[dankhank]

[ QUOTE ]

Ag-total - 2.5

I'm raising much less these days trying to passivefy my play and keep myself tied to fewer pots:


[/ QUOTE ]

just wanted to point out one key error in your thinking (imo), which is that the point of passive play in limit is to get yourself tied to more pots rather than less. for example, if you're considering either raising or calling on the turn in position: if you raise you give your opponent a chance to 3-bet and force you to fold before the showdown, where if you just call, the two bets that could've been used to raise him, will get you all the way to the end.

i can see where in a low limit full ring game 'passify my play' can mean getting tied to fewer pots in the sense of, "well i could either raise my top pair bad kicker on the flop in this five-way hand and commit majorly to it, or i could play passively so i can get away from the pot easy on the turn if i don't improve." however you said you are playing 6-max games where there is a lot of heads-up action, in which case i think passive play is equated with being in more pots rather than less, postflop.

you may be using the term 'passify' differently than this scenario, but when i run into what i consider large flaws in logical deduction re: limit holdem, in conjunction with a 1000bb downswing post, i wonder if some of the poster's fundamental theories are perhaps flawed. i don't play much shorthanded, but 2.5 aggresion seems a bit high given you haven't been holding many winners.

i think it would help to post hands and respond to hands on the forums, but sometimes particular lines aren't the problem. maybe you should be rethinking your overall gameplan while in the midst of playing, too. as your psychological state seems to be one of your strengths, it seems like your mind should be clear for this type of cerebral investigation.