Max Patience 2.0 raise strategy

Based upon the max patience all in strategy here, you can construct a preflop raise strategy if you like. I'm not going to take the time to do that although it's possible in some rare circumstances that may be useful. In theory you should generally raise at 3 times as frequently as you are willing to 4bet all in or call all in if reraised.  The theory is that you will raise 3 big blinds twice and get reraised both, plus you will fold 2 rotations of blinds which translates into losing 3 more big blinds or 9 total. If you 4bet on the 3rd time you win 9 and the current blinds and antes are profit..

I actually think you should raise more than 3 times because:
1)Blinds continue to go up offering an advantage for waiting longer. Although you may give up 9 big blinds and then win 9, you actually will win 9 at higher levels of blinds which equates to MORE than winning back what you lost PLUS the blinds and antes for that level.
2)Your opponents may also call you with too many hands which favor being able to raise more and fold more.
3)Although the game theory ASSUMES opponents adjust perfectly and immediately (which requires them to be psychic enough to know your exact strategy at any given time but not psychic enough to know anything but your hand RANGE.), reality is the opposite. Opponents often don't make any adjustment at all and cannot know whether you switched style or had a good run of cards. So if you raise more often and fold more often, you can give yourself plenty of room to adjust the first or second time you get reraised and have to fold If you switch to the normal raise and have to fold again, opponents think you fold too much now so you can raise with even fewer hands and you are probably going to get reraised
4)Opponents theoretically should almost never just call preflop unless they have a skill and/or positional advantage. But many opponents do. That means because you won't get reraised and opponents are likely to TRY to exploit you, you don't need as balanced of a strategy. You can raise much more often.
5)Often times in tournaments it is better to raise 2 or 2.5 times the big blind. If that's the case nd the reraises are not 3x the big blind you will be able to see more flops, and have the pot odds to call ome reraises even. This adds more dimension to the game and means you can widen your range IF you have a post flop advantage.
6)More importantly is how the players in the blinds respond If they are very tight, you should target there blinds. If someone else is targeting a players blinds or raising too much, you should target them on a resteal. You do NOT need to worry as much about cards if an opportunity is profitable enough regardless of cards, or profitable enough where you can  start the hand as an underdog.
7)Antes add a better payout on your raises and pots you win to where it can be profitable for BOTH players in the blinds and the initial raiser to play the hand and in the long run split the blinds. So even if you are an underdog to opponents range and equally skilled, you can still come in with only a 40% chance of being best preflop.
08If you DO have an edge in small, low varience strategies, it will have a high probability of EXTENDING your "hands left" in reality and as a result, you will be able to get your chips in the middle with not only more chips when you catch a hand but ALSO a better hand and a greater probability your hand is best.

So take a raise strategy with a grain of salt. I'd much prefer to use the 40-60% chance your hand is best preflop range ESXCEPT if it is drastically more hands than you can afford to wait for like more than 6 times as many hands or if chip stacks are shorter.

6 handed chart
		% chance of having the best hand preflop
	plys left	0.4	0.5	0.6	0.75
UTG	5	0.1675	0.13	0.097	0.056
UTG+1	4	0.2205	0.159	0.12	0.069
Cutoff	3	0.2632	0.206	0.157	0.091
Button	2	0.3675	0.293	0.225	0.134
SB	1	0.6	0.5	0.4	0.25
9 handed chart	plys left	0.4	0.5	0.6	0.75
UTG	8	0.1082	0.083	0.062	0.035
UTG+1	7	0.1227	0.094	0.07	0.04
UTG+2	6	0.1416	0.109	0.082	0.047
Lojack	5	0.1675	0.13	0.097	0.056
Hijack	4	0.2205	0.159	0.12	0.069
Cutoff	3	0.2632	0.206	0.157	0.091
Button	2	0.3675	0.293	0.225	0.134
SB	1	0.6	0.5	0.4	0.25

or more specifically...

