Is TAG style the most optimal for consistant profit?

[RichGambler]

I been playing TAG for a long time now and I am looking to improve my game - my current BB/100 is at 4+ at 1/2 NL and 2/4NL
1
The way I see it is that TAG style has much smaller variance then playing LAG + more consistent profit+ I can play 9 tables easy when playing tight.

From my poker DB only 13.6% of hands are profitable in full ring so in my opinion why play more hands which are lossing $$$$?

If you answer is - to be unpredictable then I have to say that its too much of price to pay for that unpredictability.

Can any LAG who play 25% show me screenshot of more then 16% of profitable hands in full ring 100k hands?

Whenever someone says I was running so bad for the last 3 months it makes me laugh. There is no such thing as running cold for 3 months. There is either you are not good enough for that level or your playing style isn't good vs those players which you are playing.

So far I am not conviced that LAG's can do better then TAG in the long run.

Because:
1. Variance is much less playing TAG instead of LAG that means less tilting and that means more $$$ saved if you tilt.
2 You can play 9 tables online at 1 moment that means more $$$$ at the same time.
3. Once in a while to increase your rate you can do reraises with nothing because of your tight image and your raise will have a lot of weight.
4. There is almost no ways to exploit TAG player and make $$$ from him in the long run.

[mvdgaag]

[ QUOTE ]
1. Variance is much less playing TAG instead of LAG that means less tilting and that means more $$$ saved if you tilt.

[/ QUOTE ]


That's why you should not tilt easily playing LAG

[ QUOTE ]
2 You can play 9 tables online at 1 moment that means more $$$$ at the same time.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is a valid argument. You won't be able to play this amount of tables at higher stakes though.

[ QUOTE ]
3. Once in a while to increase your rate you can do reraises with nothing because of your tight image and your raise will have a lot of weight.

[/ QUOTE ]


The beginning of a LAG style [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
4. There is almost no ways to exploit TAG player and make $$$ from him in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

I win more against nits than calling stations. Just bet and they'll fold. Most tight players are not agressive enough (making it possible to steal a lot or push them of a low flop) have bad preflop skills (they don't get to 'play poker' very often) or are way too agressive (Have been waiting for a hand and don't want to give it up)... If I can put a tag player in one of these categories it is very easy and quite safe to exploit them.


If you can't 'play poker' and win or at least break even with medicore hands, than you should play only hands that are hard to make losing hands in the long run: TAG.

Mixing in more hands will make your good hands pay off more and will show an extra profit themselves if played correctly. The better you are postflop the more hands you'll be able to play for a profit. Hands that are breakeven themselves will influence your image and therefore your opponents. They will boost the profitability of the better hands. This might be reason enough to play them.

I regret I've got no real big sample to show you since I have been using pokeroffice only for the last month. I play a TAGish style myself aswell, so It'll be hard to filter out the LAGgy sessions and my results won't be very impressive, although I reach 4.8/100 when playing 35/25 over a 5K sample (I know, way too small, but it's an indication).

I'm also quite sure you are correct that TAG is more profitable at lower stakes levels where you can play profitable at 9 tables at a time.

But in the end LAG has the most potential for profit. It is just a lot harder and takes a lot more attention, so no massive multitabling.

GL

[Number27]

[ QUOTE ]
From my poker DB only 13.6% of hands are profitable in full ring so in my opinion why play more hands which are lossing $$$$?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is faulty logic. The value of many hands depends on how you play it, what position you are in, and what opponent you are playing against. To assume that only 13% of hands are profitable is ridiculous.

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever someone says I was running so bad for the last 3 months it makes me laugh. There is no such thing as running cold for 3 months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again untrue, especially for live players. If you are playing live you could see 30 hands an hour for 30 hours a week and only see 10,000 hands. If you have not had a 10,000 hand downswing then you are either very lucky or simply do not have a big enough sample size.

As for deception: good luck playing ABC poker against good high stakes players. You would be destroyed.

Finally, you probably never play where every player at the table has 300-400 big blinds. If you have and still play that tight you are destined to lose. Deep stack cash game NL is unbeatable if you play your hands face up, which it sounds like you are doing.

[ QUOTE ]
4. There is almost no ways to exploit TAG player and make $$$ from him in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes there are definitely ways to exploit tight aggressive play, especially if the tag is deep stacked and out of position. It is even easier to exploit a tighty if he tilts; and alot of them do. I love it when a tight aggressive guys stacks off with AA OOP to my T7o for 300bbs and then bemoans what a bad beat it was.

There is nothing wrong playing tight aggressive and it is definitely more consistent; but many would argue as to overall profitability. Personally, I switch back and forth depending on the other players in the game.

[RichGambler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
From my poker DB only 13.6% of hands are profitable in full ring so in my opinion why play more hands which are lossing $$$$?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is faulty logic. The value of many hands depends on how you play it, what position you are in, and what opponent you are playing against. To assume that only 13% of hands are profitable is ridiculous.



Please show me a screen shot where I would see more then 16% of profitable hands full ring.

