How tight is too tight?

[ianlippert]

I am currently playing 1/2 Limit, and am about to start playing 2/4 when I hit $1200. I've been scouting the 2/4 and see that this is where things start to get tough. From what I've been reading ppl seem to play with a VPIP of 20 or more. Of the last 7500 hands I've averaged 14.5 and am afraid It will be too tight for the higher levels. On the other hand I have also been averaging 5BB/hr and have come to play the tight game really well.

I know poker isnt a game of simplistic stats, but of outplaying your opponents. But at what point does a tight player get eaten by the blinds? What is the bare theoretical set of hands that could beat the blinds/rake?

Also to those winning players with 20+ VPIP what exactly are you playing? It seems like you would have to be playing suited connectors, suited aces, etc from all positions to get a vpip over 20. I have always found these to be big losers in limit.

What should I expect at the higher limits?

[RedManPlus]

First...
Get Small Stakes Hold'em by Sklansky et al.
Published January 2005...
Which is aimed at $2/$4 and $3/$6...
And recommends playing more hands than you do.

Second...
"How tight is too tight?" is an excellent question.

I've been data mining Party $2/$4 for a month...
As an interesting mathematical exercise...
So I have 35,000 hands of very recent play.

Most of the winning players are 15% to 22% VP$IP...
And Pre-Flop Raise > 9%.

There are virtually no consistent winners below 15% VP$IP...
So at $2/$4 there is "too tight"... and it's below 15%.

But there is no magic number.

You can do well anywhere in the 16-22% range...
Depending on your style.

The most important thing it seems...
Is how well you play post flop.

My $0.02

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[stlip]

I think the 2+2 consensus would be that 20-22 percent is optimal for 1/2 and that moving up to 2/4 this drops to more like 17-18. However, the drop in VPIP for most players will come as a natural outgrowth of the more aggressive play at the higher level. More pots are raised early in the betting, more end up being contested two- and three-way rather than four- and five-way so a lot of hands you could play in LP or in the blinds at 1/2 become folds.

Your question about what is too tight is interesting. But I don't think it is the blinds that are the problem. I think at least some of the fish at 1/2 -- and maybe even a handful at .5/1 -- do recognize extremely tight play and save their wildest aggression for pots with the other loose players and players like me (VPIP 22-24) who play in enough hands to seem to blend into their world.

That's just my unsystematic observation. Whether that's true or not at micro limits, there's little question that at 2/4 enough players would be noticing overly tight play and the result would consistently mean a bet or two less in too many pots when you make your best hands.

[xPuns1her]

I heard Sklansky is an incredible poker mind but he sucks at actually playing... I found that quite amusing... reminds me of a friend.

[Little Fishy]

[ QUOTE ]
But at what point does a tight player get eaten by the blinds? What is the bare theoretical set of hands that could beat the blinds/rake?

[/ QUOTE ]

the rake is much worse at 1/2 than it is at 2/4 so looking at it this way you should play tighter at 2/4, i think the difference is that the players at higher limits are going to start noticing your tightness more and not paying you off. also 2/4 is a little bit tighter than 1/2 so playing a litte looser can take down more pots.

a lot of the hands you play should be skill dependent.. for instance a really good player can make a lot of hands that are -EV from early position for me +EV out of the same position. i think that the more skill you gain post flop the greater number of hands you can afford to play preflop.

I also think that loosening up greatens your variance... I'd like to get a second opinion on this one though.

[Wally Weeks]

[ QUOTE ]
I heard Sklansky is an incredible poker mind but he sucks at actually playing... I found that quite amusing... reminds me of a friend.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmm...troll.

Thank you for your nonrelevent BS addition to the thread.

[-Skeme-]

2/4 is still very loose.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]


the rake is much worse at 1/2 than it is at 2/4 so looking at it this way you should play tighter at 2/4, i think the difference is that the players at higher limits are going to start noticing your tightness more and not paying you off. also 2/4 is a little bit tighter than 1/2 so playing a litte looser can take down more pots.