40% chance of best hand
8 77+, AJ+, KQ, A8s+, KTs+, QTs+,JTs (10.82%)
7 12.27% 77+,AJ+,KQ,A8s+,K9s+,QTs+,JTs,T8s+,98s,87s,76s,
6 14.16% 77+,AJ+,KQ,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,JTs,T8s+,98s,87s,76s
5 16.75% 77+.AJ+.kQ,Qj,JT,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,87s,76s,
4 20.47% 77+,At+,KT+,QT+,JT+,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,87s,76s,
3 26.32% 22+,A9+,KT+,QT+,JT+,A2s+,K6s+,Q8s+,J8s+,T7s+,97s,87s,76s,65s,54s
2 36.75% 22+,A9+,KT+,Q9+,J9+,T8+,98,87,76,A2s+,K2s+,Q7s+,J7s+,T6s+,96s,86s,75s+,64s+,53s+,43s
1 60% LOL Everything except like Q2-Q4,J or lower with 6 high or lower kicker, and a few really bad suited cards.

50% chance of having best hand
8 8.3 88+, AJ+,ATs+,KTs+,QJs
7 9.43 88+, AJ+, KQ, ATs+,KTs+,QJs,JTs
6 10.91 66+, AJ+, KQ, ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s
5 12.95 66+, AJ+, KQ, ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,87s,76s,65s,54s
4 15.91 66+, AJ+, KQ,QJ,JT, A8s+,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T8s+,97s+,87s,76s,65s,54s
3 20.63 55+, AT+,KT+,QT+,JT,A7s+,KTs+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,97s+,87s,76s,65s,54s
2 29.29 22+, A9+,KT+,QT+,JT,T9,98,87,76,65,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,97s+,87s,76s,65s,54s
1 50 Just a bunch of hands. Any king any ace, gap connectors, suited 2 and 3 gappers, etc

60% chance of having best hand
8 6.19 99+,AQ+,AJs+,KQs,QJs,JTs,
7 7.04 88+,AQ+,AJs+,KQs,QJs,JTs, T9s,98s
6 8.16 88+,AJ+,AJs+,KQs,QJs,JTs,T9s,
5 9.71 88+,AJ+,KQ,A9s+,KJs+,QJs,JTs,T9s
4 11.99 88+,AJ+,KQ,A2s+,KJs+,QJs,JTs,T9s,98s
3 15.66 77+,AJ+,KQ,QJ,JT,T9,A2s+,KTs+,QTs,JTs,T9s,98s
2 22.54 22+,AT+,KJ+,QJ,JT,T9,A2s+,K2s+,QTs,JTs,T9s,98s
1 40 22+, A2+, K9+,Q9+,J9+,T9,98,87,K2s+,Q8s+,J8s+,T8s+,97s+,86s+,75s,64s,54s,43s

75% chance of having best hand
8 3.53 JJ+,AK,AJs+
7 4.03 JJ+,AQ+,AJs+
6 4.68 JJ+,AQ+,AJs+
5 5.59 TT+,AQ+,AJs+,KQs
4 6.94 99+,AJ+, ATs+,KQs
3 9.14 77+,AT+,A9s+,KQs,
2 13.40 66+,At+,KQ,A2s,KQs,QJs,JTs,T9s
1 25 22+,A8+,KT+,QT+,JT+,A2s+,K7s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,87s,76s

3 bets should be done based upon opponents range of hands. If you are just looking at "expected value" you should generally raise between 40-60% of your opponent's range depending on how often he'll fold and how much is in the middle. However, if we are talking about max patience strategy you can play much tighter, particularly if you are probably going to get called.

hands left	3bet X% of opponents range
10	0.378326
20	0.198528
30	0.134443
40	0.101617
50	0.08167
60	0.068268
65	0.063091
70	0.058644
80	0.05143
90	0.04571
100	0.041163
120	0.034431
140	0.029519
150	0.027554

You also probably want to be willing to MOVE all in with around twice as often as you are willing to call since your opponents  may fold.

