Is Tight Aggressive really the best?

[mtgordon]

I have always believed that tight-aggressive was the way to play. Numbers like 19.5/11/2.3 seem to be the numbers people say reflect a 'correct style'. Obviously you have to be using those numbers correctly, but never the less that's what people seem to be striving for. The only reason I question this is because I looked at my PT database and ran an auto rate with the follow rules for LA-A and TA-A:

ARI_10 6 LA-A
1 2 30.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is greater than or equal to 30.00
2 2 7.00 Pre-flop Raise % is greater than or equal to 7.00
15 2 1.50 Aggression Factor - Total is greater than or equal to 1.50
ARI_3 13 TA-A
1 4 22.00 Vol. Put Money In Pot % is less than or equal to 22.00
2 2 7.00 Pre-flop Raise % is greater than or equal to 7.00
15 2 2.00 Aggression Factor - Total is greater than or equal to 2.00

I would post the rest of the rules but the formatting is so poor that I thought it would just make things harder. I decided to look at the winrate of the various groups and I found that the LA-A had a higher winrate than the TA-A. Obviously if someone has hit a good run of cards they will appear to be looser and will have a higher winrate as well. To try and compensate for this I excluded people whom had less than 150 hands. I would liked to have exclude more, but I was trying to balance that noise with the fact that I needed to average as many people as possible. I will be the first one to confess that my database is certainly not big enough to draw a definite conclusion on this matter which is where you come in. Try importing these rules and see if you find the same trend. If not, then I’ll just take it to mean that my numbers are off. If you do, is there something to be learned from this? Should we (2+2 players) loosen up a bit in general pre-flop? Is this just and artifact of the data? Again, I’m not proclaiming that I’ve found a hole in everyone’s game or anything, I’m just wondering if there is anything we can learn from this.

[GoodTiMes]

nope, LAG is by far the best

[mtgordon]

Thanks for relying to a post that I've put some decent thought into with a one line response that is either incredibly simplified with absolutely no reasoning or (most likely) sarcastic and therefore useless.

[jaxUp]

what was your sample size for LA-A vs TA-A? I have no idea what to do with this, but I'm sure it will be of some importance to people who know about such things.

[mtgordon]

That was defintely one of my large concerns. The sample size for the LAG was slightly more than 10k which is VERY little for a winrate. When I was using everyone with more than 50 hands however it was around 15k which is still very small, but somewhat better. I think the sample size for TAG was around 30k which is still a little small, but definitely getting there. That's why I wanted to post the question. I don't have a large enough database to draw any significant conclusions.

[b33nz]

You play TAG if you want to win.

You play LAG if you want to win and get chicks.

[lighterjobs]

[ QUOTE ]
You play TAG if you want to win.

You play LAG if you want to win and get chicks.

[/ QUOTE ]

so true. this is why i need to loosen up.

[Niediam]

I used your rules on my biggest database of 70,000 hands and came up with these numbers for players with atleast 50 hands:

LAG: 2,000 hands - 2.16BB/100
TAG: 13,291 hands - 2.92BB/100

Interesting that there were a million more TAG than LAG hands (my own numbers were NOT included).

My win rate was 2.65BB/100 and I was a TAG.

[EStreet20]

One question, do you have all full ring games in that database, all 6 max or a combination of the two? A player who is TAG at 6 max will still, by your standards, be considered a loose player if you use his six max stats but rate him with the same rules because he has to play more hands. That could influence your results a litte bit as well.

[mtgordon]

My hands are almost all full ring. I also used the filter on the auto rate so I only took into account hands that had 7 or more people in them.