Do you fit this description?

[cartman]

There seem to always be a number of pros or wannabe pros hanging around the 5/10 game who usually play pretty solidly, but when they are heads up after raising preflop are <font color="blue"> guaranteed to keep the pedal to the floor the entire hand regardless of their cards, even if their opponent 3-bet preflop.</font>.

When they are the last aggressor preflop, they bet when checked to (not so bad) and raise when bet into (either immediately or on the next round). When raised, they 3-bet immediately or call and raise the next round.

When their opponent is the last aggressor preflop (for instance, they open-raise on the button and their opponent 3-bets in the big blind), I can hear their thoughts even before the flop cards come out. "Let's see, should I raise the flop or wait until the turn?"

In my opinion this strategy is doomed to epic failure against the tyical opponent, who will never fold Ace high or better in an million years. It is doomed to mediocrity against a LAG who will play the same as they do. It will only succeed against someone who folds way too much---not a common ailment.

I fold plenty, but it's not because these guys bet or raise. Their bets and raises are barely any indication of their holdings. My folds are based almost completely on my estimate of their PREFLOP raising or 3-betting criteria.

I might bet and fold to a raise with 55 on an AK2 board. I might bet and fold to a raise with QJ on an A62 board, but for the most part if I bet into these guys I have already decided that my hand can handle a raise. If I had a hand with a reasonable amount of showdown value that couldn't stand a raise, I would have just checked and called the 100% guaranteed bet.

If you fit this description you are a LAG even if only in a Jekyll and Hyde sense in the above situation. Maybe you are a winner, maybe even a pro. Now the real questions:

Is there something I am missing?

Can someone explaing to me the merits of such an approach?

Are there many of these usually TAG but turn into LAG types at the higher levels also?

Should I be playing this way?


Thanks,
Cartman

[Kimpan]

this sounds like the typical maniac.. there can't be many 2+2ers using this method? It could be me on tilt ocasionally but far from standard..

[brazilio]

I don't think this is the typical LAG so much as it's the image of most people tilting.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]

In my opinion this strategy is doomed to epic failure against the tyical opponent, who will never fold Ace high or better in an million years. It is doomed to mediocrity against a LAG who will play the same as they do. It will only succeed against someone who folds way too much---not a common ailment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Annoying thing is that it works best against 2+2'ers . . . certainly works against me, the bastards.

[cartman]

Sometimes I feel the same way. But I think we probably punish them subtly by letting them just keep betting when we have a marginal hand and then really watching them spew when we have a real hand. It surely makes up for all the times we fold a weak Ace high to their nothing doesn't it?

Cartman

[cartman]

But these guys have TAG stats and many of them multi-table some pretty heavy hours which makes me think that they are Jekyll and Hyde usually TAG but borderling maniacs in this situation only.

Cartman

[sweetjazz]

When I first started encountering heads-up play, I ended up in engaging in this strategy a few times -- a few times more than I'd like to admit now. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Now, I realize that such play is destined to failure unless I have a huge fold equity. So now I might occassionally try such a play if I was up against someone who I noticed folds a lot *and* I hadn't been involved in any overly aggressive plays (from the viewpoint of others) recently. Plus I consider board texture as well. I generally don't try to spew a tight player off a hand on an AKx board.

As far as playing against such players, I'll tighten up a bit before entering pots against them. And then proceed to call down a little more and value bet/raise a bit more. As you say, it is not too difficult to counter their strategy. In the short term, of course, they may win a few small Pyrrhic victories by getting you to fold the best hand when they had nothing, but that is more than made up for by all the extra bets you accumulate when they continue to try to push you off your hand, either by bluffing with air when you have a marginal hand or by spewing chips when you hit the board hard.

So I generally think your analysis is right on. I think there are some exceptional cases where you can overplay a missed hand profitably if the circumstances are just right, but I don't really think it is very critical to being successful at a game such as 5/10. I would say that 95% of the time you see someone playing that way, they are chucking EV like a hot potato.

[arkady]

I never run off when table goes 4,3,2 handed, but I can still count the number of times I play in these conditions. They really don't happen frequently enough for you to be worried about some alternate style of play. Yes, generally the fewer the players the more aggressive one should become, simply because in poker aggression (not even always selective) yields the best results. But to suggest that one should completely abandon their existing style seems excessive.

[dealer_toe]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think this is the typical LAG so much as it's the image of most people tilting.

[/ QUOTE ]