Max Patience 2.0

I came up with the hand percentages for the max patience strategy adjusted by number of players here. I recently converted a few key reference points into actual specific hands so you can have an idea of when to risk an all in by number of hands left.

under 10 hands left must both take how many players folded and hands remaining into consideration
(next blind you're all in or putting in half your stack. Also use if blinds will rise such that the next big blind you'll be all in because you won't be able to see any other hands)  
8 (1 hand left before blind): 22+,A2+,KT+,K6s+,QT+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s
7 (2 hands left): 22+,A7+,A2s+,KJ+,K9s+,QTs+,JTs
6 (3 hands left): 33+,A9+,A4s+,KQ,KTs+,QJs
5 (4 hands left): 33+,AT+,A4s+,KQ,KTs+,QJs
4 (5 hands left): 33+,AT+,A4s+,KQ,KTs+,QJs
3 (6 hands left): 22+,A9+,A2s+,KJ+,KTs+,QJs
2 (7 hands left): 22+,A5+,A2s+,KT+,K9s+,QTs+,JTs
1 (8 hands left): 22+,A4+,A2s+,KT+,K7s+,QJ,Q9s+,JTs


    10 hands left
8 players left to act (utg 9 handed):TT+,AK
7 players left 99+,AK,AQs
6 players left: 99+, AQ+
5 players: 99+, AQ+
4 players: 77+, AQ+, AJs, KQs
3: 55+, AJ+, ATs+, KJs+
2 (button):33+, A5s+, Kts+, qjs+,AT+, KQ
1 (small blind): 22+, A2s+, K8s+, Q9s JTs, A4+, KT+, QJ

     20 hands left:
8: JJ+
7: JJ+, AKs
6:TT+, AKs
5:TT+, AKs
4: TT+, AK
3:88+, AQs+, AK
2:88+, ATs+, KJs+, QJs, AQ+

     30 hands left
8: QQ+
7: QQ+
6: JJ+
5: JJ+
4: JJ+, AQs+
3: TT+,AK
2: TT+, AQ+
1: 55+,A9s+, KJs+ AJ+, QJs,

     50 hands left
8:KK+
7:KK+
6:KK+
5:KK+
4:QQ+
3:JJ+,AKs
2:TT+,AK
1:99+,AJs+,AQ+

    60 hands left
8    AA
7    KK+
6    KK+
5    KK+
4    QQ+
3    QQ+,Aks
2    JJ+,Aks
1    99+,AK,Aqs

    70 hands left
8    AA
7    AA
6    KK+
5    KK+
4    KK+
3    QQ+
2    JJ+,Aks
1    99+,AK


     80 hands left
8    AA
7    AA
6    KK+
5    KK+
4    KK+
3    QQ+
2    JJ+,Aks
1    TT+,AK

     100 hands left
8    AA
7    AA
6    AA
5    AA
4    KK+
3    KK+
2    QQ+
1    TT+,Aks

Why Float The Flop? Why Bluff?

