LC - You People Need To Give Villains More Credit From Time To Time

[KilgoreTrout]

Apologies for preaching, but a number of newer posters here either think they're Johnny Freakin Chan of the 1/2 tables or they think their opponents are Rockefellers spewing chips.

I know it's the cool thing to do, calling your opponents lagtards and donks, but be sure to update your reads throughout the session. Even bad players tighten or loosen up after they've been smacked around.

Yes, there are lots of morans at the tables, but just because someone plays loose/aggro does not a lagtard make. I'm sure some of you have lagtard notes on me.

When posting hands, a general read is okay, but I'd like to see more info on how the villain is playing at that particular time. Game dynamics shift quickly over a session, and even the dimmest of villains can adjust.

IOW, don't let your own hubris cloud your judgement.

That is all.

[RonWR]

are you unstuck in time?

1-2 players are 90% lagtards

[HoneyBadger]

[ QUOTE ]
are you unstuck in time?

1-2 players are 90% lagtards

[/ QUOTE ]
Rubbish. At virtually every table I play there's at least one (LAG)TAG with stats like 28/19/2.3 or so, and usually some other player who maybe seems a bit too loose, and a little bit too aggressive, but well within reason, ie. 35/20/2.5 They actually play quite well. Then you have the typical 60/10/0.6 passives, and finally there's usually some tight nit with stats like 16/9/3.2, who didn't get the note it isn't full ring. Only occasionally do I see the 60/40/2.8 type.

[HoneyBadger]

I think earlier one of my larger mistakes was thinking a 35/20/2.5 is an idiot and should be played back at accordingly. That cost me a lot of money.

[thepizzlefosho]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
are you unstuck in time?

1-2 players are 90% lagtards

[/ QUOTE ]
Rubbish. At virtually every table I play there's at least one (LAG)TAG with stats like 28/19/2.3 or so, and usually some other player who maybe seems a bit too loose, and a little bit too aggressive, but well within reason, ie. 35/20/2.5 They actually play quite well. Then you have the typical 60/10/0.6 passives, and finally there's usually some tight nit with stats like 16/9/3.2, who didn't get the note it isn't full ring. Only occasionally do I see the 60/40/2.8 type.

[/ QUOTE ]
i'm about 28/21 and I consider myself a TAG. once again you show your full ring colors you nit. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
(j/k)

[HoneyBadger]

In full ring these days "tight" is often 15/10 in my games. I even see 11/8 at times... I would consider 28/21 good at short handed, ie. semi-tight, but I think semi-tight is good. I meant (LAG)TAG as being between tight-aggressive and semi-tight-aggressive. An actual TAG I'm thinking more of 24/17 (which is generally what full ring players end up at if they pretend to play from middle position in short handed).

[thepizzlefosho]

[ QUOTE ]
In full ring these days "tight" is often 15/10 in my games. I even see 11/8 at times... I would consider 28/21 good at short handed, ie. semi-tight, but I think semi-tight is good. I meant (LAG)TAG as being between tight-aggressive and semi-tight-aggressive. An actual TAG I'm thinking more of 24/17 (which is generally what full ring players end up at if they pretend to play from middle position in short handed).

[/ QUOTE ]

I pretty much agree with all of that. I actually think it is pretty tough to beat most 3/6 and up SH games if you play "TAG" 6max (ie 24/17 or whatever). There are enough laggy players that if you don't start opening up and iso-raising after them (and increasing your button steals) it really is hard to make much.