TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

Stellar Wind made the following observation in a post in SSSH:

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of you guys want to move up sometime. I have learned the hard way that TAG is literally a losing style in higher 6-max games. Controlled, skillful LAGs dominate the games. They are a large majority of the players who play day-in, day-out and win lots of money.

[/ QUOTE ]

The complete thread can be found:

Here

Stellar's comments generated a good deal of response, but I thought it would be interesting to get the reactions from other 2+2ers who actually play in the $20/40 and up 6-max online games (as opposed to those of us strivers in SSSH).

Mods: If this type of cross-post is not OK then move or delete. I just thought it would be good to get input on this topic from the Mid-High SH FOrum.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

whats the cut off between tag and lag?

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

Read the SS thread. He really is talking about people with >40% VPIPs.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Read the SS thread. He really is talking about people with >40% VPIPs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he is talking about people with between 30%-40% typically, but as high as 40+%. Also, he is stating that TAG's with VPIP less than 25% (and perhaps 25-30%) simply aren't seen in those games because, presumably, it is a losing style of game.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think he is talking about people with between 30%-40% typically, but as high as 40+%. Also, he is stating that TAG's with VPIP less than 25% (and perhaps 25-30%) simply aren't seen in those games because, presumably, it is a losing style of game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but his main point is that in this wide range of 25-45%, VPIP has little impact on earn. The most important preflop factor is preflop aggression (which can also be measured by difference between VPIP and PFR, or %call).

I don't think 25/17 has always been a sub-optimal strategy, and people were winning with it before because the games were so easy. The texture of the games have changed a lot, and with it, winning strategy.

There are still seats where it's correct to play 26/20, but there are more where it's correct to play 35/25. You might be (maybe *should be*) surprised to see how much variation there is in your stats between significant sessions. These aren't solely due to card variance or mood, but largely to the makeup of a given table.

If anything SW's post illustrates how ridiculous it is to evaluate your play based on preflop stats, or strive to hit a certain target. At one seat I'm running at 39/30 6-haned, and at another I'm running at 28/22 6-handed, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

filtered for 5/6, my last 67k hands im at 26/19. close to 1bb/100.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

Playing 40% of my starting hands certainly is a theoretical mistake at a 6-player table. If my opposition makes bigger mistakes I can make up for my mistake if I play well.
If I am good enough to get away with such a style it almost certainly would be at a lower rather than a higher limit.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

I certainly do not particularly fear 40/30 players at 50/100+. In fact, I seek them out.

There are plenty of flaws with SW's "study", however, they are not interesting to discuss.

In higher limit SH game, while preflop stats can certainly ensure you are a loser, they most definitely do not take you far in becoming a winner.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

I looked at that thread and have serious concerns with respect to the methodology of that "study". While I don't have proof to the contrary and accept the possiblity that the LAG style may be the winningest long term for the most skilled, the sample size issue is pretty tough to ignore. 7K hands is not even close to enough hands on anyone to draw any meaningful conclusions.

Stellar if you are out there, could you please describe exactly what you looked at while studying this database. For example: what percentage of all players had a VPIP over 35 and what percentage of them were winners? Likewise for the VPIP 25s. What I am concerned about here is bias of many types.

This reminds me of that stat "90% of car accidents take place within 2 miles of your home" or however it goes. They don't mention that 95% of all the time spent in the car is within 2 miles of home.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
This reminds me of that stat "90% of car accidents take place within 2 miles of your home" or however it goes. They don't mention that 95% of all the time spent in the car is within 2 miles of home.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, 100% of pots are won by people who are in them. Better get that VPIP up! [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

Just noticed this X-post. I've said many things in the SSSH thread and some have been misquoted or misunderstood. Here are some key things I said. I use the term TAG to refer to VPIP of 25% or less.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm looking at my 20/40 6-max database for a second-tier site. It includes 172K hands averaging 5.16 players/hand played over a few weeks. I regularly play in this game so my numbers-view is supplemented by personal experience of how things work. The numbers are telling me things I already know because I see them in action everyday.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
VPIP doesn't matter nearly as much as most people think. Many successful players have VPIP well above 40%. The ideal range seems to be 28-38%. Players below 25% don't do well at all and are largely extinct in the population of regular winning players.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
PFR is more important than VPIP. Low PFR players lose almost without exception. Even more crucial is the difference between VPIP and PFR (calling percentage) which needs to be kept reasonably small. A tight player (VPIP 25-35%) should be calling maybe 7-10% of the time, mostly due to blind defense.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
24 players have at least 7000 hands in the database. These are the players who show up everyday and often multitable. 21 of these players are in the green! That's right, 21 winners and only 3 losers averaging +1.48 BB/100.


