Having last week met the bankroll goal I set for myself, I decided to continue with my plan of then shopping around for some high swing, loose money games, so I played a completely new table Monday night--with several very loose raisers who posed somewhat different difficulties.

Well, I do think one has to know some details about these loose raisers, so this is likely to be a pretty long post.

I guess the first real distinction one needs to make imo is between loose raisers who don't care about money and those who do. In the Tulsa game, which I had been playing, most of the loose raisers were quite wealthy and really didn't care much about the money. I saw one guy raise, get re-raised, then come over the top for $800 with 43o, or re-raise AQo, then call all-in on the flop with only a gutshot straight draw (JTX board). Against that loose raiser, you obviously need to have a hand to make a re-raise. If you're willing to handle some swings, it's probably not bad to re-raise with AK, JJ-AA, but I generally just flat called with AK, JJ-KK--a more conservative strategy but imo still pretty sound.

The loose raisers at the new game, however, are much more cautious about re-raising, and they aren't rich, and they do care about the money. Typical of the loose raise is some kind of AX, usually A6 or better with the one guy (Danny--I think he'll also raise any pair 77 or better, maybe 66, too). The other one (J.B.) is capable of raising any 2 but will mix in some legit raising hands. I think he views AT or better as well as 99 as almost auto-raise, but there's probably also about a 30% mix in there of hands like 63s.

I never got the opportunity to re-raise either of these players last night, but, just watching the way they play, they're certainly not coming over the top with A6 (or 63s), and I suspect they'll fold as long as the re-raiser seems pretty tight (me!). They MIGHT call the re-raise with A6o, but even hitting the A, they're going to start worrying about AK. At least that's my current feel for the players.

Ok, first of all, against this kind of loose raiser, unless the raised pot is highly multi-way, as it often is, you're not going to get a set paid off adequately. Here's pretty much the way that one goes: Danny raises to $20 or $25, gets 1 caller plus me with 22. Pot is $60 on the $20 raise. Danny bets out anywhere from $20 to $50 on the flop. If I hit my set, then that's really all I get paid off--making it at most something like $90 profit, at worst more like $60 on a call of $20 with only 7.5:1 to hit the set. Anyhow, without at least 3 other players seeing the flop, I think one should just fold or re-raise.

I think you really need at least 3 and preferably 4 players other than yourself in this hand to get the EV up even to marginal. And I think in this game accepting the marginal EV of drawing to the set in those situations is probably worthwhile.

But I think the only way to really BEAT these raises is to re-raise a lot and follow up with a "half-pot plus" continuation bet, and this is where the "when" gets complicated.

I should also note that these guys typically have pretty deep stacks, usually at least $800 and sometimes $1,000 or more. So, I also think the re-raise quantity needs to be fairly large--probably around $100 (I think this will also become more clear in light of some other "conditions" I'm thinking of for the re-raise, namely multiple callers unless I have a truly big hand).

Ok, first, out of position: I don't think it's worth raising at all from EP at this table, and I think a limp-re-raise is viable on JJ-AA and AK, again followed by a continuation bet of half to 2/3 of pot on the flop if I do get a call (the answer to this question should prove very interesting).

In position, you have the advantage of Harrington's squeeze play idea, which is basically that the initial raiser has a lot more trouble due to the fact that he doesn't know how players between you and him are going to act. Again, regardless of how anyone has acted, I think re-raising JJ-AA and AK is pretty clear. If no one has called, then the re-raise can be smaller (more like $80).

The interesting situation, though, is where loose raiser has made his move from EP and there is at least one caller between you and the raiser. First off, the pot is now more attractive, over and above the squeeze play aspect. But you also have to be aware of players remaining to act, who may turn over a big hand. The likelihood of this is a lot less if you have an A in your own hand (particularly if the initial raiser is Danny, who likely has an A of his own). So, I'm thinking any A here is in principle re-raisable.

Actually, I think I'm going to suggest a radical re-raise strategy here if there's at least one caller already in for the squeeze play: Re-raise any A or any other MP playable hand (suited connectors, big cards, any pair).

I'm going to leave it at that for the moment. Sounds pretty extreme, but the more I think about it, the more I think it just might work. In commenting, please bear in mind that image is still going to normally be very tight, simply because I play far fewer hands than anyone in this game. I do think I'd need to back off significantly if I'm hitting a lot of re-raise hands.

I'm going to try to do a follow-up EV calculation in a separate post here.

Ok, here's my EV calculation: Initial raiser makes it $20 and has one caller. You raise to $100. If all fold, you've risked $100 to make $40, so you need to win nearly 75% of the time (that's a lot).

If you have 2 callers, then you're risking $100 to win $60, reducing it to 2/3.

Then there's the scenario of getting a call from the initial raiser. You now have a flop pot of $220, and you bet $120 into it. When you win, you make $120 (you put in $100 into the flop pot). When you lose, you lose $220. So, this has to work about 2/3 of the time as well.

I have tried a bit of this against loose raisers. but it didn't work out well for me as i ran into a high pair much too often or they hit something on the flop. perhaps i was doing it against the wrong opponents or was on a bad streak. i'm not sure. it was an experiment gone bad. the problem is with loose raisers is that they are are usually loose post flop as well.

Most people say ur supposed to play tight passive against loose aggressive. So this idea goes against this philosophy although im sure it can work against the right opponent.