We have all read books by Harrington, Slansky, etc. and it's good stuff. I really like Harrington's hand examples in his Volume I NL tournament book.

However, a lot of advanced poker is betting to get information and reading bets to decide how a hand is going. The amount and the timing of bets is crucial. However, I find it difficult to play against bad players since they could be holding any two cards. Even PF raises could mean Ax, KT, QJ especially if they don't have the concept of position, you really don't know what's going on because they don't what's going on.

So I'm wondering of there is an information on how to play against bad players? Is there a book or a section in a particular book? Any online advice?

Right now I tend to tighten up and be aggressive when I have something although this is not really paying off. The only big pots I really win are when I slow play but that is dangerous because these guys like staying in right to the river for the big flush or straight.

Small Stakes Holdem

play hands that require implied odds like small pairs and connectors alot....usually lots of people in the pot so when u hit it pays off big. Obviously if your shortstacked or the blinds are big relative to the stacks this isnt the best idea so early on when the blinds are small...look to try and double up.

Against weak players you can limp in more often with small pairs, connectors and gap connectors. When you hit with you always get paid off because you can't bet a bad player out of a hand.

Not all weak players are the same. Although we tend to classify players as weak mostly because they are loose -- i.e., they play too many hands -- they can also be passive or aggressive in the ways that they bet their hands. You need to take note of that characteristic as well because it can provides clues as to what they are holding.

For example, let's say you're up against an aggressive player and you hold top pair/top kicker. If the flush draw hits and the aggressive player does not raise, you can be relatively confident that he wasn't playing the draw because an aggressive (but weak) opponent probably wouldn't pass up an opportunity to jam the pot.

For another example, if you're up against a passive player who all of sudden raises you when a runner-runner flush hits, you can probably put that player on the flush because his passive tendency tends to rule out that he is bluffing you with his raise.

These are, of course, generalities. I would recommend reading "The Psychology of Poker," which I found to be a helpful book about sizing up your opponents as a way to improving your ability to put them on a hand.

Wow, more than I expected and in just a few hours. Here's what I see.

1. A book is available called The Psychology of Poker. I have actually already ordered this book.

2. Play hands with high implied odds like 109s or 44. I presume these hands like limpers or only small raises and multiway pots. Also if I don't hit the flop or have a draw, then check/fold and try again.

3. Classify the weak player as passive or aggressive and look for tight passive for bluff opportunities and for calling stations to build a pot when I have the best hand.

I guess two other aspects that haven't been discussed yet are slowplaying and checkraising. Can anyone comment on how these should be handled at a weak table?

There are lots of conditions for slowplaying, the most important of which is the strength of your hand. In a typical small stakes games with lots of multiway action, your hand has to be really strong to make slowplaying worth the risk. On a multiway flop, I would typically slowplay the nut flush (as long as the board is not paired) or the nut straight (provided no flush draw is out), but not much else. Also, as Steve-O suggested, keep in mind that it is generally not necessary to slowplay in small stakes games because you get of lot of action anyway.

As for checkraising, keep in mind the usual caveats: (1) you must be pretty confident that someone will bet; and (2) you have to able to assume the risk that no will bet and a free card will be given. That said, I will checkraise in small stakes games as a way to extract more money, but I like to save my checkraises for at least the turn so that I get two big bets from everyone who calls, rather than two small bets (obviously, I am referring to limit games, not no-limit games).

Bottom line is that against a fish, you cannot play fancy because they don't have a clue about strategy, so putting on fancy plays is useless. Simply tighten up your requirements, make good strong value plays and you will be rewarded. Nothing will prevent the occasional suckout against a fish who stayed in a hand he didn't belong in, but if their idiocy was profitable in the long run, we would be the fish and they would be the sharks.

Stay the course and play straight up, good odds poker.