Home / Community / Forum / Support Area / Poker News /

How to be a succesful LAG

Old
Default
How to be a succesful LAG - Thu Jul 07, 2011, 07:26 PM
(#1)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
Long article but definitely worth the read, it is old but still has excellent strategy in it Please note not my writing,some people need to know this

Hello all,

I have been lurking and reading posts here for some time. I thought I would finally pipe in and speak about a few things. The subjects that I intend to discuss in these posts are manifold and perhaps unrelated, so forgive me in advance if this post seems disjointed. For those interested, I'd like to give some background about myself and my game - including addressing some posts made about me. I would also like to discuss my style and extreme LAG play in general. Finally, I would like to comment on my future plans in poker and get some feedback from some of the professionals on this site.

OK, about myself. For better or for worse, I believe that I am one of the better known players that play the 10-20 game on Party Poker. My style is somewhat controversial and has been the topic of considerable discussion in two or three posts that have been made about me. This STYLE (independent of me) has been discussed recently as well, with some excellent posts made about it by ML4L, cero_z, and El Diablo among others.

As those of you that are familiar with me know, I almost always (on PP) employ an extreme LAG style. I have found it to be extremely profitable, especially on Party Poker. I have had success playing much higher, including the big games on UB and Gaming Club - but I have found that multi-tabling 10-20 on PP while employing the LAG style has yielded me the maximum profit. The premise of this play, and the reasons for its success are manifold. In order to keep this post somewhat organized, I will try and talk about them one-by-one in a "list" format.

- First of all, as cero pointed our in a recent post, playing more hands gives one that many more opportunities to win a fish's money. For the simple reason that I am playing many more hands than the average player, I am provided with many more opportunities to win large pots against players who will overplay their hands. Additionally, by playing hands like 8-6 or 5-2, I am MORE likely to hit a hand that will be both disguised and give a weak player a chance to have a top pair/overpair type hand that he will stack off with. Note that if you play tightly, you will not get these opportunities with AA, KK, AK, etc - since (a) the opponent in the hand will be mathematically less likely to hold an overpair or similar cards and (b) if you hit a hand hard, your opponent will be less likely to hold a TPTK type hand that he might stack off with. Otherwise stated, if I hold 8-6, my opponent will be more likely to stack off with AQ.

- The inherent mathematics behind two card poker - in particular, the fact that a hand like AK is only a 3-2 favorite over a hand like 6-5 makes it very profitable to play hands that are NOT duplicated, as long as you possess the capacity to make better decisions than your opponent. Although they are not complicated, I do not want to discuss too many of the simple yet effective ways of winning pots by bluff calling, flop texture reading, etc in great detail for two reasons. One, this post is going to be long enough as it is, and two, I do not want to give away too much of my thought process for obvious reasons. However, the main point is that since the worst hand you can conjure up is still only a 3-2 dog over AK, it becomes +EV in my opinion to get to the flop as often as possible if you can make better decisions than your opponents after flop.

- Although I will do what I can to get maximum money in preflop if I am holding aces - or kings in most situations - the fact remains that the greater an edge a player has over his opponents, the more the gap widens when the bulk of the money (and decisions) are made after the flop. To that end, while I open-raise with a wide variety of hands and call raises with a wide variety of hands, I try to keep the pot sizes small. I try - and feel that I am successful - at winning lots of small pots, and picking up big pots only when I have the goods. As you all know, in NL, it is pretty common that no one has anything TOO good after the flop. The 10-20 players are fairly easy to read if they do or they don't (not just the passive ones, but the aggressive ones sometimes pick inconsistent times or monetary values to bluff with), and I tend to pick up a lot of pots that no one wants. An added benefit of raising and calling raises so frequently is that bad players (and even otherwise good players who are getting frustrated) will make horrendous mistakes far more often against a player like me than they will against a tight player. I don't mean to call out a player here, but I want to provide an example of a hand I played a couple of months ago against an otherwise excellent player and a respected poster here. Captain Zeebo, I apologize in advance for exposing this hand, but I want to point out that even strong players like yourself can make massive mistakes that you would not make against tight players. On the hand in question, it folded to zeebo and he raised to 80 from the small blind. I called in the big blind with 10-9. Many of you will say that this is not a hand I should be calling a preflop raise with, etc. However, on a flop of 8-7-6, zeebo pushed all in for 2.1K with just JJ. I of course called and won a 4.3K pot. Now obviously, zeebo will not do this against a player like sanguin, jackwould, kristelita, or any of the other successful but tight players. However, against a splasher like me, he just assumed his hand was best - and not wanting to be put to the test, he made a massive mistake. This type of thing is not infrequent: I often get statements like "samoleus, how do you get these guys to just give you all their chips?" when someone stacks off with, say second pair against my set or something. Well, the answer is this: since I splash around, players that are either not very smart or not paying close attention, just interpret my constant raising as overaggression and will be willing to play huge pots with marginal holdings. Of course, I rarely (not never of course, but rarely) will play a huge pot without a very big hand. But my style makes it appear that I will and good players give away a lot of chips that they would not give to other players.

