[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
but this book seems to teach a weak tight style

[/ QUOTE ]I don't agree, though I do see how this perception might arise.

It all goes back to REM. The authors put opponents on ranges and made the proper plays based on the equity they had against those ranges. It is not weak tight to fold against an opponent whose range will get the best of you when you get it all in at a certain SPR. However, this is not to say you make those folds in all situations and against all opponents. If you find someone trying to "exploit" you, then you re-asses their range, which changes your equity, when then changes your play (and your willingness to commit).

For example, something I've thought a lot about since reading this book is they typical tournament players I've played against. I come from the donkament world before playing cash, and one thing I know is that the average player in a tournament is a lot looser and willing to call off weaker. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that at low stakes, an SPR of 13 with a top pair hand might not even be bad against a lot of these players (that is, TPTK is the virtual nuts against these guys and you can pot, pot, pot and expect to be ahead the majority of the time when you are called). Of course, potting three streets for value with TPTK will get you killed in most cash games, but it just illustrates the point that you have to adjust to the game you are in.

The point is, SPR isn't a "system" that opponents will be able to figure out and exploit as long as we are doing it right. That is, they should not be able to say "Well, he builds x pot with y type of hand, so I will adjust", because if we are on our game, when they start trying to exploit us we will re-adjust and start building a z pot with that same y type of hand because it will now become a more profitable size pot against our opponents new range. But of course, this isn't anything new, this is the same old poker- adjusting and re-adjusting. The only difference between this and non-SPR play is that now we have an additional tool in our arsenal.

To bring it back around, we might make a certain fold against an opponent believing that we cannot go forward profitably against his range. That is not weak/tight- it is good poker. However, if new information emerges that tells us our opponent has a wider range than we initially thought (or has now widened his range), now we don't make that fold because we have greater equity. We should be playing attention to opponent tendencies so that we know how to apply SPRs and make decisions at the commitment threshold.