joseki
09-02-2004, 12:50 AM
This might be long and sophomoric and personal, but if anyone has any input, I'd appreciate it...
My basic question is: Is playing 'loose' required for a very aggressive approach to be profitable? And is tight-aggression less profitable than 'loose'-aggression?
I started playing poker about two months ago and have played over 30,000 hands of low-limit hold 'em in that time(.5/1, 1/2 & 2/4, between P-Stars and Empire). I've also read a bit and collected over 20,000 hands in poker tracker. I've averaged 2.9BB/100 hands, but I feel my play is far from optimal. I've improved my results by tightening way up from when I started (VP$IP~17%), but I'm having trouble seeing profit when I increase my aggression to the level many seem to advocate.
Maybe I just don't understand how to implement the LAG way, but when I try to play aggressively w/ mediocre hands (KJ, AT, Axs, middle-pair/big-kicker, top-pair/little-kicker, etc.) I just lose money. Do I need to increase stakes to profit from the aggro plays I read about on here? Is straightforward play the only way to profit at these limits?
I'm also wondering how to vary aggression through a session. I find myself playing my usual tight-moderate (ok, maybe passive) game for a while and then trying to ramp up aggression later. By then many players are leary of playing with me unless they hold strong hands, and I find that pots get smaller and that I only get called when I'm beat.
Anyway, I've just been wondering about balancing hand selection and aggression and hoped somebody might have some thoughts...
My basic question is: Is playing 'loose' required for a very aggressive approach to be profitable? And is tight-aggression less profitable than 'loose'-aggression?
I started playing poker about two months ago and have played over 30,000 hands of low-limit hold 'em in that time(.5/1, 1/2 & 2/4, between P-Stars and Empire). I've also read a bit and collected over 20,000 hands in poker tracker. I've averaged 2.9BB/100 hands, but I feel my play is far from optimal. I've improved my results by tightening way up from when I started (VP$IP~17%), but I'm having trouble seeing profit when I increase my aggression to the level many seem to advocate.
Maybe I just don't understand how to implement the LAG way, but when I try to play aggressively w/ mediocre hands (KJ, AT, Axs, middle-pair/big-kicker, top-pair/little-kicker, etc.) I just lose money. Do I need to increase stakes to profit from the aggro plays I read about on here? Is straightforward play the only way to profit at these limits?
I'm also wondering how to vary aggression through a session. I find myself playing my usual tight-moderate (ok, maybe passive) game for a while and then trying to ramp up aggression later. By then many players are leary of playing with me unless they hold strong hands, and I find that pots get smaller and that I only get called when I'm beat.
Anyway, I've just been wondering about balancing hand selection and aggression and hoped somebody might have some thoughts...