So to briefly summarize, my style affords me the best of both worlds. First, I am able to pick up most of the pots that no one wants. Second, I am able to win huge pots with big hands. There are additional benefits as well. It frustrates opponents and sets them on tilt. It makes players who are not able to make good marginal decisions loosen up their starting hand standards against me. I get to play more hands against fish who are begging to get their money taken by whoever gets to them first. My loose preflop standards are often misinterpreted as loose postflop standards at great benefit to me. I could go on, but you all are probably tired of reading by now.

A quick tangent: ML4L wrote an excellent post some time back entitled "the running game" or something like that. In it, he talked about winning loose aggressive players and their potential inability to adjust to those who adjust to them. Indeed that trait is of paramount importance. While I am almost always the table captain in my Party games, I have often (on UB agaist Prahlad, and sometimes live depending on the opponents) shifted to a very tight strategy. For instance, I have played a couple times at Foxwoods where a couple of players attacked very pot out of drunkenness or machismo. I knew that my splashing style would not work, so I simply sat and waited until I had big edges on them. I played way fewer pots than I am accustomed to, but won huge pots and ended up with very good profits. Same situation occured when playing in games with players like Antonio Esfandiari, Kenna James, and Phil Laak at Foxwoods. Playing 25-50 NL with an uncapped buy-in, these guys were clearly playing below their usual level and wanted to compensate by overbetting the pots. When I was in this game, I simply downshifted, let them "run" the game, but walked away with the biggest profits by playing TAG. I am not trying to toot my horn here, but just trying to make the operative point that this style that I discuss is one that I use almost exclusively on Party, but to employ it gainfully, it has to be used with discretion and has to be able to be adjusted accordingly.

Some outstanding posters, such as cero, have suggested that the counter strategy is "so simple." I do not want to get in a protracted discussion about this for obvious reasons, but I do disagree with that. I think that when a player adjusts to me (reraising to isolate, thin calls, etc), I can adjust specifically to them and counter with either extreme aggression (putting them to the question when they put me to the question marginally) or by trapping. The notes feature is a great tool obviously. Ultimately, adjusting to this style requires a good deal of decision making and stones that a lot of players are incapable of making.



Full post and thread here http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/show...ue#Post4732305

Last edited by roomik17; Thu Feb 02, 2012 at 02:51 PM.. Reason: remove irrelevant stuff
 
Old
Default
Thu Jul 07, 2011, 07:47 PM
(#2)
joker41673's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,850
Wow is this guy related to JDean?


 
Old
Default
Thu Jul 07, 2011, 07:51 PM
(#3)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
It might be his brother but like both, very informative if a little long lol
 
Old
Default
Thu Jul 07, 2011, 08:00 PM
(#4)
Swaxwell's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 315
Nice read roomik
 
Old
Default
Fri Jul 08, 2011, 12:50 PM
(#5)
mmaracle's Avatar
Since: Mar 2009
Posts: 73
BronzeStar
Thanks roomik my eye's are sore but it was worth the time.

Thank for posting the booke!
 
Old
Default
Fri Jul 08, 2011, 06:47 PM
(#6)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
I KNOW somewhere I put up a post about effective LAG play.

I know I also put in that post some hallmarks:

-Effective LAG play takes MORE "discipline" than TAG play, because your decisions are so often much harder.

-Effective LAG play almost ensures you will get "action" on your truly big hands that TAG players just won't get.

-Effective LAG play will result in many small losses, but some BIG wins to compensate.
(This differs from the poster here, who claims to be able to take many small pots too...I'm not sure I totally disagree with his reaosning.)

ETC...

Maybe it is on another forum...

I think I'll dredge it up and post it here...
 
Old
Default
Fri Jul 08, 2011, 06:50 PM
(#7)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
(The following was posted on another Forum I belong to on 2/15/11, it is by me)

Defining Looseness, and using it "properly," or, how to be loose without being a maniac

I was thinking about loose play today, and some "rules" for it occured to me. Feel free to tell me if you agree, or disagree, with these...

