SLAP vs TAG
 

im going to have another look through the site but one thing i could do with help on, and im sure others could too, is how to change play style.

im a SLAP and have tried over many sessions to play as a TAG, it seems what ever i do i always end up as SLAP .....i would like to play one session as a TAG ( so i can get the cool icon in PT ;-) but just can't help checking my monsters to the aggressive players ....

what are the significnat differences betwen a SLAP and a TAG? I buy quite a few pots and steal blinds ... is that also making me seem more statistically loose? Im definalty loose in late position but will put down "good hands" in early.

is being a SLAP bad? seems everything i read says you should be a TAG, so please .. can you make my dream come true and make me a TAG for a day?

(old uk joke - anyone remember jim'll fix it?)

seriously just one session with the eagle icon and i will be happy

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

I'm not being mean, because it's not just you...but do you
want to become a winning poker player or have really
cool-looking PT stats? They are not conjoined entities
necessarily unfortunately.

Also, TAG is just one winning style...there are a lot of winning
LAGs here...

-ZEN

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

Funny, I am also a SLAP and so far in my year of low stakes NL playing I usually do pretty well. However, I am trying to turn my game into more of a TAG style, but I'm trying to find the difference between a SLAP and a TAG. I play my strong hands aggressive pre flop and usually continuation bet in a small field (2 or less). I'm not quite sure what is keeping me from being a TAG. I think it may be my post flop play, sometimes wanting to see cheap showdowns against aggressive players when holding TPTK on a threatening board or something of the sort.

I am wondering as well..is being a SLAP bad? How much of a differece is there between a SLAP and a TAG?

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

If you feel comfortable as a SLAP, then work on being a better one. Find those places where you can make a small change that saves or makes you one BB. Then look for another one.

I think until you get to the point where the only games you can find at your playing level are not conducive to your style, why worry about changing as the adjustments are mostly minor?

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

I'm not sure being a SLAP is undesirable, it probably indicates not much more than that you are playing more hands pre-flop that a TAG would.

Personally I play a SLAP style and when I have forced myself to play a TAG style I have succeeded mainly in making myself uncomfortable and eroding my own win rate.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not being mean, because it's not just you...but do you
want to become a winning poker player or have really
cool-looking PT stats? They are not conjoined entities
necessarily unfortunately.Also, TAG is just one winning style...there are a lot of winning
LAGs here...

-ZEN

[/ QUOTE ]


There is a touch of british comedy in the post .... i dont really care about my PT icon (but i do like eagles ;-), it is a touch of comedy. i should no better than trying to be funny in a post ... but the question is a serioius one.

I am a winning player, (since i analyzed my play in PT) and fixed some leaks, but i see TAGS being generally slightly more profitable.

Also, i dont see many SLAPS around ..... can some informed user point out the main difference betweene the two styles... im at 1/2 Nl at the mo but fear my style may get me in to trouble as i move up?

thx in advance.

BTW over a 1000 hand session i play on average 32% of hands 21% of which are not as blind.
P.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.pokerlistings.com/no-limi...-strategy#miss
This is ABC 10handed poker. Follow it exactly, and congrats your a TAG. Im a tag and i even play a lil looser then this.

[/ QUOTE ]

From usr: SCORCH

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

What is a SLAP? I clicked the abbreviation link on the front page and didn't see it.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

I have always been a SLAP to PT and always will be a SLAP. So I went into PT and gave myself the smiley face. I think part of the reason SLAP is undesirable is that Mr. Yuck poison face that is the default PT icon.