If you have 7h8h and your opponent has a range of 99+ AQ+ or K9+ on a 6h Kd 2s flop you have 17.71% equity according to propokertools.com. That means if the pot is $100 and it checks to the river, you expect to win $17.71. Folding surrenders the possibility of winning that $17. While certainly it may not be worth calling $40 to win only $17.71, lets keep in mind a few things. 1)The hand range we gave your opponent may be very generous. Just because he bet doesn't mean he isn't just making a continuation bet or attempt to bluff on a "dry flop" 2)Just because your opponent bets $40, doesn't mean there isn't a decent percentage of the time that you can still win the pot on the turn. 3)If our opponent happens to have a set or top pair, we can be reasonably confident that if we continue to show weakness by checking the turn and manage to catch a straight or flush on runner runner we have the potential to get paid off huge. While implied odds are largely theoretical and don't account for our opponent hitting a bigger draw, they are significant enough in this circumstance that certainly a handful of hands at minimum will pay off a large bet on the river... assuming we make it to the river with a monster hand. 4)If we have position, we don't have to put another cent in the pot if it doesn't add equity 5)If we only call when we have a hand on the flop our opponents can continuation bet a lot. So let's say we do call, on the turn the pot will now be $180. If our opponent is the type of player who always checks the hands he is willing to fold and does, we add $140 to our stack compared to the alternative of folding. Since we are risking $40 for a chance to add $140, we need to receive a check/fold 28.6% of the time on the turn for this to be a good decision. Based upon the assumed hand range this may be optomistic. We can really only get 99-QQ to potentially fold and maybe some weaker kickers if an ace comes. Additionally, we have not considered the possibility that opponent will check/call the turn or check raise. However, with that being said there also may be an additional decision we can make on the turn. If our opponent checks to us, we can check behind. We should only do this if the hand has potential to capture showdown value. For example if we hit a pair, we have the potential to hit two pair. Checking with the intention of only calling if we hit two pair or better gives us the opportunity to win more when we hit, and not lose anything other than the initial $40 when we miss. Because we know what hands will be best against our range we can calculate there are 10 hearts in the deck that pick up a flush draw, 3 non hearted 4s that pick up a gutshot draw, 3 non hearted 5s that pick up an open ended draw, 3 non hearted 7s that pick up a pair, 3 non hearted 8s that pick up a pair, 3 non hearted 9s that pick up an open ended straight draw, and 3 non hearted tens that pick up a gutshot straight draw. That is 30 cards in the deck that potentially will allow us to continue. Of course we not only would need the pot odds to make a call on the turn but the implied odds to make up for money risked on prior streets to make it equitable.. As such, the decision to call on the flop may STILL be a little loose... HOWEVER... The reason that you might endorse it is because it makes you look like a calling station which means people may not bluff you as much which is helpful as if they see a bet they know you aren't likely someone they can bluff with a reraise. It also helps you in the future by those who know you're floating the flop by those who double barrel bluff as that may help you when you have a hand. It also isn't that losing of a decision that you may not be able to make up for it with other decisions. So should you go for it? Not necessarily. While it's nice to sometimes MIX in the occasional call on a backoor draw it isn't necessarily the best or only option. However, occasionally making this play against the RIGHT opponents who have a wider range of hands and continuation bet a lot is a great way to open up steal opportunities on the turn if they do NOT continuation bet a lot on the turn as well and fold the turn more often. Fortunately most good players that stay on the flop, fold a lot on the turn. This is because if they can't win on the turn they are going to be cognizant of players trying to trap them. Conversely players that fold a lot on the turn are more likely to fold less on the turn since they have a better hand. However, if you know enough information about your opponent or can intuit some information about them with a decent confidence range, you can run the math to see at what point it is profitable.... Running calculations to see what amount you have to risk on the turn to bluff and what happens in every situation is very taxing work, but if