As an experiment, does it make sense to try hyper-aggression at 1/2?

[Wynton]

Recently, I've been playing mostly 3/6 six-max at stars (occasionally dipping my toe in 5/10 party). But I suspect that my play really suffers from some weak/tight play. More specifically, I think I'm playing too few hands.

A friend suggests that I move down to 1/2, just to experiment with being looser and hyper-aggressive (as he apparently is successful doing, at much higher limits). But I'm not sure whether this will be productive because there seem to be so many more calling stations at 1/2, even compared to 3/6 and 5/10.

For just 30 minutes last night, I tried loosening up considerably at 1/2, entering a lot more pots (always with raises). But I was getting a slew of callers from the outset (even before they had reason to suspect what I was doing). I ended up feeling that I learned little about what might work for me at 3/6 and 5/10 (let alone about what works at 1/2).

Anyway, should I continue with this experiment at 1/2? I could do this at 3/6, I suppose, except I think I'll be too self-conscious about the bankroll to pull it off. And for any experiment like this to yield any true insight, am I going to have to sustain such play for 10K hands or more?

[naphand]

I really do not understand the advocates of "testing" styles of play at $1/$2. Playing styles need to reflect your opponents and in a game where value-betting is the way to make beans and bluffing is pointless, anything you learn about hyper-aggro will not apply to other games - especially those where you are likely to bump heads with other very aggressive players.

Experimentation is fine, where it is approached with a defined system (for want of a better word) and with clear objectives.

You could try out a level lower where the play is not so hugely different, but to be frank, I think $3/$6 is as low as you can go if you want to learn anything that applies to $5/$10 or above. Either that or you are going to have to specifically seek out some tight/aggressive games. Playing during the morning (USA time) to mid-afternoon will give you tighter games. Friday nights etc. give you wilder games. After nearly 40K hands at $3/$6 I find myself again looking at my opponents and thinking how on earth they can play so badly, and feeling there is not much left to learn here. Time to move on.

If you want to experiment, look to play certain hands or hand groups differently but stay at the same limit. This way you control for variables such as game-type and opponents. If you are concerned about your bankroll you need to build it up a bit first, and set yourself a stop-limit for the "experiment". This way you stay in control and make valid comparisons.

I have been introducing hands/plays for the last 10K or so, based on my own research/thinking and one or two very pertinent comments picked up here on the forum and the archives. With a clear plan, and some kind of strategy you will find the occassional comment/post will hit you like a ton of sh*t. A whole load of blurb (i.e. all threads every day) and a vague notion of "being more aggressive" will get you probably a little further than nowhere, and frustratingly slowly.

Read, plan, research, think, observe, look for gems of insight, understand, act, review, adjust. Rinse and repeat.

[Silverback]

Its a sure way to lose all your chips.

When it works it will work well and you will think your onto a winner, then in one bad session you will lose most of your bankroll.

Your best bet is to be aware of the style but only play it when it will work at a table you are in, say table with tight blinds and button, and not another LAG who will go to war with you.

Agame where players call down with any pair it simple wont work.

Also playing loose aggressive is not just preflop, your much more likely to lose post flop when you continue to try and overpower players who have made hands.

Im like you in the respect Im constantly looking how I play my game, but Im learning thats its about learning many plays and when to play them.