#1 The 2 cards you enter a pot with quite often mean less than other factors.

When you start with unpaired cards,

you will miss the flop approximately 2/3rds of the time. The same is true for your opponents. Even when you or your opponent(s) start with a pocket pair, more often than not one or more over cards will flop. Oftentimes a continuation bet will be enough to win a pot.

#2 Awareness of how your loose play is effecting the thought patterns of others at your table is critical for your success.

When you are entering a lot of pots, continuation bets begin to lose effectiveness in winning pots. People with a pocket pair and only 1 over on board begin to call you. People tend to believe you are on vulnerable hands, even if you HAVE paired, and they start to call you with just over cards. Failing to take into account the fact you will have less "credibility" at the table than your tighter opponents can lead you to waste a lot of chips if you are not careful.

#3 Observation of your opponent(s) tendencies are MORE critical for your success, than it is for more ABC-type players.

Since your play is so dependent upon small "edge" situations, it becomes vital that you are aware of your opponents' tendencies. Pre-flop start standards are important for you to know, but of even greater importance is knowing what your opponent(s) are likely to do on the flop, and later. What are they calling you with? What do they need to bet out? What do they require to raise or check/raise you?

I have found that playing loose successfully nets me many small losses, and a few large wins. Those large wins come when I have a much bigger hand than my opponent(s) expect. Part and parcel of being able to "create" situations where your opponent(s) pay you off handsomely on your large made hands is knowing who at the table is most likely to stack off. Alternately, knowing who will likely signal their willingness to "give up" on a hand can also net you good sized pots. It all boils down to successfully "reading" your opponent(s) tendencies.

#4 Your successful bluffs will generally win you small pots; your opponents' successful bluffs will generally win larger pots against you (if you are not extremely careful).

After a while of loose playing, your opponents will simply stop "believing" that you have a good hand EVERY hand. After this point in time, your bluffs will begin to work less and less.

Since your bluffs will rarely be believed, your opponents will usually have had to wildly miss the flop in order to fold for you. This will lead to many situations where you can pick up a small pot. If you ARE called (and the pot grows), it will be very difficult for you to win due to your loose image.

Alternately, since your hands will (generally) tend to start out weaker than your opponents', you will be MORE susceptible to re-steals, and river bluffs than are ABC players. Once your opponents key to this fact, they could potentially take a semi-large pot away from you on a late street. This tendency argues toward you keeping the pots small when you have semi-strong, but vulnerable hands.

#5 Implied odds, as opposed to pot odds, will be a hallmark of your drawing plays.

Since your game consists of pot entries on a wider variety of hands, it should not be surprising that you will also tend to pick up a wider variety of draws than your opponents. This means you will be required to notice situations where you may see a one-way draw on the flop morph into a 2 way draw on the turn, and recognition of the "back door" outs potential on a given board vastly increases in value for your play style.

You will also be required to have a strong knowledge of the potential for your opponent to fold to "phantom outs" (scare cards which you can represent as hitting you) when you bet, and his particular pressure points. "Pressure points" are the bet amounts past which an opponent will be reluctant to "sheriff" your loose image.

Since reliance upon draws will mean you will see quite a large number of FAILED draw attempts (especially after opponents begin to sense your looseness and stay in hands against you longer), it is incumbent upon you to choose the STACK SIZES you are targeting for your play to ensure maximum implied odds for when you do hit.

#6 You will fold much more often on the flop than your opponents.

While looseness implies an increased number of flops seen, it should be noted that "favorable" situations for you to continue putting chips into the pot on the flop may well be rare. Identifying these favorable situations rely very heavily upon your skills beyond playing the value of your cards.

It may seem counter-intuitive, but playing loosely actually entails a somewhat greater post-flop level of discipline than does playing a more ABC style, simply because ABC poker will tend to result in far easier decisions on the flop and beyond.

#7 Personal stack awareness is critical for your play style.

A loose play style should imply an aggressive play style as well. This is true simply because any passive play style will require making hands frequently to be profitable. This is so because when you are calling you merely have 1 way to win (showing down the best hand), whereas if you are betting or raising you have the potential for winning by making a better hand than yours fold as well. If you are entering loosely, and playing passively as well, you simply will not make enough "good" hands to win frequently enough at showdown to be profitable.

Due to the higher frequency of bets and raises, any aggressive play style requires a high degree of personal stack awareness to avoid unwarranted commitment situations. A loose style requires this awareness even more, due to the relatively higher number of pots entered.

#8 Using position is even more important for your style, than it is for more ABC styles.

