Re: defense of Joe Tall (since no1 seems to get his point)
Sorry, although my original post was a reply to yours, it was really just a general trying to support my point. It is difficult for me to argue specifically against what you say, because this situation is far more complicated than any of us are giving it credit for.
I will try to respond directly to you soon, but for now I still donīt have a good enough grasp on it myself.
Another thing to think about...
Taking the example of a tight player who calls top 45%, and loose player who calls the top 90%. Against the loose player, for the hands between 45-70, we lose out on the instant folds, and are instead forced to play against hands that we donīt have all that much edge against. Once we reach the 70-90 hands, we probably start to make back the equity that we lost by him not folding, but only barely.
Another benefit about playing against the tight player is that when we do see a flop, we have a much better idea of his range, so are able to play better postflop with our superior hand reading. Against the loose player, he could have literally anything, so it will be hard to figure out where we stand. Obviously we will have some idea, but it will be harder.
In the 45% of hands that both players are playing, I would rather be up against the tight player because:
A) he is tight, so we may win the flop immediately more often
B) his hand range is better defined, so we will know how to play better
Sorry for just posting out random things, but I need to think about this more before I fully try to refute you or come up with a full argument for wanting the tight player.
|