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever someone says I was running so bad for the last 3 months it makes me laugh. There is no such thing as running cold for 3 months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again untrue, especially for live players. If you are playing live you could see 30 hands an hour for 30 hours a week and only see 10,000 hands. If you have not had a 10,000 hand downswing then you are either very lucky or simply do not have a big enough sample size.


Obviously I was talking about live players. I was talking about hardcore online players. Who makes 50000+ hands per months if they didn't make profit in 150000 that means only 1 thing. They suck and they can't beat those players.

As for deception: good luck playing ABC poker against good high stakes players. You would be destroyed.



Note there is a huge difference between ABC "predictable poker" and good tight player who plays about 13% hands and raises 7-8% and steals blinds about 25%

LAG is very easy to exploit:

If you raise over 20% of hands I'll start testing how you react to 3x reraises.

How much % C-Bet you make if its more then 40% it means you have air. I'll be floating and take down the pot on turn.

If you still bet the turn it means Ill be hitting my cards 30% of the time and let you bet for me on flop and turn.



Finally, you probably never play where every player at the table has 300-400 big blinds. If you have and still play that tight you are destined to lose. Deep stack cash game NL is unbeatable if you play your hands face up, which it sounds like you are doing.

[ QUOTE ]
4. There is almost no ways to exploit TAG player and make $$$ from him in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes there are definitely ways to exploit tight aggressive play, especially if the tag is deep stacked and out of position. It is even easier to exploit a tighty if he tilts; and alot of them do. I love it when a tight aggressive guys stacks off with AA OOP to my T7o for 300bbs and then bemoans what a bad beat it was.



I am not talking about some stupid TAG players who cant lay down AA or KK on ragged flop. It's almost imposible to make $$$ for a LAG out of TAG because your won pots will be small but lost pots will be huge.
My stats at W%SD is 60%
All ins won 82%
Went to showdown 23%

There is nothing wrong playing tight aggressive and it is definitely more consistent; but many would argue as to overall profitability. Personally, I switch back and forth depending on the other players in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Number27]

[ QUOTE ]
LAG is very easy to exploit:

If you raise over 20% of hands I'll start testing how you react to 3x reraises.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are assuming that you have the oppurtunity. Most loose aggressive players are not just open raising trash every hand. They are betting and reraising in position far more often than a tight aggressive player does. If you are reraising me out of position, then I can either 3bet you or flat call and force you to play a bloated pot out of position.

[ QUOTE ]
How much % C-Bet you make if its more then 40% it means you have air. I'll be floating and take down the pot on turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again you are making sweeping generalizations about how loose aggressive players play. They do not simply decide to bet or raise for no reason. They are able to determine player tendencies, hand ranges, and board textures very well. If you cannot do those things you should not play loose aggressive to begin with.

We do not just say: to hell with it, my c-bet % is not high enough I am going to 4bet the nit...

[ QUOTE ]
If you still bet the turn it means Ill be hitting my cards 30% of the time and let you bet for me on flop and turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again most lag players do so with position. If you are floating bloated pots out of position you are going to lose.

Also, have you noticed that all of your counter strategies include loosening up yourself. If you are constantly 3-betting and floating flops then you are not playing tight aggressive.

Furthermore, I do not think you fully grasp what good loose aggressive play is. I think you look at statistics for players and lump good loose aggressive players in with laggro retards who just bet for sake of betting.

Durrr, Aba, Ivey, and many more play loose aggressive and they seem to do alright for themselves. The argument is not whether a tag will win more than a maniac donkey. It is whether or not he will win more than a good lag. Personally, I think great lags have a higher win rate than great tags; but at the price of higher variance.

[mvdgaag]

My sample for LAG games is very, very small (5k hands, because I haven't got software for a long time) but I seem to play about 40% (67 hands) for a profit 10% breakeven and the rest a small loss. Can someone that considers himself LAG post his results for the sake of this discussion?

[RobNottsUk]

Surely the answer is "generally" yes; the question is trivial. It might not make most profit, but you're hard to beat tough player and a consistent winner.

More interesting question, is when the skilled TAG, will loosen up and take advantage of solid rep. Thinking more about opponents, will mean more profit per 100, but probably not so good for farming lots of tables.

[cdlarmore]

BEEEAAAUTIFUL POST!!!

The way I like to run my ship is between lag and tag, Lag it up hard until they think your a tuna boat, then run tight until they realize your peddling the nuts, then switch back again...
running specifically one way is a sure way to ensure that your not as profitable as possible.

P.s. I dont mind playing aginst tags, and i can make money off them, especially at 6 max.

[Omahakiller]

TAG works for me...of course you have to mix up your game (at least at higher limits - at lower limits ppl aren't too aware, hehe)...

Also...all the books says you should be TAG ;-)

[PantsOnFire]

The most consistent profit comes from playing a style that matches up best versus the types of opponents you are up against. And I don't mean the table, I mean each individual. And further to that, you can do even better if you set the slide on your deception/straightforward play to just the right spot for each individual.

I would concede that this might become diffieult as you multi-table.

And if you ever play in a tournament, you cannot adopt one style and stick with it. I suppose that's why I find tournaments the most enjoyable type of NL holdem.