you map out a typical opponent from early, middle and late position and the extremes and everywhere between you will have a very good idea of a data set and decision to apply to your opponent when the game actualy starts... You can use that information to put a player into a general category and make a lot more profitable decisions. While most players are giving up $17.71 when faced with a bet, you may be able to reduce the long term loss of that pot from $17, by gaining a percentage of the pot from bluffs and getting paid off big when you hit on future streets. I will RARELY float against the profile and expected range of hands I just gave. But I will actively float people who continuation bet over 70% of the time provided they aren't starting out with an ultra tight range of hands to begin with with nothing but a backdoor draw. There are even times when it is profitable to cal with ANY TWO if your opponent doesn't adjust his style. Additionally, I will gladly "float" with a gutshot and an overcard, two overcards to the board and backdoor straight and/or flush draws, and a gutshot with a backdoor flushdraw or a flushdraw or open ended straight draw. I may draw to an underpair to hit a set but that is dangerous because hitting a set is very vulnerable to a higher set or higher pocket pair that is just as likely to hit a set on the other card as me. If it is profitable to call with any two, I'm probably going to prefer raising on the flop, preferably minraising to keep my opponent in. If my opponent has any sort of draw or overcards he probably will only hit them between 10% and 20% of the time with one card. Although I'm more leery about my opponent staying in on a flush or straight draw, There is more to be made by letting him stay in and fold, or if his pair ends up making my draw, let him check hoping I'll bet and allow me to see the river and get paid off often enough to make it equitable. Now what about just bluffing? Why float the flop when you can just bluff on the flop immediately with raises? Several reasons... First, information. Where if opponent puts $40 in and you put in $100 or $120 you are bluffing without the information of the check that comes on the turn. The second reason is opportunity to "call an audible and control the pot size enough to see the river. If for example opponent isn't going to fold to your raise on the flop OR the turn, now you know he has a big hand so if you pick up a draw and HE bets, now you can be VERY confident the implied odds are in fact there to call a pot sized bet on the turn knowing you can move all in if you hit on the river with very little chance of getting beat, and very high chance of geting called with worse. (watch out for PAIRED BOARDS that make your draw but could give opponent a fullhouse or scare him away fro a shove when he misses.) If I am going to bluff the flop, it probably will be in a big pot and an all in and it probably will be with the nut flush draw and possibly also a pair or straight draw. I want a lot of outs to bluff. I may very rarely bluff with les if the pot is bigger but I do so with the right proportion to shoves all in with a set or two pair and depending on my opponent maybe other flush draws and pairs and straight draws. If the pot is NOT big I may push a busted draw on the turn OR a made draw on the turn OR a made hand, but will again do it in a way that has an overall strategy that is profitable based upon my assumptions. Moving all in on the turn is very aggressive and very loose and not very typical of my play. However, under the right circumstances I will because it's very difficult to call as well. This is a good counter move to those that float the turn themselves or continuation bet a lot on the flop and double barrel or that continuation bet too much on the turn after I make a small reraise on the flop to set it up. Any move can be profitable under the right circumstances but you HAVE to know what those circumstances are and get yourself very well prepared if you want to make such a style work. Granted, if you are Phil Ivey and have played for decades online and offline and have such a huge database of hands and experience you may intuitively have a good idea of the right decisions, but for everyone else and even those WITH experience who may suffer from recency bias or any number of potential biases, you should know the math. Put in the work it takes to be great, or else you will be victim to those that do and spewing chips when you make mistakes AS WELL as when you get unlucky and you will find it really easy to be a "victim" to chance and overconfidence rather than proactively improving your game and KNOWING the difference between making the right decision and getting unlucky. double barrel bluff more often which is profitable when you have a hand. It alsol