Since a loose and aggressive style will often be playing to very small edges, it is of great importance to have the maximum amount of information possible. Playing from advantageous position is of paramount importance when seeking maximum information.

A more ABC player will tend to have start hand standards which lead to top pair/good kicker or over pair type hands on the flop; these types of hands tend to rely much more on "pot control" and betting structure than on pure position.

So...

The negatives of a Loose play style are:


With Looseness comes more difficult situations and decisions, thus you will need a higher degree of skill to be effective.
More frequent pot entries can result in any "leaks" in your game being amplified.
Frustration can easily set in if your style does not work early on.
Looseness carries a much higher degree of variance than does tighter play styles.
A Loose play style is much less effective in situations were few opponents are "aware" enough to fold in threat situations.

The positives of a Loose play style are:

A Loose play style can allow you the satisfaction of making full use of your well developed poker tool box.
Even when you do make "mistakes", you will tend to have a wider range of situations to examine, and learn from, in post game analysis.
You will exhibit a greater tendency to confuse and confound your opponents, thus making them more exploitable.
You will tend to get much greater value from your premium start hands than tighter players.
Developing an effective Loose play style can equip you to play against ANY skill level of opponent.

Does anyone have anything to add?

I would love to see YOUR comments...



-JDean

Last edited by JDean; Fri Jul 08, 2011 at 06:56 PM..
 
Old
Default
Sat Jul 09, 2011, 12:28 AM
(#8)
RedLetterman's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 665
Article immediately reminded me of Tony G. Find some vids of him and see if you do not agree.
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 11:08 AM
(#9)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by roomik17 View Post
Long article but definitely worth the read, it is old but still has excellent strategy in it

Hello all,

I have been lurking and reading posts here for some time. I thought I would finally pipe in and speak about a few things. The subjects that I intend to discuss in these posts are manifold and perhaps unrelated, so forgive me in advance if this post seems disjointed. For those interested, I'd like to give some background about myself and my game - including addressing some posts made about me. I would also like to discuss my style and extreme LAG play in general. Finally, I would like to comment on my future plans in poker and get some feedback from some of the professionals on this site.

OK, about myself. For better or for worse, I believe that I am one of the better known players that play the 10-20 game on Party Poker. My style is somewhat controversial and has been the topic of considerable discussion in two or three posts that have been made about me. This STYLE (independent of me) has been discussed recently as well, with some excellent posts made about it by ML4L, cero_z, and El Diablo among others.

As those of you that are familiar with me know, I almost always (on PP) employ an extreme LAG style. I have found it to be extremely profitable, especially on Party Poker. I have had success playing much higher, including the big games on UB and Gaming Club - but I have found that multi-tabling 10-20 on PP while employing the LAG style has yielded me the maximum profit. The premise of this play, and the reasons for its success are manifold. In order to keep this post somewhat organized, I will try and talk about them one-by-one in a "list" format.

- First of all, as cero pointed our in a recent post, playing more hands gives one that many more opportunities to win a fish's money. For the simple reason that I am playing many more hands than the average player, I am provided with many more opportunities to win large pots against players who will overplay their hands. Additionally, by playing hands like 8-6 or 5-2, I am MORE likely to hit a hand that will be both disguised and give a weak player a chance to have a top pair/overpair type hand that he will stack off with. Note that if you play tightly, you will not get these opportunities with AA, KK, AK, etc - since (a) the opponent in the hand will be mathematically less likely to hold an overpair or similar cards and (b) if you hit a hand hard, your opponent will be less likely to hold a TPTK type hand that he might stack off with. Otherwise stated, if I hold 8-6, my opponent will be more likely to stack off with AQ.

- The inherent mathematics behind two card poker - in particular, the fact that a hand like AK is only a 3-2 favorite over a hand like 6-5 makes it very profitable to play hands that are NOT duplicated, as long as you possess the capacity to make better decisions than your opponent. Although they are not complicated, I do not want to discuss too many of the simple yet effective ways of winning pots by bluff calling, flop texture reading, etc in great detail for two reasons. One, this post is going to be long enough as it is, and two, I do not want to give away too much of my thought process for obvious reasons. However, the main point is that since the worst hand you can conjure up is still only a 3-2 dog over AK, it becomes +EV in my opinion to get to the flop as often as possible if you can make better decisions than your opponents after flop.

