Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

<font color="#666666">Disclaimer: I don't really believe the following, but at the moment I don't see any source of profit in limit poker. </font>

Hello. Everyone knows I run bad. I always have and always will. It's mainly to do with my own sucking. However, it seems to me that...

A tight aggressive style is fatally flawed.

1) Tight means your starting cards are most often superior to your opponents' cards.

2) Aggressive means you bet and raise a lot.

3) Because of (2) your opponents are then free to fold when they have not improved; because of (1) this is not a mistake. You therefore get minimum money in the pot when you are winning.

4) Your opponents can call, raise, check-raise etc. at will when they hit. You therefore put maximum money in when you are losing.

(3) and (4) mean postflop disaster, which is in no way compensated for by your relatively small preflop edge.

Well, that's the way it feels when I look back over my hands. Over and over I win the blinds preflop or take the pot on the flop when I have something; and get taken for a multiple bet ride on multiple streets when I am second best.

Discuss.

Guy.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="#666666">Disclaimer: I don't really believe the following, but at the moment I don't see any source of profit in limit poker. </font>

Hello. Everyone knows I run bad. I always have and always will. It's mainly to do with my own sucking. However, it seems to me that...

A tight aggressive style is fatally flawed.

1) Tight means your starting cards are most often superior to your opponents' cards.

2) Aggressive means you bet and raise a lot.

3) Because of (2) your opponents are then free to fold when they have not improved; because of (1) this is not a mistake. You therefore get minimum money in the pot when you are winning.

4) Your opponents can call, raise, check-raise etc. at will when they hit. You therefore put maximum money in when you are losing.

(3) and (4) mean postflop disaster, which is in no way compensated for by your relatively small preflop edge.

Well, that's the way it feels when I look back over my hands. Over and over I win the blinds preflop or take the pot on the flop when I have something; and get taken for a multiple bet ride on multiple streets when I am second best.

Discuss.

Guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right, if your opponents are paying attention and you are playing a strict TAG style with no metagame considerations, you're gonna slowly lose. But if your opponents are paying attention, all's you got to do is 3-bet suited connectors a few times and occasionally slowplay a big hand. You need yourself a balanced strategy, yo.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

I think we can ignore the possibility that my opponents are "paying close attention" - it's not happening - and wonder about what the current pool of players is doing on average.

Guy.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]
3) Because of (2) your opponents are then free to fold when they have not improved; because of (1) this is not a mistake. You therefore get minimum money in the pot when you are winning.


[/ QUOTE ]

Unless you're playing in tough games, then hopefully this won't be true.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]

Unless you're playing in tough games, then hopefully this won't be true.


[/ QUOTE ]

If I get called on the river, I lose.

This is called running bad, of course, and it messes with your head, hence this post. But seriously, the staple diet of yesteryear (raise big cards, hit big pair, bet three streets and get paid off by second best) is just completely absent nowadays. I either don't get paid or I don't have the best hand at the river. Is that not the case for everyone?

Guy.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

Not getting paid? If anything poker these days is unbluffable. Not that you can't bluff one bad hand off another but getting players to fold made hands is just not easy. I am really surprised your complaing you don't get action.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

say you have a default BB defense range against an unknown button opener. you play a few orbits and then your HUD kicks in, revealing that the previously unknown button has an extremely high steal percentage and aggression factor. obviously, you would now open up your defense and 3betting range against this button as well as get to showdown more frequently. you would also be forced to take more shots at pots so he wouldn't show an immediate profit from raising OTB. this is basically what has happened in the last 6 months or so - our HUDs have kicked in. in other words, there are alot more players like this button in today's games.

therefore, "TAG" is a relative and evolving idea. TAG used to mean 24/17, but it's hard to beat up the mid-stakes games today with that style because it will be handily exploited in the ways you mentioned. so if that's what you mean by TAG then i agree, currently it is at best suboptimal and at worst "fatally flawed."

essentially, the old LAG (~32/22) is the new TAG, and the new LAG (~45/30) is the old maniac. and unfortunately, this new breed of LAG is just that - a LAG - and not a maniac. what i mean by that is that while they are routinely guilty of what seem like -EV decisions both pre and post-flop, their overall strategy is ambitious and opprotunistic in spirit (albeit excessively so) rather than aimless and irrational. that said, these guys are where the majority of your profit can derive from next to the almost extinct 50/10 guys. they are still exploitable, just less so.

the point is that the theory behind a TAG style (which is, in the broadest sense, the idea of selective aggression guided by presumed equity edges) will always be optimal. all that changes is what the TAG style technically entails.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]
but at the moment I don't see any source of profit in limit poker.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is very, very silly.