[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not too sure about that. My agression factor so far at the 1/2 tables is over 5. I've always felt like ppl equate your preflop play with how tight/agressive you are. They automatically assume that because you play very few hands you are a weak player. But I'm not, I am very aggresive post flop and I find ppl calling me to the river when I do have a hand. I like my style, and I think I will stick with it until things start going bad.

As for SSH, I've read it. I have no problem with loose games. I guess I am just wondering what types of playes you are going to make at the higher levels. Are you going to call a raise with Axs just because you can 'outplay' your opponent? I find limit is mostly about showing down the best hand.

[Jason B]

[ QUOTE ]
2/4 is still very loose.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have been playing up to 10/20 on party the last 4 weeks and notice these tables can be as loose as the 2/4 tables. Full of people trying to give their money away.

[stlip]

I think most people would say that an ag factor of 5 is way too high. It sounds like you avoid quite a few marginal situations that are long-term +EV and possibly that your bets and raises are met with too many folds and simple call downs.

[ianlippert]

Can you give me an example of some marginal +EV plays that you have found that I might be missing?

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the 2+2 consensus would be that 20-22 percent is optimal for 1/2 and that moving up to 2/4 this drops to more like 17-18.

[/ QUOTE ]


I certainly don't know if a vote was taken when I was out of the room, but I would vehemently argue that anything under 20 is being far too tight, well past games that are 2/4. When you start talking around 22, that's fine, but under 22 I think you're leaving money on the table especially with how the game has developed.

However, if you are worried about your post flop play, absolutely, keep your preflop calls to the lowest percentage possible. You will still show a profit - just not as much if you played a few more hands (but if you play those few more hands and play them poorly, you will lose money, so it is a risk).

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[stlip]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you give me an example of some marginal +EV plays that you have found that I might be missing?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just from your numbers it's hard to say, but I would guess that there have to be a fair number of hands you fold where you don't have the best hand after the flop or a draw to the nut hand, but you do still have pot odds to make it worthwhile continuing. Off the top of my head, likely suspects include some overcard hands, middle pairs with a good overcard or other drawing hands.

Small PP hands (22-66) are interesting but tricky. With your VIP as low as it is I imagine you fold most of those preflop.

I think when you hit a bad run (I've had several in my 25k 1/2 hands, frustrating as hell but I've really sharpened my game because of them) you'll take a hard look at your game and find that the hands and situations you play are not quite enough for a consistent good win rate.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
Just from your numbers it's hard to say, but I would guess that there have to be a fair number of hands you fold where you don't have the best hand after the flop or a draw to the nut hand

[/ QUOTE ]

VPIP has nothing to do with post flop play

[ QUOTE ]
, but you do still have pot odds to make it worthwhile continuing. Off the top of my head, likely suspects include some overcard hands, middle pairs with a good overcard or other drawing hands.


[/ QUOTE ]

I know when to draw to overcards, If I raised preflop with something like TT/99 and the flop comes Axx, I usually bet out again. I dont feel like I am a weak post flop player.

[ QUOTE ]

Small PP hands (22-66) are interesting but tricky. With your VIP as low as it is I imagine you fold most of those preflop.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is more of what I am trying to figure out. You are right, I fold low pocket pairs in early position. If many ppl are coming in, or it get folded to me in late position I will call and raise respectively. So do you play low pockets from any position? I find it hard to believe that calling UTG with 22 is a +EV play, unless you are at an extremely loose pasive table.

Its hard to look in poker tracker at a specific hand and say "see this hand is +ev" because the ev of many marginal hands varies a lot according to the specific situation. I found, even at the lower levels (.01/.02, and .25/.50) low pockets were still losers, even at loose tables.

In any case I'm going to stick with my style until I find a level I cant beat. But I'd like to hear from ppl who are winners at 2/4 and above with 20K+ hands.

[RedManPlus]

Here's a follow-up to my first post...
This is all $2/$4 Party Poker April-May 2005...
After data mining 37,000 hands.

Looking for winning players...
Is not as easy at it might seem...
Because a lot of bad players can have a good month.

So I've been using this filter...
To filter out players that "play correctly":

>300 hands, > 9% Pre Flop Raise, VPIP < 22%

You get 36 players as follows:

http://www.pathcom.com/~gzt/24all.jpg

Break even after 219 hours play as a group...
Not impressive.