- Although I will do what I can to get maximum money in preflop if I am holding aces - or kings in most situations - the fact remains that the greater an edge a player has over his opponents, the more the gap widens when the bulk of the money (and decisions) are made after the flop. To that end, while I open-raise with a wide variety of hands and call raises with a wide variety of hands, I try to keep the pot sizes small. I try - and feel that I am successful - at winning lots of small pots, and picking up big pots only when I have the goods. As you all know, in NL, it is pretty common that no one has anything TOO good after the flop. The 10-20 players are fairly easy to read if they do or they don't (not just the passive ones, but the aggressive ones sometimes pick inconsistent times or monetary values to bluff with), and I tend to pick up a lot of pots that no one wants. An added benefit of raising and calling raises so frequently is that bad players (and even otherwise good players who are getting frustrated) will make horrendous mistakes far more often against a player like me than they will against a tight player. I don't mean to call out a player here, but I want to provide an example of a hand I played a couple of months ago against an otherwise excellent player and a respected poster here. Captain Zeebo, I apologize in advance for exposing this hand, but I want to point out that even strong players like yourself can make massive mistakes that you would not make against tight players. On the hand in question, it folded to zeebo and he raised to 80 from the small blind. I called in the big blind with 10-9. Many of you will say that this is not a hand I should be calling a preflop raise with, etc. However, on a flop of 8-7-6, zeebo pushed all in for 2.1K with just JJ. I of course called and won a 4.3K pot. Now obviously, zeebo will not do this against a player like sanguin, jackwould, kristelita, or any of the other successful but tight players. However, against a splasher like me, he just assumed his hand was best - and not wanting to be put to the test, he made a massive mistake. This type of thing is not infrequent: I often get statements like "samoleus, how do you get these guys to just give you all their chips?" when someone stacks off with, say second pair against my set or something. Well, the answer is this: since I splash around, players that are either not very smart or not paying close attention, just interpret my constant raising as overaggression and will be willing to play huge pots with marginal holdings. Of course, I rarely (not never of course, but rarely) will play a huge pot without a very big hand. But my style makes it appear that I will and good players give away a lot of chips that they would not give to other players.

So to briefly summarize, my style affords me the best of both worlds. First, I am able to pick up most of the pots that no one wants. Second, I am able to win huge pots with big hands. There are additional benefits as well. It frustrates opponents and sets them on tilt. It makes players who are not able to make good marginal decisions loosen up their starting hand standards against me. I get to play more hands against fish who are begging to get their money taken by whoever gets to them first. My loose preflop standards are often misinterpreted as loose postflop standards at great benefit to me. I could go on, but you all are probably tired of reading by now.

A quick tangent: ML4L wrote an excellent post some time back entitled "the running game" or something like that. In it, he talked about winning loose aggressive players and their potential inability to adjust to those who adjust to them. Indeed that trait is of paramount importance. While I am almost always the table captain in my Party games, I have often (on UB agaist Prahlad, and sometimes live depending on the opponents) shifted to a very tight strategy. For instance, I have played a couple times at Foxwoods where a couple of players attacked very pot out of drunkenness or machismo. I knew that my splashing style would not work, so I simply sat and waited until I had big edges on them. I played way fewer pots than I am accustomed to, but won huge pots and ended up with very good profits. Same situation occured when playing in games with players like Antonio Esfandiari, Kenna James, and Phil Laak at Foxwoods. Playing 25-50 NL with an uncapped buy-in, these guys were clearly playing below their usual level and wanted to compensate by overbetting the pots. When I was in this game, I simply downshifted, let them "run" the game, but walked away with the biggest profits by playing TAG. I am not trying to toot my horn here, but just trying to make the operative point that this style that I discuss is one that I use almost exclusively on Party, but to employ it gainfully, it has to be used with discretion and has to be able to be adjusted accordingly.

Some outstanding posters, such as cero, have suggested that the counter strategy is "so simple." I do not want to get in a protracted discussion about this for obvious reasons, but I do disagree with that. I think that when a player adjusts to me (reraising to isolate, thin calls, etc), I can adjust specifically to them and counter with either extreme aggression (putting them to the question when they put me to the question marginally) or by trapping. The notes feature is a great tool obviously. Ultimately, adjusting to this style requires a good deal of decision making and stones that a lot of players are incapable of making.



Full post and thread here http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/show...ue#Post4732305
wowwww
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 11:09 AM
(#10)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDean View Post
(The following was posted on another Forum I belong to on 2/15/11, it is by me)

Defining Looseness, and using it "properly," or, how to be loose without being a maniac

I was thinking about loose play today, and some "rules" for it occured to me. Feel free to tell me if you agree, or disagree, with these...

#1 The 2 cards you enter a pot with quite often mean less than other factors.

