I actually think that the way those findings are presented is misleading. They assume that because 75% of hands don’t go to showdown, that players are winning pots regardless of what cards they are holding. But to quote another article: “when they win an uncontested pot, it is likely because they have a hand that they believe is the best hand right now or can easily become the best by the time all the cards have been dealt and their opponents don’t.”
For example, players on Replay love to bet big, so they make their opponents fold, thereby winning one of those 75% of pots. If you make a full house with your pocket aces, you are going to bet big because you know how strong you are, and your opponents will likely fold because they almost certainly aren’t nearly as strong. The conclusion in the article that cards might not matter is foolish because the incomplete information in poker is not knowing your opponents’ cards, but knowing your own cards is also extremely important. Don’t fold those pocket aces!
It’s kind of amazing to see how many ways poker odds can be examined. I’m not mathologist, but it really does make me appreciate the complexity of the game. It’s definitely not just knowing your cards. (Or knowing when not to pee in a bottle, as one pro found out.)
Kinda sounds like there are as many ways to play as there are people playing, but as long as you’re trending upwards bankroll wise, it seems valid. Of course, as soon as it swings, the dealer is a damn liar and can’t be trusted. Jerk.
Funny today was the first day I played during 3 hours for a long time and I started really bad getting busted early from 2 tourneys and 1 ring game at 100/200 (accounting for a total loss of 50k).
I entered another ring game and after a few hands I noticed an aggro tard. Made 130k on him… Variance is at times hard to deal with in poker (even with play chips) but in the long run you always end up building your bankroll if you play decently.
On the first part I don’t really believe there are so many ways to play poker. You can usually classify people into 6 categories.
Of course there are slight differences between two LAGs or two TAGs but basically you can put people on a style of play. The very fun part is when a good player shifts gears and change its style of play adapting to others or simply profiting from his previous image.
But to do that you also need good players around who can pick your table image up
That’s where poker is really complex and funny. To play “advanced” poker you need good opponents. Otherwise it’s value oriented which is interesting too.
Yeah the player types (it is possible to break it down further) are:
TAG - Tight aggressive, meaning they play a small range of hands, but are aggressive when in a pot (1% of Replay)
LAG - Loose aggressive, they are aggressive with marginal hands, but make good decisions (almost none on Replay)
Nit - Tight players who only play extremely strong hands and rarely bet (1% of Replay, they can be hard to spot)
Passive-fish - are bad players who like to call too much and only bet when very strong (95% of Replay)
Aggro-fish - bad players who always like to be the aggressor, even with marginal hands (3% of Replay)
It’s hard to be a good LAG on Replay because too many opponents calling all the time makes it hard to be aggressive with anything but a very strong hand. I doubt there are many nits on Replay because it’s just for fun and being a pure nit is pretty boring. Very good players tend to be on the TAG side, but they also know when to be aggressive.
That was my categories, I’ll add unknown for 6th even though someone shouldn’t remain “unknown” for long and depending on the table you can assume a style (on replay mainly passive fish, in a live table 200$NL pretty much the same even though there are chances to meet regs, at a WSOP final table well… you get the point).
No. Good players tend to be on the TAG side. Very good players know how, when and why to play TAG, LAG and nit. But i agree, LAG doesn’t work on this site as people are just too stupid to lay things down. But basically: LAG beats nit/tag, nit beats fishes, TAG beats nit/fish. However playing LAG poorly will cost you way more than playing TAG poorly because it’s a harder strategy to use.
The World is very wide. The things I have observed from a little part of the above World is…
I don’t know what is there in playing cards, most /some of the people like/ want to play with
them, Irrespective of the age. Due to this most /some of the people lost their properties, money etc,. When somebody is losing somebody should gain. But in practical it is not come true. Why?
When profit comes they are spending party (Drinking, smoking, & for unhealthy food items).
When these type of people playing in POKER, Where do the chips go?
I don’t know how they (chips) are going & how they are coming back, but it is sure they are protecting the properties, money.
Lower staked games would not be pointless to all players. The newbies ( and some of the thieving oldies…) will use those games to learn and sharpen their game. The oldies just go in and steal off them because they are useless players who can only beat newbies… MY OPINION.
I’m not an expert, but I do have a friend who runs a very large Yachting forum…his bandwidth costs alone would choke a horse! I’m betting that an interactive site such as this…is 10 times more expensive. I’m a poor poker player, so I have to buy chips every month, I hope it helps to keep this site up and running.
