High aggression factors

[Gyre]

I have a friend of mine who recently started playing PP's 3/6 6max game, and over all his quite new to short hand play.

So far he is running good and beating the game quite nicely over 5k hands. But his aggression factors are very high. This is what i looks like:

Aggression
flop: 5,51
turn: 3,84
river: 1,70

I told him that he is majorly overaggressiv but he responded that there is no "perfect" stats to strive for and that this high numbers might fit one players game while lower aggression fits other stiles of play.
I dont realy buy that, and personally i think he is losing value whit these stats, but I dont have any good arguments that so is the case.
Why is it better to have like 3,2,1.8 stat then my friends 5.5,3.8,1.7?

[imported_ncray]

There are no perfect aggression numbers to strive for. The 3.2, 1.8ish stat is a general consensus on the aggression levels that work well. That is, on the average tables at say, 3/6 or 5/10, 2+2ers have been successful playing at those levels of aggression. Of course, there is room for individual variation.

Your friend's aggression on the flop and turn seems awfully high. Sample size nazis notwithstanding, he is betting and raising almost six times as often as calling on the flop. This might be ideal in a game full of weak-tight players who could do a lot of folding, but better opponents would catch on to your friend's high aggression quickly and adjust. There are many situations where passive play is preferred to aggression.

It still might be possible to beat 3/6 with those stats, but it would be highly uncommon. Basically, there are no perfect aggression numbers, but around 3/2/2 has worked well for the majority of players.