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Only four players (of the 24) have VPIPs under 30% of which the lowest was 26%. The average stats for the whole group are 36/19 and only six players have PFRs of 16% or lower.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you see the picture? I can't even ask the question "Do TAGs win in this game?" because TAGs are virtually extinct. Players using the accepted best style have been so badly outcompeted that they are no longer part of the game

[/ QUOTE ]
Now for something new. 198 players in the DB have at least 1000 hands. Let's look at their group results:

PFR <= 12%: 42 players averaging -2.21 BB/100 including 9 winners and 33 losers.

PFR > 12, VPIP <= 25 (TAG): 5 players averaging -1.20 BB/100 including 2 winners and 3 losers. One of the two winners is a talented player at 24.4% or this would be even worse.

PFR > 15, VPIP 25-30%: 14 players averaging +0.68 BB/100 including 9 winners and 5 losers. Only two of these fourteen players are below 27%.

PFR > 15, VPIP 30-35% (LAG-TAG): 19 players averaging +1.22 BB/100 including 11 winners and 8 losers.

PFR > 15, VPIP 35-40%: 25 players averaging +1.46 BB/100 including 16 winners and 9 losers.

PFR > 15, VPIP 40-45%: 22 players averaging +1.22 BB/100 including 11 winners and 11 losers. This group includes several high-volume players whom I consider to be very dangerous postflop. Don't tell me none of them win because I don't believe you. Many of the other players in this group are quite bad.

PFR > 15, VPIP 45-50%: 16 players averaging -0.60 BB/100 including 6 winners and 10 losers. Aren't these players supposed to be burning in Hell!? -0.60 BB/100 is the penalty for being an aggressive clown preflop and usually bad postflop?

What do you think these numbers mean? At what point are you trying to rationalize the numbers to fit your preconceived notions of how poker works?

I can't emphasize enough that there is no "stupid person" filter in PT. Many of these players especially above 40% VPIP are idiots who make asinine coldcalls and play terribly postflop. What do you think these stats would look like if I only included players with postflop skills in the top 50% for this sample?

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

FWIW I ran my own personal numbers against these groups in my 200K hands at Party. I had 13544 hands where I won or lost money to TAGs (VPIP 20-30, PFR 16-24, note that these are hands that we specifically clashed, not just sat at the same table, but these include blind steals) and lost 7 bets total. I'll call that breakeven. I had 6706 hands where I won or lost to LAGs (VPIP 40-50, PFR > 26) and lost 9 bets. As a control group I checked out fish (VPIP > 50, PFR < 10), I had 81984 clashes and won 3576 bets. I am about 29/19, so from my perspective I guess these two groups look the same.

More pertinent to the discussion would be how these two groups fare against each other. I am compiling those numbers now (hands from my DB involving a TAG vs an LAG but not me) but I can already tell the sample size will be way small.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

Yeah my Party database was too small, and since all hands in that database have me at the table, once I get rid of hands that involve me I have no hands to work with. I would really need to do this on a mined database to be worthwhile. But since I mentioned it...

In 200K hands, the results I got were:

TAG versus LAG clashes: 450, TAGS win 22.12 bets total

More interestingly:

TAG versus fish clashes: 5587, FISH win 61.41 bets
LAG versus fish clashes: 8495, LAGs win 208

This was at Party 10/20 and 15/30. It's too small of a sample size to conclude anything at all, but it does lend a little support to the "dumb TAG" theory.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

Just throwing it out there - a 25/15 player that runs hot for some part of 1k hands can show up over 1k hands as 40/30 or whatever.

I had a bunch of statements like that, but they really are all summed up as: being a 40/30 or any specific VPIP/PFR means nothing if you are doing it incorrectly. I think all this post says is to be successful in mid/high sh lhe you have to be able to push tiny edges and that player tight will only get you run over.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

So, what does this all mean. What is your theory?

It seems that what is happening then is that we are making a series of preflop decisions that are individually losers yet somehow it adds up in the metagame and postflop and makes us winners. Like 3 betting a TAG with QJ. It just doesn't make sense logically that it can be correct.

Similarly, how can this group of guys (the MHUSH regulars) who are fairly dedicated and intelligent not be able to figure out the correct strategy after playing all these hands and studying for so long? Is this the blind leading the blind? Are there forums out there where Brocathmel and friends are laughing their butts off playing 40/30, calling raises from the BB with 47o, and becoming millionaires?

