Tough Games versus Tough Decisions

[Nate tha' Great]

Was thinking about this some in the context of a recent, not-so-successful (results-wise, at least) shot at one-tabling some higher limit shorthanded games while my computer is in the shop.

It seems to be that it's worthwhile to make a distinction between a tough game and a game that requires you to make a lot of tough decisions.

People typically associate tough games with tight-aggressive games. A good example might be the Party 30/60 game while the number of tables were limited, or perhaps a typical Vegas 40/80. The profit potential in these games may not be especially high, even for an expert player. Typically, you're able to win something by taking advantage of the one or two weak players in the game, or perhaps by being especially proficient in one or two microareas of play, such as defending your blinds or making good river laydowns. However, the thing about these games is that, even though your profit potential is not all that high, they are usually fairly straightforward to play. Perhaps 5% of your decisions might be described as being "tough", which I'd describe roughly as falling within +/- 0.10 BB before the flop or +/- 0.20 BB after the flop.

Contrast this with a game in which the play is somewhat looser, more aggressive, less predictable, and/or in which the game is running shorthanded. Your profit potential - emphasis on potential - in this kind of game is probably a fair bit higher in this kind of game than in the rock garden scenario described above. However, because you are facing less predictable opponents and probably larger pots, you are also facing a lot more tough decisions. Perhaps 10 or even 15% of your actions fall into the "tough" category.

The point is that your win rate in these more aggressive sort of games is going to be more "elastic" relative to just how good your skills really are, as well as just how well you're playing *at that moment in time*. Things like playing while tired, while multitabling excessively, while not having good player reads, or while adjusting to the stakes and game texture are likely to have more impact here than they are in the former case. If you're playing your A game, then your win rate is probably going to be higher in the aggressive game than in the tight game. However, if you're playing your C+ game instead, the tight game might actually wind up being better for you, if either game is profitable at all.

Just something to chew on while you're in the process of moving up, whether it's from 2/4 to 5/10 6-max, or 30/60 to 100/200.

[Position]

Awesome post!

The elasticity aspect rings true & very important. Especially as it interacts with multitabling: more tables means less "edge" everywhere & it most harms the Tough Decisions tables.

[Klepton]

good post

[goofball]

I don't see how games with all good TAGs aren't going to be giving you lots of tough decisions. It sounds to me like you describe a "good game" as a game full of tight rocks. I think of that game as "predictable and boring but ultimately profitable." When I think of a tough game i think of a game with TAGs. Aggressive, thinking, tricky players who make your life difficult.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

Loose passive give you the greatest potential at having a profitable session.

Loose aggressive games give you the greatest profit potential.

Tight passive has some differences, mostly almost all your profits come from bluffs, and you hopefully can break even with your real hands.


Aggro games always make your decisions harder, there is no question about it.

[1800GAMBLER]

CliffNotes: The wider the range of players in a game, from loose-aggressive to tight-passive makes it tougher to multitable/play while drunk.

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
good post

[/ QUOTE ]

all of them are

[MaxPower]

Excellent post that deserves a bump.

This is exaclty how I percieve the difference bewtween the the Party 15/30 games and the Party 30/60 games. The 30/60 games are much tighter and the players are better, but you are not constantly making difficult decisions. Because of the blind structure you are faced with smaller pots and less blind stealing.

The 15/30 games are much looser, but you are constantly faced with having to make tough decisions. I think this type of game tends to put a lot of good players on tilt, which is good for me.

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how games with all good TAGs aren't going to be giving you lots of tough decisions. It sounds to me like you describe a "good game" as a game full of tight rocks. I think of that game as "predictable and boring but ultimately profitable." When I think of a tough game i think of a game with TAGs. Aggressive, thinking, tricky players who make your life difficult.

[/ QUOTE ]

A table full of James282's and so forth certainly wouldn't be very much fun to play, although the typical player in the games that I'm thinking of doesn't play quite that well in terms of reading hands or mixing up his play. In fact, I'd say the typical opponent in those games will have about the "right" preflop statistics, but will generally play rather predictably, especially after the flop.

Contrast that with the next level up, where people will make some fairly egregious (sp?) preflop mistakes, but compensate by playing extremely well after the flop. These mistakes are probably more exploitable over the long-run by an expert (albeit with extremely high variance) but it's a lot more work and requires you to be a lot more on your toes.

[goofball]

Ok, so the question is choosing between tight solid predictable opponents, and loose tricky aggressive opponents (as I understand it).

I agree with you 100% then. I'd rather be against the former when i'm in a downswing, or for wwhatever reason not on my A game. I'd much rather be against the latter though when I'm playing well. While you can make more money postflop, the LAG types not only give up equity by playing shitty cards preflop, but end up in a lot of tough spots where you can punish them. The tight players on the other hand aren't giving up much too much preflop, and aren't really making huge mistakes postflop (if we're thinking of the same kinds of players). The LAGs will test you though, so while running bad the tight games, while lower EV, will be better.