The Running Game

[ML4L]

So, I was sitting around watching the Clemson/Texas A&M football game. I love college football, and part of what I love is the running game. I like watching teams that run the ball fifty times a game, teams that run the triple option, and teams whose quarterback will run for 100 yards.

You won't find any of those things in the NFL. One of the major reasons is because an offense based entirely around the running game couldn't win in the NFL. A strong running game stems from dominating the other team's line. In the NFL, the talent level is too even amongst teams for that to happen. Another thing that the running game (specifically, the option play) relies upon is mistakes. For the option to work, you need people to blow assignments, miss tackles, take bad angles, and make other fundamental mistakes. In the NFL, the players are too well-coached, too skilled, and too fundamentally sound to make the mistakes that allow the option to thrive.

What does this have to do with poker? Loose-aggressive play in no-limit is like the running game in football. It works best when your opponents are no good. It works when your opponents aren't fundamentally sound, when they make the same mistakes over and over, and when they are so weak and helpless that they know exactly what you're doing and still can't stop it.

There's been an aura surrounding loose-aggressive play on this forum as of late. Somehow, people have come to believe that it is the proper way to play poker, the panacea for average play. Don't get me wrong; it has its place in poker, just as the option play has its place in football. But, what everyone needs to understand that the strength of loose-aggressive play lies in your opponents' weaknesses.

Some people like to railbird the big games. When they do so, they get to watch a number of loose-aggressive players do pretty well for themselves. When they see these players, they view them as poker experts, poker superstars. When I watch these players, I see Tommie Frazier. For those who haven't heard of him, Tommie Frazier was a quarterback who led Nebraska to back-to-back national titles. He broke countless records and is one of the best college quarterbacks to ever play. He ran the option. And, he never played a single down in the NFL. The main reason being: his skills were one-dimensional. So, as good as he was in college, he wasn't a viable player at the highest level.

If Tommie Frazier were allowed to play college football as long as he wanted to, he'd probably still be playing and winning today. Unfortunately, you can't exercise game selection in football. In poker, however, you can figure out what you're good at and what works in a certain type of game. Then, you can play only in games that suit your strengths. You can play college football forever. And, you can get rich doing so...

But, make no mistake. Don't confuse loose-aggressive play for a dominant strategy. Because, if you play more hands than your opponents and play them too aggressively, you will lose if your opponents are any good. And, don't confuse every loose-aggressive winning player for an expert. Some might be experts who wisely adjust to game conditions. But, many others don't understand poker; they are merely fortunate that they play against opponents who can't stop their running game.

If such players were to ever find themselves in the NFL, they would be in for a rude awakening. They would keep running the ball, because that's all they know how to do. But, they would soon find that the running game doesn't work against strong competition.

To succeed in the NFL and in poker, you need a balanced attack.

ML4L

[creedofhubris]

I hear what you're saying.

I also know that the biggest consistent winner in the 10-20 game I play at is a total LAG. Comes in with a raise with any two suited, any two connected, any two paint, any position. Granted, it's not the biggest game out there, but this guy is killing it, day after day.

I guess we all don't have our anti-LAG weapons down.

What would you say they are, besides the preflop reraise?

[JMP300z]

Our advantages: Position, Predictability, and Passiveness.

-JP

[PassiveCaller]

Good post, best players knows when to use the running game, and the passing game to his advantage as do the best teams...

[mcb]

great post. people must change gears based on how the game is being played. simply being lag can be a disaster, as i have experienced.

[Big_Jim]

Nice post.

Even good opponents don't know what to do when you're playbook is big enough, and you pick your plays based on what you know about the D.

[craze9]

Cool post. A good take on what is suddenly a hot topic and a nice analogy.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't confuse loose-aggressive play for a dominant strategy. Because, if you play more hands than your opponents and play them too aggressively, you will lose if your opponents are any good.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you say that LAG play is not a dominant strategy, I assume your implication is that there is no single dominant strategy. With that I agree. But if you are suggesting that there is a specific strategy that is superior...

The fact is that a loose aggressive strategy can be highly effective at any level. And there are no simple counter-strategies, because a good LAG player is not actually set in a specific mode of play. I would say that "loose-aggressive" is primarily an image. Just because a player has been labeled a "LAG" doesn't mean he isn't adaptable. Versatility and the ability to adapt to changing conditions are necessary for any genuinely good player.

I disagree with the thought that "any good" player can easily overcome a LAG strategy, and with the implication that this type of strategy has no place in the NFL/big games. I have seen lots of players who consider themselves "good," players who have built bankrolls playing nl holdem, players who are very used to winning, suddenly start losing and losing a lot when faced w/ certain LAG strategies in certain metagames and all they usually do is comment on how bad the players beating them are. I'd even go so far as to say that the VAST majority of WINNING nl partypoker players would have a real tough time in some major LAG games. I mean why arent the partypoker rocks lining up to play Mahatma? Because he'd own them.

Overall I agree with most of what you say and certainly with the spirit of the post, but I think it's important to note that the term LAG is largely undefined. In fact I'd say the only thing that all the good LAG players have in common is that they are loose preflop. And if you really think that every player who is "any good" can stop a LAG in his tracks, well, then I think you're underestimating the power of the dark side.

[Niwa]

Great post as always.

[aggie]

I come onto 2+2 trying to escape my misery....I see ML has posted and figure it will be good so it's the first one i open.....And this is the first sentance i read:

[ QUOTE ]
So, I was sitting around watching the Clemson/Texas A&M football game

[/ QUOTE ]

I wanted to kill myself....Thanks bud!

[Niwa]

?