re: Poker & I've noticed that some technically bad players do well assumingly due to aggression?
In Dan Harrington's book volume 1 it talks briefly about these player types.
I say these player types as he breaks it down very well in (sub categories in his book).
He basically states in the book that players get broken into groups and in each group you have to deal with them differently from different positions.
2nd) "The Lag"
3rd) "The hyper lag"
But in his book he branches the 3rd&4th into one group
Now when it comes to group 3&4 you, your question is more or less stating the both groups play the same or have a somewhat (the same line of thinking), well they actually don't have similar lines of thinking, their thinking would be like day and night (Complete opposite to one another).
The 3rd group (many pros), actually would fit into that group (while the 4th group would have many donks/fish and over all maniacs in it).
The difference seems to be the ability to be able to put your opponents on a hand and actually while doing that be able to convince them that you have a different hand (better than they), while group 3 is able to do this flawlessly on a continually basis, they also realize when they are beat and thus fold without losing much chips in the process, while when they attack you gaining alot of chips in the process because of their very nature of how they play ATC (or it would seem), they do end up hitting a higher frequency of flops because they play a higher frequency than you do (and/or you miss with your high card hands and they convince you that they have hit a wet board), and when the normal (Joe), can't fold AA on a board of 835 (2 spades), the pro could easily have that 67s/33/55/88/83/85/53 and AA wouldn't know the difference giving the way the "pro" has been playing. Now while talking about the hands, their would be reasons that the said "Pro", would call with such hands (pot odds
), the fact that they want to send a message they don't like their blinds attack/raised, because they feel they can out play you, they feel if they hit that you wouldn't be the wiser (and fold your over pair), maybe it's because of the simple reason that they get to close the action off in that round (many different reasons).
Now you have the 4th group, they don't care at all about nothing, they don't think about anything, and they certainly aren't doing it because of the reasons I stated above, they simply are doing it for the sheer madness of playing like trying to imitate the pro players plays (yet they are lacking the intellect to comprehend the reasons the pros are doing it).
While a prefect example of such a situation would be like this.
Say "A pro" would be in the BB with 85s, and a conservative player raised in UTG with w/e to 2.5x-3x, with blinds at 150-300 and antes at 20 at a 9 handed table.
The pro would than take into account all the money in the pot preflop
20 antesx (9) players=180+ 150(SB)+300(BB)+900 (assuming it was a 3xraise from UTG)
would= 1530 (Since 300 already in the middle from the pro), he looks at it as he would need to pay another 600.
Giving him 2.5:1 on his money.
Now at this moment he starts thinking about (UTG), and how he/she has been playing up till this point. Is he conservative/what hands does he/she play, are they crazy?
Flop comes out, and they proceed from their.
Now all those calculations don't take into effect in the mind of the maniac, they just call to call, it's as if they can't help themselves out.
I jut wanted to also state in the book, that when he does touch up on this subject, that he only has 3 categories and that he states anyone playing over 30% is just crazy, thus I included the 4th group in their.