Aggressive poker is winning poker

[1sunchin]

Yeah I saw you too! You were doing quite well also.

I was definitely unlucky yesterday and wasn't on my game. I'm still trying to refine my system of play, but I have to say that I've been getting the best results with aggressive bets for hands that are in my range. There's just not much you can do when you're not catching anything good on the board...

Anyway, I hope to see you again at the tables. Keep up the good work and good luck to you!

It seemed to me that you need to think about the tactics of the game in freerolls, as many players in the freerolls call, raise and re-raise with a much wider range of hands than in buy-in tournaments.

I hope that in the next CC freerolls you will have more luck.

Good luck at the tables!

 

[finaltable1]

While there's a fine line between reasonable aggression and playing like a maniac, I have found that, when I assert myself with bets at the table, I often take down pots easily.

With any good connectors (nothing too low), if I have the opportunity to open the betting, I usually start with a pot-bet. This immediately scares off weak handed players and draws in those who think they have a shot. Then the flop... If I make a pair, I follow up with another quarter to half-pot bet depending on the strength of my pair. This works to either cause the other player(s) to fold or as an information bet, especially if they raise (in which case I will probably fold). If they just call, it's time for the turn... my pair might still be good. I make sure I'm not in danger of getting caught by any draws and make another half-pot bet. This provides another fold/information opportunity, and a spot where a lot of players make the mistake of continuing when I have them beaten already (e.g. a set or have hit a draw). Finally, the river... I take a quick look at the board and see what I've got. If I think I'm still winning, I make another half-pot bet. Believe it or not, this is usually where the other player folds. If not, I win the pot with essentially a series of value-bets.

This is just an example of how many hands tend to go for me. I only screw up when I get bored and start to play too loose. Also, I never shove pre-flop. I do, however, sometimes call a shover if I've got them stacked.

Also, it's important to note that I don't necessarily start out playing this way. I prefer to build at least 40 BB before I move to this style of play. But it has carried me to a few final tables the last few weeks.

Anyway, I'd like to hear some thoughts from other aggressive players and see if they have similar experiences. Alternatively, do you think this approach is bad? If so, I'd love to hear ways to improve it.

That's a good point of view on the poker side of the game. But you'll keep folding and losing that pot size pre-flop bet with your connectors in a schimpanze style game where all of your opponents push all-in button pre-flop with no doubts.

 

[takinitSLEAZEE]

It seems like a good ring-game strategy. Get your money in a few nice pots until you've double or tripled a stack then hit another table, or play more than one. Tournaments are more like roller-coasters moving players around and rising blinds, imo. I really just try to play what the table is giving me and that my luck holds out.

 

[bellicoso]

The downside is that you will lose a lot against better kickers with this style and you will lose big pots!

I think this strategy is mathematically a losing one. To make it work you will have to be able to classify your opponents very well. If you can get enough people to fold and are capable of making some good lay downs it could work.

For me making smaller bets worked better. If you open with the same small bet every time it makes you hard to read and even relatively small continuation bets can get opponents to fold if you build anrichten table image

I do the same thing but with larger bets. If open, the pot bet helps to swell the pot if I've got callers. I half-pot bet if I've got something and it seems to be working for the most part. The only time it doesn't is if I'm in a downswing where I'm not catching anything. But I'm pretty much out at that point anyway, so I don't lose my head about it.

Since I initially wrote this post, I've refined my hand range and the positions from which they're played and I stick to it. This has helped this methodology quite a bit. The key is that I'm not in every hand like a maniac, and when I'm in, I've got something.

Suck outs happen, but that's normal. In general, I can quickly gain command at a table, take out weaker players and hold my own against stronger ones.

I'm sure there's more I can do to play this better. I'm still working on it. But, so far, so good.

 

[GameTooHard]

There's a lot more to playing aggressive. Avoiding a discussion about table image, I'll give you a quick piece of advice.

When we open-raise and get called, such that we're heads up in a pot we generally want to cbet a dry flop (factors that contribute to a dry flop: weaker cards, no same suits, no connected cards). For example:

Pre-Flop

We open from the Button to X3BB and get called by the big blind.

Flop 9s3h7c

It's going to be +EV to raise if the big blind checks to us, whether or not we made anything in the hand. The reason for this is that more often than not our opponent hasn't flopped anything and with this flop they haven't gained any equity. Out of position this choice to c-bet could be more difficult, especially without a HUD and a Fold to FCbet stat.

It's important to consider is your hand strength and position, c-betting out of position requires greater hand strength. If the flop is wetter (opposite of dry board) c-betting with a hand that hasn't connected yet becomes -EV as an aware opponent or someone who has connected can check-raise you and have it be the "correct" choice.

I would focus more on establishing solid reasoning for your choices instead of focusing on a specific style of play. Styles of play are essentially a set of solid reasons for making choices at certain junctions in the game.

 

[maximmaxim]

I act according to the situation and mood, when I am angry, I myself am very aggressive ... usually I peacefully wait for a good hand and do not participate in adventures ...

 

[infonazar]

The results of your game speak for themselves. If you get a stable income, playing aggressively, then it's great and you need to continue to play the same way. But if you get a loss, then an aggressive strategy is not a good choice. I adhere to a conservative strategy that gives a good result. I always try to be a disciplined player and wait for good cards.

 

[andrewallenschutter]

Do what's working best for you. If being aggressive is working for you then continue being aggressive. Be careful for following through with hands that don't have enough outs.

 

[lywyu_09]

Be aggressive

Is good to be aggressive against loose players.

 

[scolopin77]

It is good

It is good but the other way aroubd is also good bet before the flop. If you then get something on the flop you can check quickly to make a slow play. But remember not to burn yourself on thr turn oreslse the river will get you.

 

[Johnsouth]

This style has many pros and cons it can make or break the bank I've played many games using the aggressive style and had all sorts of outcomes but when at an aggressive table it can be very exciting imo

 

[0m3n]

Agressive style is good but not alwaays... It depends on stage of tourmanet or players which are at ur table

 

[fadisn]

Good strategy, and to add more, personally I notice for example poker stars (some how) rewards such players, by a really amazing river based on a low flop, doesnt sound so strange that you could made it to final tables to me, congrats.

 

[Mustafajones]

I only seem to get aggressive when I am very confident in my hand. I rarely bet pre-flop unless its a premium hand and I like the position I'm in. I try to hold my aggression until post flop and see how the other players are responding to it. If I get a round of checks I start betting aggressively. If I catch my hand post flop I just bet aggressively until I win the pot or get re-raised.

I am not saying this is the best strategy but I tend to last longer in games when I become more aggressive in certain situations. My table presence strongly influences my aggression. If I have not established myself at a table I am less likely to be aggressive.

 

[Rusel2302]

an interesting version of the game, something of this game you can take a note

 

[damgold]

If you want winning is the best way to play the opponents feel uncomfortable with has an aggressive player at the table.

 

[FrothyGoodness]

Its kind of a toss up. Aggressive is definitely a winning strategy but not if you're playing at a table full of New Blood. You can be aggressive all day but if they are calling everything Guess what...you lose. Aggressive against a tight table is Ideal. More than likely someone will tilt hard. You can also have a tight approach when playing and win out too

 

[bzvz222]

If you are in the tournament to win, you have to olay agressively. Tight game will get you in the money, but if you wanna win, tough up your game.