TAG or LAG can both win if they're played well. But there are TAGs who play well and TAGs who don't so much. The latter won't win.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

So true. It is ridiculous to think you cannot be sucessfull playing tag poker or lag for that matter its just a matter of playing either style well.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

a lot of these so-called tags are the cookie-cutter generic variety that don't particularly play that well to begin with. i can train my little sister to play 28/20 or whatever. doesn't neccessarily mean she'll know wtf she would be doing though. while that is a pretty vague generalization, but "TAG" in itself isn't flawed because i know plenty of players with the the same/similar stats/style that are huge winners, marginal winners, marginal losers, and big losers. some people just play better than others, period.

that said, a couple other reasons that seperate the men from the boys, the results from the reality:
games are a lot tougher than before
variance
table selection
tilt control

and also the one thing that people underestimate in importance is their hand reading ability and their opponents hand reading ability. this here is the number reason imo why it seems like so many TAGs lose while so many LAGs win.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

If TAG refers to preflop then I'm pretty sure its best way to beat 10/20ish online while multitabling (don't know about higher cuz I never win higher). If TAG refers to postflop then I'm pretty sure that's awful (bc postflop is so complex that sticking to any one strategy sucks).

But you already knew that, so just keep playing short sessions until you run better!

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

Generally TAGs lose because the less imaginative worse hand readers try and cling to a pre flop guide that best helps them to overcome the deficiencies of their overall play. There are a lot of good TAGs though that hand read well and use their tighter image to pull off sound bluffs/steals against the right opponents and a lot of these are the hardest players around to play against. The easiest players to play against are the Bad TAGS tho b/c observant opponents three bet them more liberally and often no exactly where they stand in the hand postflop.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

One point before addressing your theory: unless a TAG loses more than the rake, she is not being exploited, she simply isn't winning enough to beat the rake. LAG just pays more rake.

The primary weakness is in your third point, which sounds good until you put numbers on it. They are not free to fold if they don't hit. In the general case, on the flop, if you don't improve and they don't improve they have 6 outs or 25% equity. Add to this that if the LAGs ever fold when they are ahead, they have big problems.

On your fourth point, when they hit you will have outs. They also have no idea where they are if they hit something small. Furthermore, when they hit and you hit, they will lose a lot.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="#666666">Disclaimer: I don't really believe the following, but at the moment I don't see any source of profit in limit poker. </font>

Hello. Everyone knows I run bad. I always have and always will. It's mainly to do with my own sucking. However, it seems to me that...

A tight aggressive style is fatally flawed.

1) Tight means your starting cards are most often superior to your opponents' cards.

2) Aggressive means you bet and raise a lot.

3) Because of (2) your opponents are then free to fold when they have not improved; because of (1) this is not a mistake. You therefore get minimum money in the pot when you are winning.

4) Your opponents can call, raise, check-raise etc. at will when they hit. You therefore put maximum money in when you are losing.

(3) and (4) mean postflop disaster, which is in no way compensated for by your relatively small preflop edge.

Well, that's the way it feels when I look back over my hands. Over and over I win the blinds preflop or take the pot on the flop when I have something; and get taken for a multiple bet ride on multiple streets when I am second best.

Discuss.

Guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

This whole post is just wrong and it's easy to see why you are "running bad". Sorry to be blunt, but until you change your thinking your results won't change very much.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

the key to poker is to get more from your opponents when you are ahead than they get from you when you are behind. this can be done in a variety of ways: value betting, playing tightly (ie folding second best hands), hand reading and making correct plays (bluffing etc).

ultimately the TAG will win in almost all of the above categories, especially the 1st and 2nd.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is that not the case for everyone?


[/ QUOTE ]

The answer is clearly no. I remember reading a stats post proably over a year ago from a well respected poster who now plays reasonably high limits, the post detailed his career stats. It showed that the player had flown through the mid limits only playing ~20k hands at 5/10 and 10/20 and winning 2-3 BB per 100. Is that player a good player now, highly likely, was he a good player then possibly did he run good at that time all most certainly. Subsequently that player has had his own well documented downswing. However that initial good run helped build a bankroll and gave him confidence to draw upon when the bad times hit. A 100k hands of losing poker or 200k near breakeven is much harder to take mentaly (and to recover your bankroll) when it is not preceeded by an initial good or even average run. It 's impossible for any of us to know if you suck at poker but it does sound highly likely you have run bad for an extended period. Unfortunatly I suspect there is not much you can do that you are not already doing to improve the situation.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

also, i feel that a lot of previously good TAGs make a transition to LAG and get eaten alive by regulars. the transition from TAG to LAG (ie vpip 27/20 to vpip 33/24) is more than just playing more hands. it involves a significant change in playing style/philosophy. previously winning players can become losers just by adding these hands, i think.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]


This whole post is just wrong and it's easy to see why you are "running bad". Sorry to be blunt, but until you change your thinking your results won't change very much.


[/ QUOTE ]

Where does it say that this was "my thinking"? I'll give you a clue: it doesn't, in fact it explicitly says the opposite.

I was hoping for constructive analysis of the sources of profit in limit hold'em. Standard wisdom is to start from a basis of playing strong hands and playing them strongly, and add to your strategy from there. I wondered how this could be criticised and defended. Do you have anything useful to add?

Guy.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]
1) Tight means your starting cards are most often superior to your opponents' cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tight also applies to post-flop. It means not sticking with 2nd best and worse hands. This discipline can breakdown when you are running bad. It's easy to dump overcards when you're hitting your share of flops. When not hitting, you may find yourself sticking with these hands and others when you should clearly be folding.

