Tight-Agressive Outdated?

[Bez]

I've read a Caro article where he suggests in a loose game you should play looser than normal but not as loose as everyone else and tight but not as tight as everyone else in tight games. This was from Card Player some years ago.

[winky51]

TAG is not outdated. I consider myself a TAG but I adjust to players. The same hand vs two players I play differently.

You just have to adjust your style to the players, the players in the pot, players behind, general feel of the table, tells you see, chips in front, and so on. Its a lot of things to take in but in many cases my instincts make a judgement on what to do. I prefer live NL or tournaments as I read players well. The online tournaments I cant read crap.

Its all about adjustment to others and frustrating the other player to the point he plays worse or starts giving off more tells out of frustration.

Although if I play looser I prefer to play a hand that can make 2 draws even something like 95s. Easy to play and can make 2 draws. don't like LAGging with J3o or 92o, K4o or hands like that there are few opportunities there to make a hand or draw.

[NMcNasty]

I think tight-aggressive play is outdated for strictly no-limit brick and mortar tournament poker. A player of Daniel's calibur can and should play hands like 78o, J5s, 37s, etc.. Of course you would never recommend these hands to your average player. I'm sure they're even unprofitable for the top 2+2ers, but for tournament specialists who have been playing the game for 15+ years they work.

Is Daniel playing 5 or 6 hands out of ten in his 4k-8k game? Hell no.

Is playing 5 or 6 hands out of ten correct play for just about any level of limit poker? No.

Tight- Aggresive is the best playing style in poker, hands down.

Since we're talking about a general way to play over the long run, espousing 1 style of play is NOT stupid. Of course you need to change your style occasionaly for a number of valid reasons. However, you should always regress to your basic winning style, which is and will always be for 90% of the WINNING poker population, a tight aggressive approach. This is certainly true with respect NL Holdem.

Think about it. What are the alternatives? Loose Aggressive, Loose Passive, Tight Weak??? I think some of the posters are suggesting a loose aggressive approach, but does anyone really think that over the long run the average winning player would a) be able to withstand the swings associated with that style of play, and b)still be a winner over the long run??
Just my opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
Think about it. What are the alternatives? Loose Aggressive, Loose Passive, Tight Weak??? I think some of the posters are suggesting a loose aggressive approach, but does anyone really think that over the long run the average winning player would a) be able to withstand the swings associated with that style of play, and b)still be a winner over the long run??
Just my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

In a full ring game, the forces of time and tight play should yield a profit--considering a player's ability to voluntarily enter pots in which they perceive a statistcal advantage and, as a result, apply risk adverse and reward bolstering wagering strategies.

However, a tournament constrains the time variable. A fixed field of competitors must play for advantage amid an ultimately finite all-or-nothing scoring system; first place accumulates all the chips once possessed and evenly distributed among all the competition (rebuy tounrmants add slight variation to this principle.)

The differences between tournament play and ring are signifcant enough to suggest winning strategies may differ as well.

Is TAG even the norm in tourneys? I think the battles of tight-passives and LAGS seem to define the early stages of a tournament...perhaps even continuing as an overall paradigm until one person possesses every chip in the tournament's universe.

It would be interesting to see empirical evidence to explore this question further.

[chadplusplus]

This works in two situations:

1) Bad play by your opponents:

a)Donks are unwilling to fold their TPTK to your trip threes or rag two pair or whatever - this really helps your implied odds but is very dependent on knowing your opponent(s);

b)Just calling a raise in LP makes people leary of PP and when they miss the flop and you fire over their continuation bet or check, it confirms their suspicion that you are holding PP and they will fold allowing you to steal the pot. Necessary skills: Selective Aggression or Sensing Weakness

2) The second reason is much more complicated and I'm not sure how correct I am in my reasoning. Imagine a table where everyone is playing textbook TAG style. Your short term winrate will be very dependent upon the cards you get. You luck into getting aces vs. someone's kings, AK vs. AQ, stuff like that. But over the long run, you'll be on the short end of that stick just as frequently as you're on the winning end. All in all, you'll be break even with these other guys because you're all playing the same style (also assuming mistakes are relatively even). However, if you now throw in the occasional 27o or 58s or whatever, this drastically changes the dynamics of the game. If everyone else is still only playing tight textbook poker, but you've loosened up, you've given yourself an occasional opportunity to win an extra pot - and these few extra pots do add up as long as we are disciplined enough to fold when we know we are beaten. Herein lies the skill of the uber-pro. They, with their seeming telepathic abilities, can play middle pair on a K 4 6 rainbow board and know whether you are holding that king. I can't do this yet, but I sure wish I could.

As applied to tournaments, this strategy will only work well during the early stages when everyone is playing deep stack poker - the deep stacks provide enough of a buffer that if you do manage to hit your rag two pair and your opponent connected with his hand (TPTK), you can expect to exract a lot of chips compared to your initial investment.

Also, let us not forget that when opponents see us playing bad cards hard, they are more willing to pay us off later when we actually have a monster.

Edit: But apparently, the key to most people's success, regardless of preflop style, is aggression.

I know you mentioned "Full Ring" in your answer, but don't you think a TAG approach would also yield considerable profit in 6-max as well. Maybe even more than full ring, because most players at 6-max are so loose that a TAG approach is even more effective. Of course this takes into consideration that tag for 6-max is slightly looser than tag in a full ring game.
Looking forward to your response.

[ QUOTE ]
It would be interesting to see empirical evidence to explore this question further.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think that's the one thing missing in poker research. i'd love to see a study of 1000 low entry fee tournaments and see how things evolve.... i know some of it has been done and linked to risk-aversion etc... i basically have never seen a huge study that was user-friendly... i know the experienced authors know this stuff inside and out, but i want to see an actual study.

[ QUOTE ]
i'd love to see a study of 1000 low entry fee tournaments and see how things evolve.... i know some of it has been done and linked to risk-aversion etc... i basically have never seen a huge study that was user-friendly... i know the experienced authors know this stuff inside and out, but i want to see an actual study.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obvioulsy, all the online poke sites hold this data. Doubtful they would ever release it to the general public--even if the player names were changed to protect those involved.

I don't know how much relevant hand information can be gathered through one player using tracking software at a multi-table tourney. Maybe if a group of such players agreed to share inofrmation with one another a more comprehensive statistical narrative would emerge.