Shifting Gears Means Shifting Mentalities

It's very difficult to go from one way of thinking to another. To "change gears" and think in a completely different way. If you are preventing exploitation, you only really need to be making sure YOU aren't giving away any tells, or give off a fake tell often enough to make up for it. So the focus is inward.

But if you are exploiting you need to be thinking outwards. What is opponent doing? What information are they giving out? do I have any tells? What are my opponent's hand ranges? What percentage of hands do they play in each position? What percentage of hands do they raise with? What percentage of hands do they call a 3bet with? What percentage do they continuation bet and so on. ANd in turn, what's the best response to that? How aware is my opponent of me? How vulnerable should I risk being to counter exploitation?

Shifting gears is one of the most difficult things to do because it is enherently going to require not only a change in mindset but a change in emotion, without letting either emotion paralyze you,. If you think too tight, you may end up looking for reasons to fold. If you are too loose you are looking for reasons to call or raise. That natural outlook is okay as long as it is controlled and for the right reasons.

You also have to be aware enough of either strategy and how to impliment it and have a rough idea for what cards to play in those situations.

Not easy. I don't have a perfect memory nor do I have enough time to look over a ton of charts even if I was playing at home where no one could see what I am looking at. Somost of the work must be done in preview and review. Study up before tournaments nd afterwards. The more comfortable you get with a style, the more you can look back and investigate and see how close you are from "correc". Are you having a tendency of being too tight or too loose? You can make counter adjustments pretty quickly without having to play millions of tournaments. That is the goal of all the preparation. Also to make the game logical and mathematical and structured rather than emotional and chaotic... without abandoning intuition.

Nutball exploitative Poker

By default my "exploitative" strategy involves coming in with HALF of my opponent's range, or even 40% of that range and being aggressive during the flop and afterwards. I love coming in with a better hand and being aggressive because that provides me with a large enough margin of error where opponent has to respect my range of starting hands and has such a poor range himself relative to mine that he really not counting for "outs" should be calling with about 25% of his hands just to be in my upper half range. That means with additional aggression he has to be even tighter just to avoid running into a situation in which he is calling me with a worse hand. Add to the fact that I am calculated about showing aggression on top of his aggression and aggression on the turn and river, and It is very difficult for my opponent to not screw up and give me too many small pots, by being too tight, or screw up by being too loose and playing back at me too often in which case I will take a LOT of chips often enough to profit.

When I am starting off with a tigher range than my opponent, I am also looking for postflop tendencies as well. If my opponent folds on the flop 50% of the time I can bet up to half the pot and still be profitable. I typically prefer to bet less than I have to of course since this adds equity. If my opponent bets 100% of the time I can raise him 100% of the time. I probably will instead just look to exploit the turn and just call or min raise rather than raising to take down the pot hee though. I also prefer to be aggressive and I already have a better hand than opponent's range so I can play say 70% of my hands (pair or any draw plus ace high on a lot of paired flops or two overcards to hands that didn't hit my opponent's range), and continue with aggression.

Since I'm starting with a better hand than my opponent and playing aggressively, My opponent risks making a mistake by calling too loosely or folding too tightly. Until I decide how he will react to me I probably won't know how to exploit him too much. So I typically will only do so by playing huge overbets on the river with a made hand with the right proportion to bluffs to have an approximate"equilibrium solution". the incorrect play on the flop and turn will payoff on the river by building a big pot for incorrect decisions since my opponent can only call or fold now and cannot rebluff me. So if they were too loose I make up for it. If they were to tight, I may pay the price but I will have made enough off of the small pots where I'm only giving back my winnings or less.

Although this strategy is "exploitative" to some extent, it is mostly an "equilibrium strategy" with a few small adjustments. There's a reason for that.

1st) Players play bad enough before and after the flop that I can make money just by entering in a better hand than them and playing it aggressively. I will win often enough on a showdown that it will be profitable regardless of how they play, and I will also make money regardless of if they make the mistake of being TOO loose or TOO tight....

BUT "nutball exploitative" strategy involves the all in option more often and sooner OR playing in a LOT more hands preflop and exploiting after the flop.

Now against the guy who continuation bets 100% of the time, I want to know how he responds to frequent 3bets on the flop. Is he a "push or fold guy"? If so, how often does he push? Is he a call and continue on the turn guy?

Technically if he folds often enough it doesn't matter what two cards I have, I can keep the aggression up knowing that he will wait for a big hand and that he will bet on me paying him off enough to make up for it. I will not give him that luxury, plus I will probaly have backup plans.

Daniel Negreanu proposed a strategy that is a lot more "passive" but he makes it work well because it's quite honestly using very sound gam theory whether he is aware of it or not.  Basically, Negreanu will flat call on the flop a LOT with the intention of bluffing on the turn. I like that strategy, but something I like better is reraise bluffing on the flop to reraise bluff on the turn with a similar mentality. Whiele you may pay extra for that information, you may open the door to more profitable rebluffs and make the opponent pay for drawing to a card he can continue with.

