Hello! Alternate method to tight/aggressive play...

[SittingBull]

The Caro system offers an alternate method of providing a winning strtegy.
Basically,this school of thought encourages a player to play meekly on the early rounds and aggressively on the later streets. The other school of thought is a "knocking out UR oppos." on the early rounds.
Example of the Caro's school:
U have a big PR on 3rd and is probably the BEST hand.
Do NOT raise to "protect UR hands". Play it slowly and gradually build the pot. More players will
"stick around "with weaker hands.
If U think that U have the BEST hand on 5th or beyond,play it aggressively.
This is the reverse method that the Tight/aggressive school encourages.
So which method is superior? Theoretically,
the Caro's students will make more money OVER TIME than the tight/aggressive players will.
However,Caro's students will lose MORE POTS.
But those pots that they do win will be BIG and the net result will be a greater profit than if they were to follow the tight/aggressive school.
The major problem with Caro's philosophy is that one tends to "tilt" and subsequently plays poorly. This will result in greater than expected LOSES.
Hence, I do NOT recommend this method.
However,if one has more patience and discipline than the typical winning player,then the Caro method is the better one for him.
Note,by 5th Str., a Caro player will either surrender his hand (realizing that he's beat with very little chance of improving to the winning hand) or he will begin to play aggressively if he thinks that he has the BEST hand. The other remaining players are generally tied on with weaker hands ,but the pot is now quite large,so they will not surrender. Hence,they are now hoping for "miracle cards".
HappyPokering,
SittingBull

[BeerMoney]

If you raise, and your opponnents call.. That's not bad. Now, if you catch an ace on the next street.. What happens? Your opponents fold. Unless they have a draw. They only call with a draw if you raised on 3rd. Otherwise, they probably fold on 4th.

Look at it from the other perspective. You limp with 445. How you do you feel when it gets raised behind you? You feel like you just lost money, right? Its because you did.

I would say at .5/1, there wouldn't be anything wrong with a passive strategy on early streets, but in other games, I don't think this will work.

I recently made a post about a similar topic.

PS. I think you hit return too much when you type. That is the reason for the strange paragraphs.

[jon_1van]

How do players get tied on if you aren't betting?

How does the pot get big if you aren't raising?

[MRBAA]

How do you get full value out of your strongest hands if you don't bet them? Raising with a big pair isn't just a protection move!

[lstream]

I don't think these different schools of thought are mutually exclusive. There are tables (most recent experience is 5/10) where if I try earlier completions and raises with the best hand, I end up killing my action almost every single time. Especially recently during a card drought where I hardly play at all. The other players decide that I am ultra-tight and I end up making next to nothing when I catch.

At that point, I think you have to try something else or switch tables. So in some cases, the idea of building gradually can make you more money as long as you don't overdo it. I think it is especially profitable if people will limp with semi-dead hands which a lot of these players do, if they can play cheap enough. I would not want to try this if I would expect more than 2 opponents to hang around - there is just too strong a chance that you will get outdrawn.

On the other hand, there are tables where you can pound to your heart's content and people pay, at least until 5'th. On these tables, there seems to be no real point in doing anything fancy or clever.

So I think there is room for both schools, depending on the game. One more point - I think you need to consider position when deciding which method to use. For example, if you have a big pair, and two or three people have already limped, then you probably want to complete and thin the field, since most limpers will hand around anyway. On the other hand if there are only two or three people left to act, then you may want to consider a more gradual approach to end up with an optimum number of people in the hand.

[BeerMoney]

lstream, maybe its time for a scree name change.

Although, me Roland, and Sara don't seem to have too much trouble getting action on our big hands. Try not typing into the screen, "guys, I have aces!" then you might get more action!

[BeerMoney]

Oh ya, I can help you out with a new screen name if you need some creative thinking.

[lstream]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh ya, I can help you out with a new screen name if you need some creative thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK - lets examine the trend with regard to your screen names - lampang (that was you right?) douchedog, and the latest one that would likely get me kicked off this forum if I repeated it. So god knows what you would come up with for me - likely get me arrested or something.

Let me think about this offer for a bit - uh - no thanks [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[MRBAA]

I've recently played with "Randy Raper" and "brutal rape".

Very tasteful.

[frappeboy]

This slow play strategy is only correct on tight games where the ante structure is very tight. Here is why:

With a higher ante structure, just picking up the antes is a great result, so you can't afford to slow play anything

With a loose table there is no point in slow playing because you'll get called if you raise anyways, so why let the bad players in cheaply??