Caveat: there are, of course, situations where continuing with OCs is correct. Making good decisions with these weak draws is a hallmark, IMO, of TAG post-flop play.

"When I get called on the river, I lose." This suggests your post-flop play may be leaking a bit. Running bad sucks. I paired the flop &gt;20% from October through January (s/b 32%). It is hard to raise AQo over and over again and fold the flop most of the time. Gets to the point where you don't want to see that bitch.

Good luck

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]

3) Because of (2) your opponents are then free to fold when they have not improved; because of (1) this is not a mistake. You therefore get minimum money in the pot when you are winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

They are free to fold but they are physically incapable of it. If you bet and they fold, it is because they had four high.

[ QUOTE ]

4) Your opponents can call, raise, check-raise etc. at will when they hit. You therefore put maximum money in when you are losing.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is true that they have options, but your ability to read their hands based upon which of these options they choose will allow you to minimize the damage by folding, taking free cards, etc--not maximize it. This analysis is probably only true in the specific circumstance where you have a strong hand and they just happen to have a stronger one.

[ QUOTE ]

Well, that's the way it feels when I look back over my hands. Over and over I win the blinds preflop or take the pot on the flop when I have something; and get taken for a multiple bet ride on multiple streets when I am second best.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the definition of running bad. Better luck!

Cartman

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


This whole post is just wrong and it's easy to see why you are "running bad". Sorry to be blunt, but until you change your thinking your results won't change very much.


[/ QUOTE ]

Where does it say that this was "my thinking"? I'll give you a clue: it doesn't, in fact it explicitly says the opposite.

I was hoping for constructive analysis of the sources of profit in limit hold'em. Standard wisdom is to start from a basis of playing strong hands and playing them strongly, and add to your strategy from there. I wondered how this could be criticised and defended. Do you have anything useful to add?

Guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
but at the moment I don't see any source of profit in limit poker

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm unsure what exact limits you play, but in my experience up to 200/400 there is a source for profits. It's just silly to say otherwise.

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone knows I run bad. I always have and always will. It's mainly to do with my own sucking

[/ QUOTE ]

Even though you have put you're little disclaimer up, I have just heard this statement too much from weak players who are basically breakeven but have the illusion that they are actually winning players and use running bad as an excuse for their results.


But the main reason I disgree with your post is poker is way to complicated to play well by playing one fixed strategy such as "Tag" and "lag". When I think of good players that I have played against, I don't think that they are a "Tag" or a "Lag", they have the characteristics of both and in the end just play good poker. You might be able beat non-thinking players with just a prototypical "tag" strategy, but soon as you face thinking players you better be able to do something more than follow a hand chart and telling yourself to be aggressive postflop.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

[ QUOTE ]

I have just heard this statement too much from weak players who are basically breakeven but have the illusion that they are actually winning players


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that's not me: I've always won money but never had any illusion that I was doing anything right. I am terrible at seeing what opponents do and thinking "Aha! if he's doing that, I should do this, and I'll make money." Like I say, I don't see where the money comes from.

Well, there's one obvious exception: if someone plays too many hands and pays off too much, then I get it. However, I'm not finding vast numbers of these at the tables these days; I find people who look like that's what they do, but in fact they keep turning over the best hand at the end. Which costs.

Anyway thanks for trying.

Guy.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

"2) Aggressive means you bet and raise a lot."

If u raise a lot postflop without a hand, well, there is ur answer.

"3) Because of (2) your opponents are then free to fold when they have not improved; because of (1) this is not a mistake. You therefore get minimum money in the pot when you are winning."

U are not looking for them to call down w nothing (well, u can hope) but to call down when they got something but something that is worse then u got. Holdem is a game of domination, and u - because of (1) - dominate them.


"4) Your opponents can call, raise, check-raise etc. at will when they hit. You therefore put maximum money in when you are losing."

Nope, u will often have a better hand when noone hit and when both hit because of (1).

Also, the idea that a TAG is always coming in with better hand is wrong. Even a TAG play bad hands around the blinds and we are around the blinds a lot if we play SH holdem.

Re: Why TAG is wrong - or - help me sort my brain out
 

but i also think a lot of more advanced players can add to winnings through a small increase in stats such as you posted. I think running between a lag and tag, depending on table image is really important. I like to run over a table until they start getting over agg and call happy against me, then slam on the brakes, play tag, and collect, always rotating as the table shifts.

To be most profitable, you cant be predictable, and sooo many players can recoginze you as a tag, and adjust accordingly.

FWIW, my vpip is 33 overall, and im smoking 20/40 right now (over only a 5k hand sample size). But i have lots of success at 5/10, 10/20, and 3/6 with a similar VPIP. I find a tighter VPIP is more successful at 12/,2/4, and 3/6 (maybe around 28). I am not sure if that is because the players dont really catch on to the tightness, or because they have a harder time finding folds, where i think we have a lot more FE at a 10/20 and 20/40 table.
cdl