Only logged-in members can vote!
→ Click here to create a Mob account which gives you access to our forum and all our free bankrolls (no deposit bonuses) → Log in to existing account!
Joined: Oct '11
Location: Sweden
Age: 32 (M)
Posts: 1410
Phil Gordon has said a number of times that "aggressive poker is winning poker". What's your take on this? Is it true or is it false? In my experience, yes it's true. Just curious as to what you guys think about this.
Of course there's a fine line between aggressive poker and stupid poker but you know what I mean.
Well, yes, in the long term the statement is true. Remember, also, the other true statement where one can play correctly and still lose. If my hand is made on the flop or at least on the turn I play it aggro. If I lose on the river then more often than not reverse implied pot odds have kicked in so my made hand loses in the short term. There is a lot to consider on the last two streets that can affect the outcome of a hand. Wet boards, broad way draws, runner-runners, set over sets, boat over boats, to mention a few...have lost to them all at one time or another. In these cases, as much as it hurts, it's important to try to only lose the minimum. That can be hard because it can be hard to let go of a strong hand so as not to appear passive. IMHO it's a balancing act and sometimes we fall...still tight is right and playing those solid hands aggro will in the long term be +EV.
Joined: Jan '10
Location: Indonesia
Age: 60 (M)
Posts: 1875
It's true for me, but it's not enough play aggressive , should be play the card at right time. Not always play aggressive every time we get good card ( maybe it's just for me ? ) In some condition play passive bring me to better result, after fail with aggressive play.
Joined: Oct '08
Location: Canada
Age: 34 (M)
Posts: 217
Posted by shokaku: Controlled aggression is part of the game. But know what you are doing. Aggression alone will not win you money, and it is very easy to overdo it.
I completely agree with this. Aggressive poker is definitely winning poker, but it has to be used in the right spots. You got to use the image you are portraying to your advantage. You got to know when to slow down and when to speed up. This is where it gets complicated. Aggressive poker isn ot easy to play and that is why you will see a lot of players playing not so aggressive, so they have more control.
Joined: May '08
Location: Lithuania
Age: 39 (M)
Posts: 10090
absolutely not- aggressive poker is aggressive poker, that's all. winning poker is when you show profit in the long run, simple as that. you can be a winning player with aggressive style, or with any other style. and the same goes when you are a losing player- you can lose your roll playing aggressive poker, or super passive one, and anything in between
Joined: Nov '10
Location: Serbia
Age: 37 (M)
Posts: 2087
False. If Agressive poker is winning poker then all those donks that play like Ivey on 1/2c games would be winners. Offcourse, If you have hand you will bet it. You wont check nuts on river right? But, that is not what aggressive means (or what all donks think it means). Somehow everyone in TAG forgets about being tight and end up being mainiacs. Thinking, solid, balanced... poker is winning poker.
------------
Posted by pochui: absolutely not- aggressive poker is aggressive poker, that's all. winning poker is when you show profit in the long run, simple as that. you can be a winning player with aggressive style, or with any other style. and the same goes when you are a losing player- you can lose your roll playing aggressive poker, or super passive one, and anything in between
Joined: Apr '11
Location: Romania
Age: 58 (M)
Posts: 2432
Poker is an internal struggle.The tight-aggressive style is the epitomy of perfect self-control. This is known to be the only lucrative style of poker. If this is so, why doesn't everyone play in this style? The answer is very simple: because it is unnatural. This style is unique, carefully crafted, and rarely found in your everyday game. It is necessary to invest a lot of time and energy into exercising this style successfully.
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Greece
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 14136
Havent kept stats so far, but ive seen many times at my table aggressive players getting busted. Most of them they just keep betting and raising no matter what. If you play like this all the time doesnt mean you can win. Sometimes i order to win you need to fold
Joined: Oct '11
Location: Sweden
Age: 32 (M)
Posts: 1410
Posted by Mober: Havent kept stats so far, but ive seen many times at my table aggressive players getting busted. Most of them they just keep betting and raising no matter what. If you play like this all the time doesnt mean you can win. Sometimes i order to win you need to fold
ofcourse and as I said in my first post, there's a fine line between aggressive and stupid.
Joined: Jan '11
Location: United States
Age: 60 (M)
Posts: 3361
I surely don't have the technical or methodical feedback as some of the more experienced players, but do have an opinion on aggressive play. I've found that yes aggressive play works when the right circumstances exist. If your getting the hands and playing against others that are not very aggressive the advantage is in your corner, but when there are other aggressive players who take chances and are either getting good hands or make it appear they're getting god hands it's tougher to be aggressive yourself. I try to be an observer of how players are playing, if and when possible. It's hard to do when your getting bounced around on tables.