Now let's look at a subset of these 36...
Those with VP$IP under 15%:

http://www.pathcom.com/~gzt/24under.jpg

9 of the original 36...
This is a small and losing group.
After 57 hours: -2.28 bet/hour.
This group is too tight for $2/$4...
And is not getting enough action to be profitable.

If you eliminate the Rocks...
You get 25 players at VPIP 15 to 22 with PFR > 9%...
With a BB/100 of +0.83

This is interesting...
Because you could code a Bot that does this.

Of course...
Most of the money is made with good Post Flop Play...
So taking it to +2.0 and higher BB/100...
Is an art form that takes time and ** talent ** to develop.

And looser than 22% ????

Here it is:

http://www.pathcom.com/~gzt/24over.jpg

Only 3 players, but you can eliminate the 51% guy...
So only 2 players out of 38 take VP$IP into the mid-20s.
But it can work if you play well.

All this tells you...
16-25 VP$IP and >9% PFR is a starting point...
The easy part.
On this foundation you develop solid Post Flop Play.

I'm now exporting 100% of the data from PT...
And may have some interesting analysis...
On the next few weeks.

For example...
I now have 39,000 "known starting hands"...
(Only about 13% of starting hands are known...
Usually the ones that make it to the showdown)...
And can start confirming the advice in SSH.

Hold 'em has amazing complexity as you dig deeper...

For example...
Based on my limited sample...
More money is made with suited connectors like 98s...
Than with Gapped Suited Broadway hands like QTs...
Because both good and bad players then to overplay the latter.

rm+

/images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[ianlippert]

what happens when you sort the tight preflop players and take out the ones with AF<2. Tight preflop play could reflect of weak post flop players. If they are getting pushed out of every pot, they are going to be big losers. Like I said I'm not weak post flop.

[stlip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just from your numbers it's hard to say, but I would guess that there have to be a fair number of hands you fold where you don't have the best hand after the flop or a draw to the nut hand

[/ QUOTE ]

VPIP has nothing to do with post flop play


[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't talking about VIP I was talking about your stratospheric post flop ag. Most of us get a certain number of backdoor draws with overcards, middle pairs, etc. Often these are worth calling and continuing, but you do so little calling vs. raising and betting -- even compared with highly aggressive players -- that you ought to consider what's behind this a little more deeply.

It's not a question of being tough enough vs. weak as you keep trying to frame it. We all like to get TPTK or draws to nut flushes or PP with only one overcard on the flop.

But what about the other times. Do you just not get some of these other cards the rest of us do from time to time, or does your game perhaps lacks a certain dimension others of us know how to exploit.

Since you've already acknowledged playing an overly tight preflop style I would suggest you don't have a very well-rounded game for taking on the 2/4 yet.

[ianlippert]

Its probably just that I dont have enough hands at 1/2. At .25/.50 I have 12K and my AF if 2.8, a bit more reasonable. Already my AF at 1/2 has dropped to 4.5, I'm pretty sure I was on an upswing and able to really push my hands.

[mongoose51]

If you use the Loose Game pre flop chart from SSHE you will probably play 20-22% VP$P. This chart is for 6-8 players on average to the flop. I rarely find games that loose at Party 3/6 and 2/4 , and I normally end up using the Tight Game pre-flop guidelines from SSHE (3-5 players on the average see the flop). This will give 15-18% VP$P.

Most hands are raised pf in typical Party 3/6 game - it sucks to limp in w/22 - 66 or T9s get raised and find yourself in a 3 way hand that needs to hit the flop pretty strong.

[mongoose51]

Determining whether or not a player is a winning or losing player from 300 to 500 hands is silly.
Their vp$p, pfr,and post flop aggress numbers at 300 to 500 hands is probably a good indication of their playing style, but their dollars won/loss after 300 to 500 hands in meaningless.

[bobbyi]

Correlation is not the same as causation. If the tight players in your sample suddenly started to play more hands, their win rates probably would not go up. The fact they are overly tight is a side effect of their poor understanding of poker. That same poor undertanding causes them to lose money. The tightness itself does not. Essentially no one loses at holdem as a result of playing too few hands.