My poker progression

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
If I sit down at a 2+2 table and play 17VPIP like some losers actually have, we might as well not have these games to begin with.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're upset when people insult your style of play and then decide that when people play a 17 VPIP in a 2+2 game, they are losers?

What if, for these "losers", it is fun to play their A game against overaggressive but thinking opponents?

I like your approach to the game and I do agree that there is a lot of merit to playing an aggressive style and getting involved in marginal situations, both in terms of improving your game and increasing your long-term profits.

However, I also recognize a certain value in tightening up and playing selectively aggressively in certain spots. In my opinion, the very best players know how to adjust their playing style to the table conditions. Sometimes, playing 30/22 is going to make you the most profit. Other times, the table dynamic changes and it might be best to resort to a playing style that will be 22/17. At full ring, the best style might be 18/14 under certain dynamics.

This is not directed at the OP but the community as a whole. I often hear it said that you should play a style that you are comfortable with. And as one is learning the game, I agree. But the long term goal should be to learn how to play styles you are not comfortable with and become adept at them as well. Because ultimately, any one style is going to be exploitable once people catch on. It's when you are adjusting your approach to counter how the other people at the table are playing that you can approach god-like status. Or so I have heard, as I am still learning how to play mid-limit games. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[skp]

On the 2p2 game, point taken about it being a fun game and not representative of actual play. Besides, I am no 6 max expert to really comment on what is good or suboptimal play.

I was happy with my 22/11 stats in the 15 games. I don't see limping as being an inherently bad thing - I have historically limped more than most posters advocate (in the looser games).

In the 30 games, I openlimp a lot less as the 17/10 shows. BTW, I do agree with you that a 17 VPIP is probably not optimal. On the other hand, I think that 25/18 is probably not optimal either. I am not sure which is more suboptimal hence my comment that these stats within a range are six of one and half a dozen of the other.

[AlexSem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I sit down at a 2+2 table and play 17VPIP like some losers actually have, we might as well not have these games to begin with.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're upset when people insult your style of play and then decide that when people play a 17 VPIP in a 2+2 game, they are losers?

What if, for these "losers", it is fun to play their A game against overaggressive but thinking opponents?


[/ QUOTE ]

I realize that SOME people, come to 2+2 and STILL have only profit in mind. For them, yes it's optimal to play their 17/11. To not to anything crazy, to not show hands when asked to etc.

I understand different people have different goals. Just that I don't approve of such people much, and feel no remorse telling them that, but you are right, I should use softer, more appropriate language overall.

[ QUOTE ]

I like your approach to the game and I do agree that there is a lot of merit to playing an aggressive style and getting involved in marginal situations, both in terms of improving your game and increasing your long-term profits.

However, I also recognize a certain value in tightening up and playing selectively aggressively in certain spots. In my opinion, the very best players know how to adjust their playing style to the table conditions. Sometimes, playing 30/22 is going to make you the most profit. Other times, the table dynamic changes and it might be best to resort to a playing style that will be 22/17. At full ring, the best style might be 18/14 under certain dynamics.


[/ QUOTE ]

I actually agree with you, absolutely!

There comes a time when people outaggress me and just make retarded plays overall but make my usual strategy inferior, so I right away tighten up and play 17/15 or so.

What I was suggesting for 30/60 is that tables consist of 17/11 players (whom I happen to enjoy mocking for their ABC play).

So you have those 17/11 players and then you got one or maybe two 35/15 or if you're lucky 40/25 folks who are your targets. So if someone plays 35% of their hands. How many hands can you play and be dominating him in a lot of cases? Probably 34.5% since the 35%ers also suck postflop, but since there's people you have to push out and account for, you have to tone it down, so I play 25%.

I don't see, how in the world, how you can make money from the bad player if you only play against him so often. See what I am saying?

[ QUOTE ]

This is not directed at the OP but the community as a whole. I often hear it said that you should play a style that you are comfortable with. And as one is learning the game, I agree. But the long term goal should be to learn how to play styles you are not comfortable with and become adept at them as well. Because ultimately, any one style is going to be exploitable once people catch on. It's when you are adjusting your approach to counter how the other people at the table are playing that you can approach god-like status. Or so I have heard, as I am still learning how to play mid-limit games. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


Very well said, I am glad you have taken your time to post, Thank you.