Dear uNL: You are not good enough

[BevillTheDevil]

Im sure you can beat 200NL playin like 15/13/2 depends on what you consider to "beat" means but IMO it would be tougher w/ such a tight style it does open up the door for more +EV bluffin but to compensate for gettin pushed around your bluffin frequencies would have to increase as well. I dont think youd have a very great overall winrate tho unless you have sick table selection. But sure tag works in higher limits but 15/13/2 is much closer to nit than a tag IMO.

[hennnerz]

even if u are gd enough, no1 else is. ABC will be all i play from 2day onwards.

[ajmargarine]

I will have to say
that this is
indeed
a very nice post.

[jk1986]

Meh I think you overrate preflop.. Pretty sure you can beat a wide range of limits playing vastly different styles as long as you play well postflop. Saying one style isn't as good as another / just saying don't play LAG since you don't want to play mediocre hands is pretty tarded IMO.

I'm not trying to say that you can't nit it up and be very profitable, since you probably can get away with that even at much higher limits, but you're reasoning behind not playing LAG is IMO pretty flawed.

You consider that playing mediocre dominated starting hands pre is difficult, but fail to consider the fact that the ppls ranges against you shift, and other hands become much easier to play. I.e. once you establish a loose image you can stack off happily with TPTK and overpairs in some spots which would be tough if you had a better image.

You also have to consider that playing looser makes postflop all about valuebetting and not bluffing like playing a more solid style.

And as far as 3betting goes, ignore it if you want, thats fine, since ppl in micros will still stack off even though your 3betting range is real tight; however I again feel that it definately can be profitable when used carefully, when ppl start to take the mickey on the button, and only against solid players. And if they start to play back at your 3bets then you're totally set ease back and get action against wider ranges once you pick up bigger hands.

I hate making huge generalisations like the OP and myself in this post, IMO so little in poker is preflop anyways.


Cliff note: OP states a difficulty encountered with LAG play but ignores the advantages..

[corsakh]

[ QUOTE ]
Meh I think you overrate preflop..

[/ QUOTE ]

There are some good books written by Mr Sklansky. Unfortunately most of them are for limit. Nonetheless, one simple thought I remembered very well:

A player who checks the stone cold nuts behind on the river every single time he has them is making a much lesser mistake than a player making some particular poor preflop decision every time he faces it - callng TAG UTG raise with QJ for example.

Why? Cos you only have the nuts once in a moon. But you get dealt QJ every second orbit or so.

[jk1986]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Meh I think you overrate preflop..

[/ QUOTE ]

There are some good books written by Mr Sklansky. Unfortunately most of them are for limit. Nonetheless, one simple thought I remembered very well:

A player who checks the stone cold nuts behind on the river every single time he has them is making a much lesser mistake than a player making some particular poor preflop decision every time he faces it - callng TAG UTG raise with QJ for example.

Why? Cos you only have the nuts once in a moon. But you get dealt QJ every second orbit or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh but I'm not saying that playing TAG isn't easier to start of with / isn't v profitable, I'm simply saying that OP misrepresents looser play in the OP.

I mean he gives examples of mediocre hands in tough spots when looser play is really about maximising value from better hands because of your image!

[Jamougha]

You're definitely not good enough to know what hands you can and can't open profitably. No way in hell. Copy what successful players do preflop.

[calmB4storm]

[ QUOTE ]
Meh but I'm not saying that playing TAG isn't easier to start of with / isn't v profitable, I'm simply saying that OP misrepresents looser play in the OP.

I mean he gives examples of mediocre hands in tough spots when looser play is really about maximising value from better hands because of your image!

[/ QUOTE ]
If you're worried about your image at uNL, you need to find a better table.

[Waingro]

So basically you are saying: "Do not under any circumstances adapt to different table conditions. If raising JTs UTG will get you HU in position with your all time favorite drooler, do not do it."

I think occasionally doing different things at the poker table, if you think it is the right move, is vitally important to your winrate. I think it is more important to your winrate than any hand chart. But op is right, if you only do it because you are supposed to do it, don´t do it. Do it because you think it is the right thing to do. If you mess up, review the hand and figure out what went wrong. That would be my take on it.

[jk1986]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Meh but I'm not saying that playing TAG isn't easier to start of with / isn't v profitable, I'm simply saying that OP misrepresents looser play in the OP.

I mean he gives examples of mediocre hands in tough spots when looser play is really about maximising value from better hands because of your image!

[/ QUOTE ]
If you're worried about your image at uNL, you need to find a better table.

[/ QUOTE ]

People will notice how many hands you are playing, more and more regulars out there with PT and one-tabling fish will notice how many hands they play against you and how your "always betting" etc.

To believe that there is no image at uNL is wrong IMO, although I do agree that at fishier tables you're going to be able to play tighter and still find opponents with wide ranges post flop; if you were to play looser against the same opponents their ranges would definately change.

So I do think this statement is kinda ill-thoughtout and has no reasoning!

I wish Jamouga had put this whole thread to bed by putting in a nice explanation from a better player [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]