These threads (the "bad TAG" threads) have a very big psychological impact on me, testing the very core of what we are trying to accomplish around here. I hope we get some more responses and perhaps shed some light on this.

anecdotal but worthwhile
 

Is there anyone out there who can post their results showing a win rate over 1 BB/100 at 10/20 or higher playing a VPIP>40, pfr>20 for say 75K hands or more? I am patiently waiting.

Re: anecdotal but worthwhile
 

no, but i can show you a winrate of about 1.1bb/100 over 300khands with stats around 28 19 sorted for 5 to 6 handed

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
calling raises from the BB with 47o

[/ QUOTE ]

where's the raise from? how many people are in? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
So, what does this all mean. What is your theory?

It seems that what is happening then is that we are making a series of preflop decisions that are individually losers yet somehow it adds up in the metagame and postflop and makes us winners. Like 3 betting a TAG with QJ. It just doesn't make sense logically that it can be correct.

Similarly, how can this group of guys (the MHUSH regulars) who are fairly dedicated and intelligent not be able to figure out the correct strategy after playing all these hands and studying for so long? Is this the blind leading the blind? Are there forums out there where Brocathmel and friends are laughing their butts off playing 40/30, calling raises from the BB with 47o, and becoming millionaires?

These threads (the "bad TAG" threads) have a very big psychological impact on me, testing the very core of what we are trying to accomplish around here. I hope we get some more responses and perhaps shed some light on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're pretty much right a lot of the way. Let me put it like this: (1) I rarely go more than a couple of days without a nitty 100/200 TAG grinder telling me that I'm an idiot fish; (2) See my posts in BBV over the last few months (pretty graphs with nice upward slopes to the tune of $$$$).

If everyone plays the same then it's hard to win, other than those increasingly rare occasions when an uber-fish happens to feel like dropping $10k playing over his head. IMHO, the key to being really successful is understanding how to play solid, but deviating just enough and in just the right spots against just the right players to achieve the metagame results that others have referred to.

Of course, some days I feel like I've found that magic formula and some days I feel like I really am that fish that some players think I am.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, some days I feel like I've found that magic formula and some days I feel like I really am that fish that some players think I am.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've said the same thing to others many times the last several months. Very true statement I think of "expert" poker.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
If everyone plays the same then it's hard to win, other than those increasingly rare occasions when an uber-fish happens to feel like dropping $10k playing over his head. IMHO, the key to being really successful is understanding how to play solid, but deviating just enough and in just the right spots against just the right players to achieve the metagame results that others have referred to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree strongly with this. Wish I were better at finding the "just the rights." Also agree with later statement about some days feeling like finding magic and others feeling like fish -- this really adds to the mental challenge of this silly game.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

as much as I wish my old 25/18 style would work in the current mid stakes SH game, after 3 months of playing pretty close to that at full tilt, i'm agreeing more with stellar here. i've got some pretty good samples on some winning players there, and a lot of the winners are playing 35/25, but the winning range sure seems to be 29/19-40/25. of course just talking about stats sucks, but i think the old style of straight forward TAG is too easily exploitable to anyone who knows it. this discussion comes up time and again, even a year or more ago all the top players seemed to be move to the 30/20 LAG/TAG stats(which was consider a lag/tag then) now I'm not surpised if the optimal 6max stats are in the 30/20 - 35/25 range. of course i'm finding my stats are dictated by how i'm running and my opponents more than anything, but i've been moving steadily from 25/19 towards 30/22 and i'm definately doing better. my sample is close to 80K hands, FWIW.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

I wonder if the main problem for a TAG versus an LAG is kind of this meta-shania thing, where the TAG doesn't know if his opponent is a thinking LAG or a non-thinking one. The thinking LAG can get a lot of mileage out of pretending to be nonthinking.

The main postflop advantage that helps the TAG "play" is the ability to make bluffs based on his tight range, but you give up this advantage if you think your opponent sucks.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

disjunction, do you think a tag can be nonthinking, or seemingly nonthinking as well?

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
disjunction, do you think a tag can be nonthinking, or seemingly nonthinking as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

But it seems obvious that the answer is yes against good LAGs but that they can autoplay against bad LAGs and fish. But I don't understand why in my small sample the TAGs weren't making, say, half of what the LAGs do against fish. Unless it was just sample size.

Edit to add: A TAGs main job I would think should be handreading. An LAGs main job is to be unpredictable (while tending to play good hands further). So by this standard the TAG has a tougher task to think about.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

I don't know why you guys waste so much time dissecting stats like this. When it's time for it, decide if the hand is profitable to play based off the other players and your skill/experience. I range from 25VPIP to 50+VPIP depending on the game. If there are donkeys in the blinds when I am the button, VPIP goes sky high.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

This thread is like the DERB thread.

