Parrots and Bullies
I'd like to hear the opinions of people who have played at least tens of thousands of hands on whether purely being a bully at the table is actually a profitable strategy.
By this I mean throwing huge raises out there, or doubling everything the person to your right does.
Every time I have seen somebody like this at the table their stack is huge. Given that C-Range is always considerably smaller than O-Range, particularly when behind a player who raises you 30BBs like it's normal, surely they have positive expectation?
Even if they lose a hand, it probably won't be enough of a loss to cover the amount of bets they will rob from people when they throw out such a huge bet that only monsters will be worth a call. Or maybe it will?
I was just at a $25NL table and there was one of these guys playing 83% of hands - I saw him show 53o at the river on one hand. I raised his preflop call and I KNEW that he would counterraise with a big, chest-thumping raise. I didn't want him to, but he did. He bet $4 to counter my $1.25. This was the one time I got involved with him and he showed AKo at showdown and rinsed me purely because he got a K on the river. This is typical. 83% range and the time I play him he has AKo and wins by chance anyway.
It isn't a strategy I would adopt personally because I don't think that it is Poker - it's just flop lotto/who can shout loudest. It is always obvious that he has absolutely no hand whatsoever because of how big and aggressive and, more importantly, how immediate the raises are - there is never any thought or deliberation behind any of it. But if you're in a room with a suicide bomber - you'd get down on the floor whether he had a point or not, right?
EDIT: I suppose realistically this is a Betteridge headline; if this were a profitable strategy, Poker wouldn't be a game any more and people would have done it decades ago. Still interested to hear people's breakdown analyses of this strategy though, with anecdotal evidence..