When you start with unpaired cards,

you will miss the flop approximately 2/3rds of the time. The same is true for your opponents. Even when you or your opponent(s) start with a pocket pair, more often than not one or more over cards will flop. Oftentimes a continuation bet will be enough to win a pot.

#2 Awareness of how your loose play is effecting the thought patterns of others at your table is critical for your success.

When you are entering a lot of pots, continuation bets begin to lose effectiveness in winning pots. People with a pocket pair and only 1 over on board begin to call you. People tend to believe you are on vulnerable hands, even if you HAVE paired, and they start to call you with just over cards. Failing to take into account the fact you will have less "credibility" at the table than your tighter opponents can lead you to waste a lot of chips if you are not careful.

#3 Observation of your opponent(s) tendencies are MORE critical for your success, than it is for more ABC-type players.

Since your play is so dependent upon small "edge" situations, it becomes vital that you are aware of your opponents' tendencies. Pre-flop start standards are important for you to know, but of even greater importance is knowing what your opponent(s) are likely to do on the flop, and later. What are they calling you with? What do they need to bet out? What do they require to raise or check/raise you?

I have found that playing loose successfully nets me many small losses, and a few large wins. Those large wins come when I have a much bigger hand than my opponent(s) expect. Part and parcel of being able to "create" situations where your opponent(s) pay you off handsomely on your large made hands is knowing who at the table is most likely to stack off. Alternately, knowing who will likely signal their willingness to "give up" on a hand can also net you good sized pots. It all boils down to successfully "reading" your opponent(s) tendencies.

#4 Your successful bluffs will generally win you small pots; your opponents' successful bluffs will generally win larger pots against you (if you are not extremely careful).

After a while of loose playing, your opponents will simply stop "believing" that you have a good hand EVERY hand. After this point in time, your bluffs will begin to work less and less.

Since your bluffs will rarely be believed, your opponents will usually have had to wildly miss the flop in order to fold for you. This will lead to many situations where you can pick up a small pot. If you ARE called (and the pot grows), it will be very difficult for you to win due to your loose image.

Alternately, since your hands will (generally) tend to start out weaker than your opponents', you will be MORE susceptible to re-steals, and river bluffs than are ABC players. Once your opponents key to this fact, they could potentially take a semi-large pot away from you on a late street. This tendency argues toward you keeping the pots small when you have semi-strong, but vulnerable hands.

#5 Implied odds, as opposed to pot odds, will be a hallmark of your drawing plays.

Since your game consists of pot entries on a wider variety of hands, it should not be surprising that you will also tend to pick up a wider variety of draws than your opponents. This means you will be required to notice situations where you may see a one-way draw on the flop morph into a 2 way draw on the turn, and recognition of the "back door" outs potential on a given board vastly increases in value for your play style.

You will also be required to have a strong knowledge of the potential for your opponent to fold to "phantom outs" (scare cards which you can represent as hitting you) when you bet, and his particular pressure points. "Pressure points" are the bet amounts past which an opponent will be reluctant to "sheriff" your loose image.

Since reliance upon draws will mean you will see quite a large number of FAILED draw attempts (especially after opponents begin to sense your looseness and stay in hands against you longer), it is incumbent upon you to choose the STACK SIZES you are targeting for your play to ensure maximum implied odds for when you do hit.

#6 You will fold much more often on the flop than your opponents.

While looseness implies an increased number of flops seen, it should be noted that "favorable" situations for you to continue putting chips into the pot on the flop may well be rare. Identifying these favorable situations rely very heavily upon your skills beyond playing the value of your cards.

It may seem counter-intuitive, but playing loosely actually entails a somewhat greater post-flop level of discipline than does playing a more ABC style, simply because ABC poker will tend to result in far easier decisions on the flop and beyond.

#7 Personal stack awareness is critical for your play style.

A loose play style should imply an aggressive play style as well. This is true simply because any passive play style will require making hands frequently to be profitable. This is so because when you are calling you merely have 1 way to win (showing down the best hand), whereas if you are betting or raising you have the potential for winning by making a better hand than yours fold as well. If you are entering loosely, and playing passively as well, you simply will not make enough "good" hands to win frequently enough at showdown to be profitable.

Due to the higher frequency of bets and raises, any aggressive play style requires a high degree of personal stack awareness to avoid unwarranted commitment situations. A loose style requires this awareness even more, due to the relatively higher number of pots entered.

#8 Using position is even more important for your style, than it is for more ABC styles.