Is there one person out there that claims to have stats similar to 40/30 or even 35/28, 5/6 handed at 50/100 and up that wins 1.5BB/100 (I'll even take 1.0 i guess) over 200k hands?

Where are these people? When I am introduced to even one such person I may start to give some though to that style of play.

I know of several long term tag winners who have tried lagging it up for extended periods of time (btw, I do not consider 30/20 laggy) and the have all gotten creamed.

Additionally, although no one will ever agree with me, variance should be a consideration here IMO.

As for the PT figures, when looking at samples less than ten thousand hands (but more than 1000), there is going to be a survivorship bias. That however, does not explain the poor performance of 28/19 types.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
So, what does this all mean. What is your theory?

[/ QUOTE ]
1. The successful players are not successful because they can beat TAGs. The ability of the LAGs to dominate the games I described has virtually nothing to do with their ability to outsmart and outplay the tiny minority of surviving TAGs. There are many whole tables with no classical TAGs at them. Even when a TAG is present you don't play many hands against him.

We need to understand what is good about being a LAG. What is wrong with being a TAG is unimportant and will probably become evident once we understand how LAGs succeed.

2. The answer is not going to be subtle. When entire statistical groups of players are stomping on the game it's time to stop discussing Shania, handreading, and other nuances. There are some very fine players amongst the LAGs but most of them are not very good players and some are downright terrible. Many poor players seem to be winning or at least not losing very much because they picked the favored general style.

3. The results show that preflop aggression has enormous importance. The primary benefit of preflop aggression is to exclude people from seeing the flop. Raises do this directly by driving out players and indirectly by intimidating players into folding in front of you.

Value is also a benefit of raising but we are mostly far beyond that. The extra raises that distinguish the aggressive player don't appear to offer much value.

Notice the tie-in with tight play. If excluding players from seeing the flop is an enormous good, then maybe it follows that the self-excluding ways of the TAG are an enormous evil.

4. While certain TAG-posters are trying to figure out how to beat the LAGs in a duel, the LAGs are busy attacking the fish and hauling away their gold. One message that comes out of my PT research is that "everybody wins". Not really of course but it is amazing what a wide range of players is getting the money or at least not bleeding out (review the numbers I posted). Of course these are players with at least 1000 hands and that is the rub. My research using PT databases from several sites shows that most of the money won/raked from high-level games is supplied by a relatively small number of terrible players that lose up to 15 BB/100. Usually these players don't last long because such extremely poor play is hard to overcome even for a short span.

The key to table selection is to find these players and sit with them. The key to winning money is to take it from these bad players. The key to taking money from bad players is ... playing hands against them. In money terms the skill difference between an expert and a really mediocre 20/40 player is small compared to the difference between the mediocre player and a superfish.

The good news for the mediocre player is the superfish is happy to play lots of hands against him and anyone else that shows up.

I think that's the fundamental issue here. The TAGs forgot to show up. They are so concerned about not taking the worst of it versus the regular players in the game that they allow themselves to be excluded from too many opportunities to go fishing. The LAGs (in general) aren't any smarter than the rest of us but by doing what comes naturally they created repeated clashes with the big donors while sweeping potential competitors out of the pot. If that leads to unpleasant confrontations with strong players and good hands, that's just the price of doing business.

5. Let's recast the last argument in terms of theory. Remember Ed Miller and the $1000000 pot? Theory says large blinds require loose play while small blinds dictate tight play. The more dead money the looser you have to play.

Morons with chips are just as much a form of dead money as blinds, antes, and the NPA's $1000000. This isn't some deep mystery that needs to be solved. TAGs lose because they play too tight. It's a natural consequence of game structure.

There are no "LAG forums" laughing at us because LAGs are primarily unscientific players who don't take books and forums seriously. They just sat down and played. The talented ones prospered using their natural style.

6. So how did this happen to us?

A. Theory and education are both heavily tied to full-ring games. The blinds compared to final pot sizes are much bigger in 6-max. People didn't properly appreciate what this meant.

B. 6-max has the same magnifying effect on the superfish. A superfish at a 6-max table means much more to an individual player. Once again the supply of dead money in relation to final pot size expanded while we weren't looking.

C. Internet poker has lower rakes/tips. Avoided rake is another form of dead money.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

talk about it all you want. why dont you play 10k hands 40/30?

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

TAG is ftw.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
talk about it all you want. why dont you play 10k hands 40/30?

