A table selection poll

[Moneyline]

Which game would you rather play in: A loose game with typical aggression, or a game that is only slightly loose but very passive. Assume that the game is either 5 or 6 handed, and ignore other possible factors like seat selection. Explanations are appreciated.

[Moneyline]

Personally, I prefer the passive game. I think the benefit of getting to play from the blinds for only a single small bet outweighs the advantages of the pot getting pumped up more when I have the best starting hand. Not only do I get to play more hands in the passive game, but the transparent style of my opponents will make them relatively easy to outplay compared to players who will raise more liberally postflop. That's my opinion, but it seems a little counterintuitive to pass on the looser game. I'd be interested to hear what others have to say.

[adamstewart]

Regardless, I prefer games where my opponents make the most and largest mistakes - as should everyone else.


Adam

[flawless_victory]

HUSH rules!

[Surfbullet]

it's an interesting theoretical exercise - one that has been hashed out before, but many here now may not have participated.

It's interesting whether having our opponents play predictably but make fewer mistakes wins us more money than opponents who make more mistakes but also cause US to make more mistakes because of their increased aggression. From a FTOP standpoint I think we'd profit more from the passive/slighttly less loose games because the mistakes we make are more likely to be smaller in consequence.

Surf

There has been analysis of Pokertracker data which shows that aggression factor is better correlated with winningness than vip. Therefore being passive is generally a bigger mistake than being loose.

I'm guessing you mean loose preflop, but what about loose-postflop? Opponents that see the river a lot are a huge source of profit.

[Moneyline]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing you mean loose preflop, but what about loose-postflop? Opponents that see the river a lot are a huge source of profit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes to your question, and I agree with your assesment. If I know certain players will call down very liberally then I want to be in their game. Although I suppose there would be a couple rare exceptions, like when the players who are apt to call down are also very tricky, in that case I'd go back to prefering the less tricky opponents who are a little less likely to show down the hand.

straightforward loose callstations are preference the first.
super-laggy callstations are preference the second.