Negreanu basically proposed that all he needs to call a flop with is   backdoor draw or an ace. That's pretty close to correct on a lot of flops to equilibrium. However, depending on the bet size is probably too loose in several instances. A backdoor draw is too loose and an ace high on some flops is too loose to meet "equilibrium" to larger bets, he makes up for it by exploiting opponents though and getting paid off when he has a hand against opponents who can't tell the difference between players that are loose in small pots and passive (but aggressive when it counts) and tight aggressive in big ones, from just standard players who are just too loose passive overall.

My thing is, if the turn play is always profitable to call and opponent will always call a minraise, why not inflate the pot size, represent greater strength than you have and potentially get opponent to make a mistake by folding to a minraise as well? Or perhaps a slightly larger than minraise bet?

In tournaments there is a strong argument for the lower varience strategy of just calling, controlling pot size and perhaps passing up opportunities for maximizing chip gain in exchange for increasing probability of survival depending on the stage of the tournament and what you can do with a small, medium and big chip stack.

In cash games, that doesn't matter so much.

In either case, you at times will still have plenty of chips to maintain a low varience strategy in a small pot by increasing your bet frequency and putting more in the pot as well as boost your overall profitability.

Finally, you can set the stage for more potential all in semibluffs with monster draws as well as smaller bet semibluffs as well as taking the freecard and getting paid off since opponents cannot put you on a backdoor draw as well as being able to represent more obvious draws since opponents will have to respect that you might minraise the flop, check the turn, take a free card and bet when you hit.

Additionally, as long as opponents don't deviate from a tendency or are slow enough to adjust, you can go after it over and over again, while understanding the effect that it will have on observing opponents.

So while I'm willing to 3bet shoving or check raise shoving with any two where I have at least a draw (70% of all flops if I have suited connectors to start the hand) if the pot is inflated preflop to 1/3rd or even maybe 1/5th the effective stack... when I'm facing opponents that are too tight to call... I am probably also trying to keep them in when I have a monster... Vs observing opponents I will actually do the opposite and shove in with the big hand and play for a draw and then big all in on the river when I hit. Opponent who sees me shove in with flushdraw 3 times against the other guy will not believe that I hit the flush since they rationalize that I would have shoved the turn. So they may call with a set or top pair and think I was bluffing.

Of course I have to change the strategy as my opponents become aware.

Nutball exploitative poker is about entering an equal amount of hands as your opponent or more and continuing with aggression if opponents fold too much, and being very tight if they stay in too much, except when I believe I can draw and overbet and get called.

The varying styls and paying close attention to my opponents allows me to vary my strategy specific to opponent with a hard to read strategy overall and the occasional "gear shift" of drastically tigh tening up and just playing my cards, or tighting up just enough to play the odds my cards are best vs random opponent.... or tightening up but specific to my opponents and making sure I enter with a better hand.

See, the more strategies you have that you are aware of how to play to either exploit profit or prevent opponent from exploiting you and making him pay for mistakes either regardless of whether he is too tight or too loose or with direct intention of exploiting tendencies, the more ways you can continue to dominate table even as opponents have no idea WHY you are still winning chips. Is it because you play too many hands? or too few? Is it because you are bluffing? or always coming in with a strong er hand? Are you specifically targeting opponents? Or just playing your cards? Or are you just playing cards vs position and assuming random perfect opponents? Or are you exploiting your nutball image by tightening up? Or are you playing small pots at the right times and big pots at the right times?  There are so many different ways to win at poker, but if you are a player that adjusts style either randomly so opponents cannot "guess" and counter exploit, OR intentionally (so you anticipate opponents counter adjustment and actually are "aiming where they are going, not where they are". The anticipation aspect just has to be more accurate than the random guesses to work, provided the strategy you choose isn't too vulnerable if you are wrong.