[/ QUOTE ]
And what would you say after I did? Depending on the result I'm betting on "I told you so" or "sample size".

Pursuit of statistical goals is foolish. Poker is still a game of individual hands and decisions. I'm not going to randomly add a whole bunch of hands at once and hope it works out. They have to be the right hands and right now I don't have 40% worth of ideas that I want to be associated with.

But I do have 30% worth of ideas and in retrospect that seems incredible. Not so long ago 30/20 seemed impossible to me. I got there not through crude measures but by carefully analyzing many aspects of preflop play and gradually adding new hands and new raises. I've also deleted a few too because even tight players do some things they shouldn't.

That's what I'm going to continue to do. Researching, analyzing, and trying new things in a controlled way while trying to make some money at the same time. If that leads to 35% or 40% someday then so be it.

My statistical research using PT and my essays in these threads serve two purposes for me:

1. Game selection: A year ago I had fundamentally wrong ideas about who the fish are. This is one of the most deadly strategic failings a poker player can have and it got me in some trouble. I now have a much better understanding of where I should be sitting.

2. Areas to explore: Most of the LAGs are pretty haphazard about which preflop ideas they embrace. Bad hands are included while some good ideas get left out. Understanding why they are successful is much better than simply copying them. I want to find and add the good ideas without picking up a bunch of new leaks. This thread has helped me figure out what changes to investigate next.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

The discussion seems to be centered about LAG preflop play but I think a big consideration needs to be given to the LAG postflop play. The difference between LAGS and TAGS is not confined only to the preflop realm.

Here are some plays that LAGS (at least where I am playing) are characterized with when it it comes to post flop play (mainly HU):

-LAG raises preflop bets the flop and is called.
Most LAGS will bet the turn about 95% of the time.
- LAG raises preflop,bets flop and is raised. Most LAGS will peel the flop no matter what they have. If the LAG is in position and is CR on a low board he will always 3-bet with overcards, bet the turn and check behind river when he has A high.
- LAG raises preflop and is 3-betted. A LAG will peel the flop about 95% of the time.
- AK goes to SD 100% of the time when it is HU. AT-AQ go to SD 90%
- A pair is never folded
- No matter the action preflop or on the flop, when the LAG picks up an 8+ outs or more draw he raises.
- if the preflop aggressor checks behind the turn a LAG oop will always bet the river.

These plays describe more accurately the 35/22 +LAGs. The lower the VP$IP, a lesser amount of the above plays is used.

I believe that the plays above are much more useful against tags than against fish since tags are folders and fish are looking for every opportunity to get to SD. In the last couple of years the number of fish in comparison to TAGS has lowered considerably and this could be the reason that LAGS are showing better winrates in databases.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

I totally agree.IF the LAG:s are more successful it depends more on their postflop play than their preflop play.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

So maybe it's a combination of the two. Vs TAGs it's their post flop play that makes them 'good' and vs fish it's their pre flop play.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

Andy Prock:

[ QUOTE ]

The tight and aggressive style is designed to exploit preflop looseness, and postflop weakness. What if you want to exploit players who are far too loose postflop? To do this, you’ll need to get to the postflop rounds to effectivly exploit them. In that case, you may want to defer your tight-aggressive style until the flop has come.


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

If that's true combined with the assumption that LAGs make their money from fish and not from the Tags, why is this a problem only in the mid+ limits? I thought there were more "far too lose players" in the low limits. Just wondering...

If a Tag style is successful at the low limits and not at 20/40+, I can't see why this is because of the fishes in those games. Maybe I'm missing something, but I think a good 25/17 would beat the superfish I've observed at some 20/40 tables.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know why you guys waste so much time dissecting stats like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was looking at the stats only as a theoretical point of interest. No other reason -- I don't expect it to help me play poker.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

theres plenty of TAGS playing in one of the stoxtrader databases, stoxtrader himself is a 6 player TAG.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
theres plenty of TAGS playing in one of the stoxtrader databases, stoxtrader himself is a 6 player TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

How old is this DB?
I suspect Stox's TAG style is not good enough after how the games have changed. Of course this is just a personal opinion and might be far off.

Re: TAG v. LAG style of play in MSSH (Cross-Post from SSSH Forum)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
theres plenty of TAGS playing in one of the stoxtrader databases, stoxtrader himself is a 6 player TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

How old is this DB?
I suspect Stox's TAG style is not good enough after how the games have changed. Of course this is just a personal opinion and might be far off.

[/ QUOTE ]

its not really comparable. stox was playing 150p/300p. i highyl doubt todays 10/20 plays tougher than that game.