Joined: Jan '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 36 (M)
Posts: 1204
Hmmm. Good comments. I would say it is winning poker just as any other style is. But I consider good, controlled, opportunistic, loose, aggression to be more profitable, if you have a good gut and can maintain control, and make all the right reads. The reason I think this is, the more hands you're in, the more you're putting yourself out there, the more likely you are to hit. You can't win if you don't put yourself out there. But obviously you still have to fold, you still won't be in many hands but just more than others. Opportunism is the key word.
i find controlled aggression to work the best for me, there are many times i have been to aggressive and it comes back to bite me in the ass, now i try and stay alert and try and be more aggressive when i think its right.
Joined: Feb '08
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 1886
I think it's quite clear that if you are aggressive at the wrong times you will lose money and if you are aggressive in the right spot you will maximise your winnings. But when poker players are talking about being aggressive players they are not talking about donk-raising every hand. All winning poker players are both aggressive and passive but it's how and when they use their aggression that determines if they are TAG style or LAG or something else.
Truly, I think there is no way to prove which is best. There are some players who have won a lot of money by playing loose, which is not typically thought of as winning poker. I also know nits who have won money by being extremely selective of the starting hands they play, almost blinding themselves out before they cash. And it's impossible to say this way is better because you can't rule out amazing luck or external conditions and what suits some players doesn't suit others. For instance I might be really bad at reading people's faces which counters my winning aggression strategy or I might be too impatient to fold the hands my strategy tells me to fold.
So poker players can have entirely different opinions about raising/calling ranges. I know that many say raising gives you two chances to win the pot so raising is better than calling but I don't buy that. I've also heard that any hand good enough to call is good enough to raise but I think a lot can be said for pot control using checking and calling. Aggression usually gives us more information but sometimes it can't tell us any more than we already know. I think basic TAG is probably enough for newbies but as already said, most forget what the T stands for. I know I have developed my own range of play based on what I find others play and that often means folding hands where a lot of winners would be raising, and I may be entirely wrong for it or I may just be winning as much as I am due to this strategy. I will probably never know.
Joined: Oct '12
Location: Belarus
Age: 37 (M)
Posts: 42
Hypperagressive game always is too easy to read.but if you play aggressively in moderation i think it will be +EV game.For example you must to bet continuation bet for all boards if you in position,and your opponent checks,because you have position and initiative.I thing this agressive game will be +EV
Joined: Mar '12
Location: Netherlands
Age: 51 (M)
Posts: 617
i think aggresive poker can give you an advantage in any tournament,,but you simply can't play with the same aggression during the whole tournament,,,
in certain situations it's wise to go for potcontrol and keep pots small...in other situations its good to step on the gaspedal...
in general the aggresive player will have an advantage on the passive players..but if you can't fold to a reraise, aggresive play is just not for you..
you'll 100% walk up to a monster ...
so in combination with ,knowing when to fold...it is a key to open doors for yourself.
i think i am pretty aggressive player myself..i consider myself TAG switching to LAG in certain parts of the tournament..
in general i always start playing TAG...depends on the players at the table...
if there's a maniac at the table ,i will tighten up and wait for a nice spot to knock him out..
Joined: Nov '09
Location: Canada
Age: 55 (M)
Posts: 2387
Posted by uhhcallmi: i think aggresive poker can give you an advantage in any tournament,,but you simply can't play with the same aggression during the whole tournament,,,
in certain situations it's wise to go for potcontrol and keep pots small...in other situations its good to step on the gaspedal...
in general the aggresive player will have an advantage on the passive players..but if you can't fold to a reraise, aggresive play is just not for you..
you'll 100% walk up to a monster ...
so in combination with ,knowing when to fold...it is a key to open doors for yourself.
i think i am pretty aggressive player myself..i consider myself TAG switching to LAG in certain parts of the tournament..
in general i always start playing TAG...depends on the players at the table...
if there's a maniac at the table ,i will tighten up and wait for a nice spot to knock him out..
I agree with you on this. I think you have to mix up your play at the table and keep them guessing, but you definitely want to keep the aggression level up. Nothing better than being aggro for a bit, the other players at the table are starting to lable you as a bluffer - and then pocket rockets appear!
Joined: Nov '11
Location: Romania
Age: 34 (M)
Posts: 754
it is true, but not always. Depends on your cards. For example, sometimes i play all-in almost all hands, but in some tourney, it doesn't work in all. So i play all-in almost all hands, and i do it to get the other to a stage of rage, and they will pay my all-in only to get me out, so doensn't matter what cards they have. Many times i win, sometimes i don't, but always look to be shure there is no1 who can get me out of the tourney. With a very good hand you should play like Agressive pre-flop, on flop passive , turn : passive - Agressive, before River. This is how i play more than 70% of my time.
Joined: Mar '11
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39 (M)
Posts: 1646
i play pretty tight throughout the tournament until the right moments come up. i.e the money bubble and the ft bubble. at these times i will three and four bet in position alot more with a wider range of hands. and also when i know the tendencies of the players on my table. aggression is one of the tools you need to win a tournament but knnowing when and how to use it is another. good luck all
------------ oh! and i havent voted in your poll because there is an option missing:- BOTH
) In some condition play passive bring me to better result, after fail with aggressive play.