Since a loose and aggressive style will often be playing to very small edges, it is of great importance to have the maximum amount of information possible. Playing from advantageous position is of paramount importance when seeking maximum information.

A more ABC player will tend to have start hand standards which lead to top pair/good kicker or over pair type hands on the flop; these types of hands tend to rely much more on "pot control" and betting structure than on pure position.

So...

The negatives of a Loose play style are:


With Looseness comes more difficult situations and decisions, thus you will need a higher degree of skill to be effective.
More frequent pot entries can result in any "leaks" in your game being amplified.
Frustration can easily set in if your style does not work early on.
Looseness carries a much higher degree of variance than does tighter play styles.
A Loose play style is much less effective in situations were few opponents are "aware" enough to fold in threat situations.

The positives of a Loose play style are:

A Loose play style can allow you the satisfaction of making full use of your well developed poker tool box.
Even when you do make "mistakes", you will tend to have a wider range of situations to examine, and learn from, in post game analysis.
You will exhibit a greater tendency to confuse and confound your opponents, thus making them more exploitable.
You will tend to get much greater value from your premium start hands than tighter players.
Developing an effective Loose play style can equip you to play against ANY skill level of opponent.

Does anyone have anything to add?

I would love to see YOUR comments...



-JDean
and wowwwww
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 02:21 PM
(#11)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
Lots of good info in both, being a LAG player is much different than being a spazz lol
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 02:33 PM
(#12)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by roomik17 View Post
Lots of good info in both, being a LAG player is much different than being a spazz lol
loll hehehehe
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 02:43 PM
(#13)
Don B. Cilly's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 394
(I just love people who quote 100 lines to add one, don't you? ;)

But... er... Roomik... I was expecting slightly different graphs on pokerprolabs after reading the word "successful" in the title, you know....
I think I'll stick to my TAG-occasionally-intuitively-LAG style for the moment.
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 02:49 PM
(#14)
roomik17's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,556
BronzeStar
lol I never said it was my writing Don B. Cilly and read the whole thing with the link included haha
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 04:13 PM
(#15)
Grade b's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don B. Cilly View Post
But... er... Roomik... I was expecting slightly different graphs on pokerprolabs after reading the word "successful" in the title, you know....
I think I'll stick to my TAG-occasionally-intuitively-LAG style for the moment.
I think its true to say that using both styles is the best way to go. on a tight table or in later stages of an MTT then Lag is good. But in a Freeroll or start of an MTT Tag is defo right (unless its a mega tight table.)

Grade b


I am always ready to learn although I do not always like being taught. ~Winston Churchill

13 Time Bracelet Winner


 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 05:38 PM
(#16)
CannonLee's Avatar
Since: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grade b View Post
I think its true to say that using both styles is the best way to go. on a tight table or in later stages of an MTT then Lag is good. But in a Freeroll or start of an MTT Tag is defo right (unless its a mega tight table.)

Grade b
+1mirrion

Compare poker to boxing. In boxing would you want just 1 effective punch... or would you want these to combat a scenario that arises... a jab, straight, left hook, check hook, right upper, left upper, over hand right and combine them to make a combo.. foot work and head movement.?

LAG and TAG combined is a very tough style to cope with in "cash games" if your up against it! Very difficult to range them!



Quintuple Bracelet Winner

 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 07:36 PM
(#17)
Deleted user
I have always felt that teaching LAG to newer players is a waste of time.
If they cant play a effective TAG game then how are they supposed to grasp LAG?

A LAG knows the TAGs weaknesses because they have studied the style.
You can win micros with TAG and I think jumping to a more sexy style before winning a MTT is going to be counter productive in the long run. You will end up with a style that is abused by both sides!

JMO
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 08:06 PM
(#18)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
tag or lag or mixed.

when a tag player mixes it in a pot you tend to know hes got it.
when a lag player mixes it in a pot who knows what they got
playing mixed say ten hands tag then ten hands lag is really effective.
However playing lag and missing flops can be very dangerous
especially when the flops are running high
also they can be rewarding if you get a premium hand when playing lag

timing is important and how the cards are running too
if variance is favouring 2-3 low flops lag it is
but if im seeing high cards then tag it is for me

if your card dead then lag it must be,got be better than sitting and been blinded out.

look like a mad man and no one beleives you have a hand,but that also allows lesser players to call you and get lucky at times.

the best style i feel is none,and just play it by how the table seems.but remember those folds wich i seem to forget.
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 08:23 PM
(#19)
joy7108's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,286
Very interesting reading, I've just been starting to incorporate some lag play, usually later in tourneys. It's amazing what some peeps will call with,even late in a tourney. This hand is from the Bigger $2.20 on Sunday Jan 29th. The opponent had been opening almost every pot for 3x or better, and cbetting every flop. He was winning quite a lot for a while...