SLAP is from Poker Tracker. It stands for Semi-loose Aggressive Passive. So you play a fair number of hands and raise a lot preflop, but slow down a bit once the cards are dealt.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

SLAP = Semi-loose agressive/passive

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

i just recently started using poker tracker and am also labeled a SLAP. it was my understading the aggresive referred to after the flop and the passive was overall, including preflop aggression. in my case, playing low pot limit/no limit ($25 max), i tend to call with speculative hands (suited connectors and suited aces) in early position, especially if the table has a low PFR. it's probably a leak, but i've convince myself it's the nature of low limits. your case may be different with more preflop aggression and less postflop, but analyzing the "more details" page in pokertracker will give you a better idea of where you might want to make adjustments.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
i just recently started using poker tracker and am also labeled a SLAP. it was my understading the aggresive referred to after the flop and the passive was overall, including preflop aggression.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not quite. The SLA refers to your slightly-loose and aggressive preflop play, while the P refers to your passive post-flop play.

By the way, I'm guessing that a lot of the somewhat-successful SLAPs in this thread have post-flop aggression numbers that would make then at least TA-N (neutrals) if they were a bit tighter. In other words - you can get the passive label in those PT categories without being very passive.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not quite. The SLA refers to your slightly-loose and aggressive preflop play, while the P refers to your passive post-flop play.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, that's what it's sounding like everyone is saying in this thread. i guess i'm confused, because looking at the break down of aggression factor on all streets, i'm much more aggresive after the flop than before. my pokertracker aggression factor, not including preflop aggression, is slightly above 2. factoring in preflop aggression, the number is slightly less than 1.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

Thanks for the link. I have been trying to transition toward LAG to have gears for changing table dynamics.

I suppose I should break down and get Poker Tracker. I have heard so many good things about it. Honestly, I can't figure out why I have been dragging my feet getting it.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

RIGHT :-)

well my aggression starts at 1.04 for flop and ends at 1.96 for river, so i guess i see the passivity area ... need to look into this in more detail.

LOL and as i typed i flop a st8 .. usually i would check to suck em in .... not enough sample evidence really, but its a funny old world!

(i didnt have a pre-flop aggresison variable, how did you calculate it?)


Thx for the replys, i guess sometimes its about finding where to look.

.....

aren't forums great

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

Ok, i clicked the "show preflop aggression factor button", (doh!) but im too embarressed to post the value.

so basically im getting more aggressive as the hands go on ...not passive! ... which stas do you use confused? the original PT ones or from this site or from "another easy to find website with PT tuitorials"?

Looks like my SLAP is coming from lack of pre and flop aggression. (check call check-raise)

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not being mean, because it's not just you...but do you
want to become a winning poker player or have really
cool-looking PT stats? They are not conjoined entities
necessarily unfortunately.

Also, TAG is just one winning style...there are a lot of winning
LAGs here...

-ZEN

[/ QUOTE ]

try to be more zenlike, zen ..... if this isn't a thread about people wanting to improve poker skills .... i'll teach everyone how to clap with one hand.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, i clicked the "show preflop aggression factor button",...

[/ QUOTE ]

i am using the default pokertracker stat definitions. I didn't have a chance to look at how pokertracker defines SLAP exactly, but from memory, i think it's semi loose (before the flop) aggressive (after the flop) passive (overall, including preflop). which makes sense with the way i play. based on my stats, my high preflop call percentage is what drags my overall aggression stats down. pockertracker aggression factor is calculated using the formula: (bet+raise)/call so checking doesn't count against you.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

excellent, so its definatly not a factor of check-raising then, which is kinda a relief ...i guess this is what leads the player to raising SC's in MP/LP ;-)

i reviewed a hand i played today where i flopped Quad Queens :-)(0.25/0.5Nl)

QQJ

i check flop, $4 turn , $15 river .. im pretty sure i could of got $4/$15/$30 (him all-in) since he called the $15 on turn he woulda called the rest on river, i woulda known that sooner by betting the $4 on flop.

I thought this to be a signifying leak for a SLAP (and thx to our discussion), certainly this is an extreme example of where flop aggression would of paid off a good few extra BB's and a potential weakness of my style at least.

Actually, statisticallly this play would be aggressive though at least to PT as i raise 3 times and call once? (3/1) but more aggressive if i bet the flop too (4/1)

What do you think ccOOgt?
Would you play this same way?

