![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
as mentioned before, the winning LAG players (long term) appear to be crazy and wild, but they generally tighten up considerably post flop. If one of their rag hands doesn't connect, they get out cheap for their PF raise/call. If it does hit, they bust the overplayed overpairs. also, there are a lot more losing LAG players than winning ones, so take it with a grain of salt when someone drags a monster pot with 92o.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I used to go on occasional jealousy tilt because I never seemed to have the biggest wins (unless I had the opportunity to repeatedly isolate hyper-aggressive bluff monkey and check-call him to death).
Then I realized that I was more consistently grinding out smaller wins and never having huge losses. Now, it's true that I probably play a more passive, lower-variance style that might not be quite as EV as I could play, but it's also a style that I am very comfortable playing, and one that I can abandon if I need to shift gears a bit to be profitable (although I might just look for an easier table if I find myself in that predicament). |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Because playing LAG is teh sexy and playing TAG is teh gay
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
bad layers generally think good players are too loose and getting lucky a lot.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
bad layers generally think good players are too loose and getting lucky a lot. [/ QUOTE ] I know for me that I start to curse the people who are playing 50% or more of their hands and beating me with crap starting hands. Then what happens I start to tilt and lose any judgement that I may have. Not that I have that must judgement. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I used to play a very tight aggressive game at limit hold'em. As I got better, I opened up my game. I play more pots, bluff some, get caught some, but get paid off much more then I bluff. But there are 2 answers to your question.
If you are playing low limit live, the biggest stack is probably a really loose player who is hot. The next day, that is the case again, but it is rarely the same person. The player above who stated that slow and steady usually wins the race. But when you get up to middle limit and above like I am in, image does mean something, and you can capitalize on that. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
the biggest stack is probably a really loose player who is hot. The next day, that is the case again, but it is rarely the same person. [/ QUOTE ] |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
But most of the time I go to a live casino, it isn't the by-the-book "tight aggressive" players who win. It's always someone who is playing some crazy hole cards too far and wins big; or someone who is setting up a worse fish by making terrible plays all night. [/ QUOTE ] What you are not seeing is htat tese LAGs have rebought multiple times, while you're still grinding a profit from your first buy in. They rebuy and rebuy, and when they hit a rush, they look like the WSOP champ of the world - but it cost them A LOT to get there, and they are rarely breaking even. Meanwhile, playing TAG, you're grinding out a profit, that exceeds the LAGs in the long term, has lower variance, and is something you can live on. AB |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Every book I have and virtually every strategy post here advocates a particular style of play, roughly tight aggressive. And tight aggressive may well be correct playing 400,000 hands on-line, multitabling 10 tables for months. But most of the time I go to a live casino, it isn't the by-the-book "tight aggressive" players who win. It's always someone who is playing some crazy hole cards too far and wins big; or someone who is setting up a worse fish by making terrible plays all night. This is true both in limit and in no-limit. Even in limit, it seems to me the best players are the LAGs who read well, not the tight aggressive players. Am I misobserving here? Is the sample size too small? Or are these books just wrong. I just came back from five days playing at the Wynn and Bellagio, and every session, every game, the winner was some eccentric making weird plays. [/ QUOTE ] Most of it is simply that there are probably more LAGs than TAGs and LAGs have higher variance per time unit. Since there's a limit on how long a person can realistically play, that means most of the truly big stacks will be built by LAGs. A very small part of it is that the very best players are LAGs. There's no doubt that TAG is a fundamentally more sound way to play but there are very few live games where a great player can't make more money by playing LAG than by playing TAG. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Think SLAG
|
![]() |
|
|