Maximum bet and agression

[CraigJ]

I'm going to try posting again. I must not have been clear as to what I was trying to find out in my last post. I was looking for a discussion on agression and the size of the maximum bet. No one really answered my question yet. I am not arguing you need to play hands agressively. I am just wondering how much of a realtionship the type of table you are playing has on the effectiveness of agression. I am assuming that agression would be less effective on a .5/1 table than it would be a 2/4, and a 2/4 table less effective than on a 4/8 table. Therefore on a .5/1 you might see more hands going to the river and more people getting "LUCKY". Consider No Limit, there are a lot more instances of the flop not even being seen than on small or micro-limit holdem. And on .5/1 almost always the hand goes to the river. Many more times than when playing no limit.

Am I correct in my assumption of agreession becoming less powerful as the maximum bet dercreases?

[davelin]

With the lower stakes and more people staying in, aggression is even more important to push your equity edge.

[DMBFan23]

less powerful in the sense that most people will see a showdown anyway, yes. this is why it is critical to be aggressive with one's good hands - you said it yourself, they aint folding.

[CraigJ]

Yes, that is what I mean. Less powerful in the sense that you can't drive as many players out.

[davelin]

Let's put this in a real world example. Because of the stakes, more people are calling and going to the river because it doesn't cost much to call. Let's say the situation after the flop is -

Hero - TPTK (34%)
Opponent 1 - OESD (29%)
Opponent 2 - Mid pocket pair (13%)
Opponent 3 - Gutshot draw (14%)
Opponent 4 - Low pocket pair (6%)
Opponent 5 - Overcard and backdoor flush draw (5%)

The numbers in ()'s are each hand's equity from Twodimes.net. Assuming everyone will call down to the river, do you see why you would want to be aggressive and put more money in the pot?

[davelin]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, that is what I mean. Less powerful in the sense that you can't drive as many players out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Less powerful in driving others out = More powerful in pushing equity edges.

[DMBFan23]

[ QUOTE ]
Therefore on a .5/1 you might see more hands going to the river and more people getting "LUCKY"...And on .5/1 almost always the hand goes to the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

there's a discussion of this in SSHE, about adapting to this style...semi bluffing draws less often (I almost never semibluff without a read), and value betting hands like top pair no kicker/middle pair ace kicker more often.

I think people were confused by the phrase "effectiveness of aggression" - it's not effective in getting people to fold, but it's effective in making you money /images/graemlins/smile.gif