A humble question

Limit hold'em has never been my game, I've tried to keep away from it, but I seem mysteriously attracted to it in some some strange way. I'm still in a learning process and have a humble question...
After been reading a lot of the mid/high stake hands in this forum - must you play the game in such a super-agressive manner? It seems all players are cocky youngbloods who'd never chicken out and raises and re-raises with very questionable hands if there's just one chance in hell they are ahead. Am I wrong to suggest a lot of the players posting here have strong egos rather than a winning aproach to the game? And finally it would be interesting to know if there's someone reading this who thinks he/she represents a different player, a somewhat straightforward style, and still doing well in high stake limit hold'em poker?

[brick]

Tommy Angelo teaches a style that is less agressive.
I think you would call his style 'super postion sensitive' rather than 'straight forward' or 'super-aagressive'. He posts on this site and has website with many essays.

thanks, I found his posts, looking forward to read em!

[DcifrThs]

i have a long winded reply that i will try to shorten.

-"super-aggressivity" is correct in some settings, sometimes overapplied or more readily applied than would be best, but the results clearly lean towards that style given certain restrictions. there are outliers from the restrictions.

- most high limit games are shorthanded. a predominant amount of aggressivity prevales at these limits and hands, and these limits and hands are the ones posted on this board, so it appears that this board backs these hand posts' actions in all similar settings- as could be interpreted selectively

- further, being more aggressive and playing more marginal hands puts you in more marginal situations, and those resulting in possible correct aggression are the ones posted.

- playing in higher limit games leads to more shorthanded pots. as above, shorthanded pots are the most aggressive.

and so on, sample selection bias and selective interpretation, from which we all suffer

NOTE: i just realized i wrote the above in the present tense using "are" instead of "most likely would be" or "most likely to be" or "more likely" or other probabalistic wording.

Barron

[DcifrThs]

to more directly answer your question, tight passive can certainly work wonders in the correct setting. its just that those hands aren't as likely to be posted as more aggressive ones whether that aggression is correct or not.

Barron

Aggressivity isn't a word, Barron.


Aggressiveness.



Tex

[Tommy Angelo]

[ QUOTE ]
Aggressivity isn't a word, Barron.


Aggressiveness.



Tex

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm a little more curious than most about such matters, so I took a look. I found many mentions. Here are three, one about cars, one from a dictionary, and a book title.

--------------

The research program examined U.S. crash statistics to determine the characteristics and extent of the vehicle compatibility problem. One obstacle to quantifying the compatibility of a vehicle is the lack of an accepted measure of compatibility. A primary objective of our research effort was to develop a clearly defined a metric for measurement of vehicle aggressivity. To date, the NHTSA aggressivity research program has developed two potential aggressivity metrics.

-----------------------

Roget’s II: The New Thesaurus, Third Edition. 1995.

aggressivity

-----------
KERNBERG, Otto F.

Aggressivity, Narcissism, and Self-Destructiveness in the Psychotherapeutic Relationship: New Developments in the Psychopathology and Psychotherapy of Severe Personality Disorders. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004. 271pp. $60.00 (h).

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Aggressivity isn't a word, Barron.


Aggressiveness.



Tex

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm a little more curious than most about such matters, so I took a look. I found many mentions. Here are three, one about cars, one from a dictionary, and a book title.

--------------

The research program examined U.S. crash statistics to determine the characteristics and extent of the vehicle compatibility problem. One obstacle to quantifying the compatibility of a vehicle is the lack of an accepted measure of compatibility. A primary objective of our research effort was to develop a clearly defined a metric for measurement of vehicle aggressivity. To date, the NHTSA aggressivity research program has developed two potential aggressivity metrics.

-----------------------

Roget’s II: The New Thesaurus, Third Edition. 1995.

aggressivity

-----------
KERNBERG, Otto F.

Aggressivity, Narcissism, and Self-Destructiveness in the Psychotherapeutic Relationship: New Developments in the Psychopathology and Psychotherapy of Severe Personality Disorders. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004. 271pp. $60.00 (h).

[/ QUOTE ]

ty tommy.

i was going to use the 'ol webster to prove how easy it would have been to prove its a word rather than to blindly post that it's not, but that quotation you provided does just fine.

so are you a tautologist or something since you're "more than a little" interested in this stuff? or is it your personal interest in writing in general that fuels such concerns.

Barron

[Tommy Angelo]

"so are you a tautologist or something since you're "more than a little" interested in this stuff? or is it your personal interest in writing in general that fuels such concerns."

Neither. I just like words.

"i was going to use the 'ol webster to prove how easy it would have been to prove its a word ..."

Hundreds of words are made from scratch every day. And hundreds more are fashioned from existing words and phrases. Dictionaries, by definition, lag far behind in keeping track of production.

For example, everyone here knows what "donk" means, but we won't find our definition in Webster's.

Is the poker version of "donk" a word?


Tommy

Roget’s II: The New Thesaurus, Third Edition. 1995.


aggressivity

NOUN: See aggressiveness.




any questions?


google it, yahoo-it, webster it, whatever. 4 years of english I might not use but i still possess.



Tex