PokerStars Hand #74720106566: Tournament #557010967, $2.00+$0.20 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level XIX (600/1200) - 2012/01/29 23:41:50 CT [2012/01/30 0:41:50 ET]
Table '557010967 269' 9-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: cel01 (63350 in chips)
Seat 2: ivocikovski (43040 in chips)
Seat 3: Van Syn (80191 in chips)
Seat 4: joy7108 (18241 in chips)
Seat 5: GIVEMEURDOH1 (38263 in chips)
Seat 6: GuesWho'sBac (29994 in chips)
Seat 7: Mr.Vengance2 (40240 in chips)
Seat 8: Rotbert83 (84909 in chips)
Seat 9: thundup007 (62175 in chips)
cel01: posts the ante 150
ivocikovski: posts the ante 150
Van Syn: posts the ante 150
joy7108: posts the ante 150
GIVEMEURDOH1: posts the ante 150
GuesWho'sBac: posts the ante 150
Mr.Vengance2: posts the ante 150
Rotbert83: posts the ante 150
thundup007: posts the ante 150
joy7108: posts small blind 600
GIVEMEURDOH1: posts big blind 1200



I was surprised he called the shove considering what he had, he was kind of a bad lag as it turned out.

Last edited by joy7108; Thu Feb 02, 2012 at 08:26 PM.. Reason: add
 
Old
Default
Thu Feb 02, 2012, 09:22 PM
(#20)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
PokerStars Hand #74930515381: Tournament #509335642, Freeroll Hold'em No Limit - Level II (15/30) - 2012/02/03 2:11:57 UTC [2012/02/02 21:11:57 ET]Table '509335642 476' 9-max Seat #5 is the buttonSeat 1: holdemace486 (1220 in chips)
Seat 2: shsh77 (120 in chips)
Seat 3: azofra_du (1060 in chips)
Seat 4: RIKITRAUN (4525 in chips)
Seat 5: stanca83 (5070 in chips)
Seat 6: yustas55 (1100 in chips)
Seat 7: tranquilo373 (2300 in chips)
Seat 8: hank6138 (2370 in chips)
Seat 9: @marcos_ofc (3955 in chips)
yustas55: posts small blind 15
tranquilo373: posts big blind 30
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to holdemace486 [Qs 7d]
hank6138: folds
@marcos_ofc: calls 30
holdemace486: raises 30 to 60
shsh77: raises 60 to 120 and is all
-inazofra_du: folds
RIKITRAUN: folds
stanca83: calls 120
yustas55: calls 105
tranquilo373: folds
@marcos_ofc: calls 90
holdemace486: calls 60
*** FLOP *** [7h 6s 5s]
yustas55: checks
@marcos_ofc: checks
holdemace486: bets 378
stanca83: folds
yustas55: raises 602 to 980 and is all-in
@marcos_ofc: folds
holdemace486: calls 602
*** TURN *** [7h 6s 5s] [6d]
*** RIVER *** [7h 6s 5s 6d] [Kh]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
yustas55: shows [5h Jh] (two pair, Sixes and Fives)
holdemace486: shows [Qs 7d] (two pair, Sevens and Sixes
)holdemace486 collected 1960 from side pot
shsh77: shows [Js Ah] (a pair of Sixes)
holdemace486 collected 630 from main
potyustas55 has timed out while disconnecte
dyustas55 is sitting
outyustas55 finished the tournament in 5275th
placeshsh77 finished the tournament in 5276th place

*** SUMMARY ***Total pot 2590 Main pot 630. Side pot 1960. | Rake 0 Board [7h 6s 5s 6d Kh]Seat 1: holdemace486 showed [Qs 7d] and won (2590) with two pair, Sevens and SixesSeat 2: shsh77 showed [Js Ah] and lost with a pair of SixesSeat 3: azofra_du folded before Flop (didn't bet)Seat 4: RIKITRAUN folded before Flop (didn't bet)Seat 5: stanca83 (button) folded on the FlopSeat 6: yustas55 (small blind) showed [5h Jh] and lost with two pair, Sixes and FivesSeat 7: tranquilo373 (big blind) folded before FlopSeat 8: hank6138 folded before Flop (didn't bet)Seat 9: @marcos_ofc folded on the Flop

A CLASSIC LAG MOVE THAT CAN BE DEVASTATING,
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com