I have a feeling getting more agr pre and on the flop is the way to tweak SLAP.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the link. I have been trying to transition toward LAG to have gears for changing table dynamics.

I suppose I should break down and get Poker Tracker. I have heard so many good things about it. Honestly, I can't figure out why I have been dragging my feet getting it.

[/ QUOTE ]

IT's free to try ..there is no good reason not to.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

however. the man say he have with
and slap him is lagging?? i am hate
sec ret codes you are guys using and not
to in clude new-mem ber!!!!! I not like eet her!!

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
excellent, so its definatly....

[/ QUOTE ]

to somewhat echo what one of the posters above wrote, i don't think you should play every hand with a "trying to produce nice pokertracker stats" mentality. with a hand like this, your main focus is trying to extract as much as possible and if checking helps you do that, then check. the way i try to adjust is on an overall, and not hand by hand basis. for instance, after reviewing my aggression stats, i want to improve my preflop aggression, so i make a concerted effort not to limp preflop from early position, unless i plan to checkraise a preflop raise or now i raise hands i previously would have limped with in late position.

i don't think checking a monster flop is going to lead to an overall lower post flop aggressive game because you're not going to be flopping quads or the nuts as often as you'll be missing flops.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't have a chance to look at how pokertracker defines SLAP exactly, but from memory, i think it's semi loose (before the flop) aggressive (after the flop) passive (overall, including preflop). which makes sense with the way i play.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "SLA" part is preflop. Semi-Loose meaning you see more than 20% of your hands (using default #s) but less than some higher rate (like 30% or something, I can't remember where LAG starts). The "P" is for calling more often post flop than betting or raising. It is the opposite of what you indicate in your quote, above.

Anyway, if that's what you want to do (to OP), then just bet and raise more than you call. This can be tough because with this approach (if you're not so good with hand reading, like me at the moment) you can very easily win a lot of small pots, lose a lot of medium sized-pots, fold a lot of marginal hands that would have won if you had called them down, and win about the same number of monster pots as playing more passively post-flop. On the other hand, this TAG style post flop is intimitating to an opponent, and can often give you better information more cheaply than calling someone down. It is also possible that this style, played well, can generate more well-disguised monster pots becaue a TAG can get away with looking like he's playing an overpair from LP for a raise while holding 78s, flop a straight, and get all-in versus a set who thinks the TAG is holding onto aces or kings with white knuckles. The TAG might also get more action from passive post flop players if he shows down a couple of cases in which he was betting his draws like he had a made hand (as opposed to calling or folding with a draw), but then changes gears for a while betting with the goods instead of draws.

Here's an example of SLAP versus TAG style in action. Let's say you raise AK preflop in LP, the flop is A72r, and the SB who called preflop bets into you for 1/2 pot, then you are probably way ahead (AQ or AJ, for example) or way behind (77 or 22 or even a loose A7s). Do you call the 1/2 pot bet, call the turn and call the river? Or, do you pop that probe bet up to 1.5 times the size of the original pot (2x the min raise, or maybe more depending on stack sizes) to see what happens? SLAP play would be inclined to call (call the probe bet, call a turn bet, then call the river, and be out for maybe 3 or 4 times the size of the original pot if he was way behind, but win a nice pot if he was way ahead). TAG play would be inclined to pop that probe bet a good amount and then take it from there - i.e. check behind on the turn if villain calls the raise then checks the turn, or fold if villain calls the raise and pots the turn, or fold if villain pushes preflop (out only 1.5 to 2 times the size of the original pot before folding), or just win the pot right ther because villain folds his JJ and gives up after his probe bet fails to fold you out - the point is that hero must make a read on each street post flop and either raise, push, check, or fold - and that's it...only on rare occaisions (i.e. the ONLY hand that calls a raise on the river is one that has you beat, etc) would you be inclined to just call post flop trying to play uber-TAG.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

Thanks albert, i think that was exactly what i was looking for!. (ive re-read it 5 times at least)

The QQ hand is just an extreme example.

