute nuts, but every aggressive player isn't a maniac. Most people are taught just to call the bully but sometimes this will get you in hot water, especially when your out of position. What will happen is that you will have an aggressive player on your hands that will sometimes take your checks for weakness and will fire 3 shells at you to test your courage.

Say for example you have ace jack and and aggressive player raises it up, the flop comes and you hit your ace and he fires a probing bet 3/4ths the pot and you call. 4th street comes and to you it seems a blank and he bets the pot, now your thinking your hand is good but your also thinking is my hand marginal, so when you call this bet your thinking to yourself I hope he checks on the river for a showdown, UNH UNH. River comes seemingly blank and you check and the aggressive player fires another shell, this time either its the same as the pot, or somewhat more than the pot, OR even all in which would seemingly be out of nowhere. Now your faced with a tough decision, you could have him beat, but than again he could have ak or aq, or he could have just been betting with a pocket pair and he could have hit on the flop turn or river for a set.

Now your playing for a big pot with a marginal hand and you have no clue where you stand in the hand because you never raised to see your opponents strength and since he was last to act he has the maximum opportunity to bluff you, but at the same time you dont know if he thought you were weak based on your checks or if he really has his hand.

I see this happen all the time, people calling bets thinking that the aggressor won't bet on the next street and each street they bet the person that check seems to become weaker and weaker. About 7/10 your going to end up laying your hand down, because your not confident or your going to be really beat because the aggressor's bets allowed him to fish for 2 streets after the flop and he very well could have caught 2 pair or even a set because of this.

Reasons like this is why I think its good to counter with aggression, because all in all you STILL HAVE TO PROTECT YOUR HAND, so I would raise on the flop and his following action may help you to determine what to do, he may reraise you then and there hinting for you to laydown or if you know him well you might know to come back over top all in over his reraise, most likely he's only gonna reraise with a premium hand and you'll get away from this hand with a smaller loss, he may have a pocket pair and didn't hit it on the flop and a raise could take the hand down there, he could even have suited connectors and hit one of his cards and a raise could also take it down, these two situations you wouldnt allow the aggressor to suckout on your hand by seeing more streets.

Sometimes its cool to call the aggressor, but sometimes you have to protect your hand no matter what he has and at the same time you need to find out where you stand in the hand and simply calling all the time could get you in big trouble if you don't have the absolute nuts. Even with the nuts you should raise, because the aggressor is capable of having anything and you don't want him to catch a flush on you cus when it comes what are you going to do with an overbet to the pot with your straight thats no longer good if he actually has the flush.

You have to know when its cool to check call an aggressor and when it isn't. Your reading skills have to be impeccable to come over top with complete garbage all in and if he calls you and wins than his confidence is going to boost and everyone else may become more confident when playing pots with you, and you definitely don't want that.

heres what it comes down to in a cash game, if your passive the following things will happen:
-you'll get your blinds stolen much more (you'll see alot less free blind play)
-you'll lose much more when you defend your blinds because you'll most likely end up laying down whatever cards you have to continuous aggressive bets
-MOST IMPORTANTLY, you'll have a hard time getting your monsters paid off because your play will look out of character, especially if you bet at the pot, red flags will go up in your opponents heads. (the point of being aggressive is getting your monsters paid off and picking up alot of small pots, therefore making up for all the chips you lose when you get called on bluffs)
-you'll lose a lot of hands to players that bet there draws when you really have the best hand with middle and bottom pair
-you will get bluff raised a lot more
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tiltboy

tiltboy

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 29, 2007
Total posts
120
Chips
0
Calling stations always have to make tough decisions
 
aliengenius

aliengenius

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Total posts
4,596
Chips
0
If your worried about losing too many chips being aggressive than you'll easily get pushed around.

Someone said its usually a bad idea countering aggression with aggression, ennnnh, I think this is 50/50 and I actually prefer countering with aggression. It definitely makes sense just to call when you have an aggressive maniac on your hands or you have the absolute nuts, but every aggressive player isn't a maniac. Most people are taught just to call the bully but sometimes this will get you in hot water, especially when your out of position. What will happen is that you will have an aggressive player on your hands that will sometimes take your checks for weakness and will fire 3 shells at you to test your courage. Say for example you have ace jack and and aggressive player raises it up, the flop comes and you hit your ace and he fires a probing bet 3/4ths the pot and you call. 4th street comes and to you it seems a blank and he bets the pot, now your thinking your hand is good but your also thinking is my hand marginal, so when you call this bet your thinking to yourself I hope he checks on the river for a showdown, UNH UNH. River comes seemingly blank and you check and the aggressive player fires another shell, this time either its the same as the pot, or somewhat more than the pot, OR even all in which would seemingly be out of nowhere. Now your faced with a tough decision, you could have him beat, but than again he could have ak or aq, or he could have just been betting with a pocket pair and he could have hit on the flop turn or river for a set. Now your playing for a big pot with a marginal hand and you have no clue where you stand in the hand because you never raised to see your opponents strength and since he was last to act he has the maximum opportunity to bluff you, but at the same time you dont know if he thought you were weak based on your checks or if he really has his hand. I see this happen all the time, people calling bets thinking that the aggressor won't bet on the next street and each street they bet the person that check seems to become weaker and weaker. About 7/10 your going to end up laying your hand down, because your not confident or your going to be really beat because the aggressor's bets allowed him to fish for 2 streets after the flop and he very well could have caught 2 pair or even a set because of this. Reasons like this is why I think its good to counter with aggression, because all in all you STILL HAVE TO PROTECT YOUR HAND, so I would raise on the flop and his following action may help you to determine what to do, he may reraise you then and there hinting for you to laydown or if you know him well you might know to come back over top all in over his reraise, most likely he's only gonna reraise with a premium hand and you'll get away from this hand with a smaller loss, he may have a pocket pair and didn't hit it on the flop and a raise could take the hand down there, he could even have suited connectors and hit one of his cards and a raise could also take it down, these two situations you wouldnt allow the aggressor to suckout on your hand by seeing more streets. Sometimes its cool to call the aggressor, but sometimes you have to protect your hand no matter what he has and at the same time you need to find out where you stand in the hand and simply calling all the time could get you in big trouble if you don't have the absolute nuts. Even with the nuts you should raise, because the aggressor is capable of having anything and you don't want him to catch a flush on you cus when it comes what are you going to do with an overbet to the pot with your straight thats no longer good if he actually has the flush. You have to know when its cool to check call an aggressor and when it isn't. Your reading skills have to be impeccable to come over top with complete garbage all in and if he calls you and wins than his confidence is going to boost and everyone else may become more confident when playing pots with you, and you definitely don't want that.

heres what it comes down to in a cash game, if your passive the following things will happen:
-you'll get your blinds stolen much more (you'll see alot less free blind play)
-you'll lose much more when you defend your blinds because you'll most likely end up laying down whatever cards you have to continuous aggressive bets
-MOST IMPORTANTLY, you'll have a hard time getting your monsters paid off because your play will look out of character, especially if you bet at the pot, red flags will go up in your opponents heads. (the point of being aggressive is getting your monsters paid off and picking up alot of small pots, therefore making up for all the chips you lose when you get called on bluffs)
-you'll lose a lot of hands to players that bet there draws when you really have the best hand with middle and bottom pair
-you will get bluff raised a lot more

(^This format is unreadable).
As far as I got into it, however, I just want to note that my previous comments were directed at playing vs. a maniac, sorry, I was not more clear there.
 
Y

young hova

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 14, 2007
Total posts
168
Chips
0
what do you mean by this format is unreadable? New to the forum, so a bit confused
 
Egon Towst

Egon Towst

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Total posts
6,794
Chips
0
Sorry, Hova.

Primarily, we mean break it up into paragraphs.

Any large body of text is vastly easier for the reader to follow if each new point or idea is presented as a new paragraph. It both helps him to separate one idea from the next and assists in the actual process of reading. In a large and monotonous block, you blink and you have lost your place.
 
Top