Im looking at pre/flop play in detail and see the situations you are describing but calling down with AQ/AJ .. i would allways raise/re-raise the AK but slow down and call to re-raise or resistance.

Im clearly not ready to make all the plays you explain, all of the time!!

I see now i have a long way to go to get to TAG, but have added a few new moves which are working well so far, i guess i just keep adding good things, and check where it is leading me. My flop aggression has improved over my last few sessions and i think this is a clear positive.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

i finally had a chance to read the pokertracker definition and along with the other explanations here, i think i have it straight now. SLA=semi-loose aggressive preflop, P=passive overall aggresion (including preflop aggression). so, what i've learned is, the "A" in SLA is strictly a function of preflop raise percentage and the "P" is a function of (bet+raise/call) overall, on all streets. i was equating them both to the aggression factor calculation.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

Hi folks

Coorect me if I'm wrong, and I alpologize if this has already been said, but couldn't you go from a SLAP (which I am) to TAG simpy by tightening your pre-flop startting reuirements.

By doing this, you will have better holdings and consequently will be able to legitimately be more agressive post-flop. Would'nt one take care of the other?

I mean there is a reason that we don't see too many SLAGs - it's tough to be semi-loose and aggressive and stcik around too long unless you have an awesome post-flop game.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
but couldn't you go from a SLAP (which I am) to TAG simpy by tightening your pre-flop startting reuirements.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. It all depends on your syle. If, overall, you call more than you bet+raise, then you will get that "P" for total aggression no matter how much you tighten up preflop.

That aggression number is just a ratio of (bet+raise)/call. Checking and folding are neutral. So, a guy that calls more overall than he bets or raises whenever he isn't checking or folding, then that guy is labeled "passive" overall. If he calls less than he bets or raises when he isn't checking or folding, then that guy is "aggressive" overall.

As for tightening up preflop leading to more aggression on later streets, that's not necessarily true. On the SSNLHE board there are a lot of cases where a TPTK or overpair wants to "control the size of the pot" in order to be able to make better decisions on later streets regarding how strong he thinks villain might be - without losing his stack to a set or 2-pair in the process. For example, AA raises preflop, continuation bets the flop, then what? If he's up against a set or two pair, does he just keep doing all the betting for villain? Does he check the turn and value bet the river? Every hand is different, but it is very possible that better starting hands could call for more aggressive on early streets, but frequently call for more passive play on later streets.

The aggression numbers are more effected by your style in answering these questions:

Do you continuation bet when you miss the flop more than you check/fold or check/call (i.e. you have TT on a KJ7 flop, or you have AK on a 942 flop, etc.)? It is obviously more aggressive to bet, but at some loose/passive tables, that might be chip spewing. At a weak-tight table, this is probably +EV.

Do you more often call or raise when a person in EP who had called your preflop raise (you have KK) leads into you on the flop for 3/4 pot?

Do you bet or raise with draws more often than you call with draws?

Do you bet or raise with strong flops (sets and two-pairs) more often than you try to slow play/cold call with sets and two-pairs? Since a set is not a monster (like flopping quads that will cripple a deck and require a slow play), a set or two-pair can be played fast or slow depending on the villain and the situation, but an "aggressive" player will bet or raise with those more than a "passive" player might not bet or raise until the river in order to try suck out more money while taking the risk that villain might outdraw on later streets without having to pay more for that priveledge.

It really boils down to this: when facing a decision, especially post-flop, are you more inclined to check/call than you are to bet, raise, or fold? If so, then you play mostly "passive" poker. If not, then you play mostly "aggressive" poker.

Re: SLAP vs TAG
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hi folks

I mean there is a reason that we don't see too many SLAGs - it's tough to be semi-loose and aggressive and stcik around too long unless you have an awesome post-flop game.

[/ QUOTE ]

i guess i must have an awesome post flop game :-)