I heard this quote and I want your opinion

L

LEV1ATHAN

Rising Star
Joined
Sep 17, 2020
Total posts
18
Hey I'm new to Poker and even more so tourneys. I was reading tournament forums and heard a couple times people saying "If you're only getting it in good you're calling too tight"

I would like to hear what more experienced players or even what new players think on this.

ps. I know this is vague but I'm not looking for detailed scenarios just overall mindset
Thanks, LEV
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Collin Moshman

Collin Moshman

Poker Expert
Joined
Nov 11, 2009
Total posts
1,317
Awards
3
The quote is correct, particularly the slightly more general version: "If you're only getting it in good, you're playing too tight" (instead of just calling too tight). Of course, if you're getting it in bad all the time, you might be playing kind of kamikaze!

But good play requires things like:

** Shoving with weak hands because you only have 8bb in late position

** Calling river bets or pre-flop all-ins only because you're getting great odds

** bluffing because it's a great spot where your opponent will usually fold

Some of the time, these moves will inevitably get action from great hands and you'll be getting it in bad. As long as you were happy with the spot, don't worry that you had low equity (winning chances) when the money went in :)
 
A

angelamsmith05

Rock Star
Joined
Feb 21, 2018
Total posts
381
The quote is correct, particularly the slightly more general version: "If you're only getting it in good, you're playing too tight" (instead of just calling too tight). Of course, if you're getting it in bad all the time, you might be playing kind of kamikaze!

But good play requires things like:

** Shoving with weak hands because you only have 8bb in late position

** Calling river bets or pre-flop all-ins only because you're getting great odds

** Bluffing because it's a great spot where your opponent will usually fold

Some of the time, these moves will inevitably get action from great hands and you'll be getting it in bad. As long as you were happy with the spot, don't worry that you had low equity (winning chances) when the money went in :)

This is very helpful.
 
Tracid

Tracid

Squirrel Tiger
Community Guide
Joined
May 28, 2016
Total posts
6,358
Awards
6
As Joe Stapleton likes to say; "if you only get it in good, you can never suckout"... :biggrin:

~EDiT:- Or words to that effect... :)
 
Amanda A

Amanda A

Legend
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Total posts
1,308
Awards
2
Yes true statement. Also, if other players know you are super tight and only get it in good, you won't get any action when you finally have a great hand.
 
Rob Hobson

Rob Hobson

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Total posts
3,704
Awards
2
BR
Famous players say what they want, but not everything makes sense for all players or any particular stage or type of a game.
 
Last edited:
Poker Orifice

Poker Orifice

Legend
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Total posts
22,522
Awards
6
I believe the saying is "If you're not getting it in bad.... you're not getting it in enough!"
 
NWPatriot

NWPatriot

Rock Star
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Total posts
480
To sum up Collin's examples: short stack, pot odds or fold equity. The answer lies in poker math.

Fold equity is the key concept if we are betting light. If we have some fold equity, then even when we have less than 50% showdown equity, we may actually have a 65% chance of winning the hand if we have great reliable fold equity. (Let me know if you need the formula to calculate total combined equity.)

If we are calling, then pot odds is the key concept. But for me, this is more of a cash game application, rather than a tournament application if we are going all-in. The pot odds tell us that given enough opportunities for a particular situation, we will win some and lose others, and this is fine in the long run of cash games. In a tournament, losing all of our chips is a disaster, and calling off all of our chips needs more thought than simple pot odds.

I am not sure if everyone assumes "getting it in good" is the same as "getting ALL our chips in good" (i.e. all-in), or if it just means we call a big bet when we may not be the leader. There is a huge strategic difference between an all-in and an overbet scenario.


Either way, Good luck and God bless.
 
elizeuof

elizeuof

Visionary
Joined
May 26, 2015
Total posts
656
Awards
1
Playing tight is the first tip that any poker player will find when researching poker, as a rule the game must starting tight and getting wider, according to the situations that are happening, be it getting closer to the end, opponents giving us the conditions to make more profitable plays if we play more loose, or when the aggressiveness of the opponents allows us to use a wider range and still gain an advantage.

It is not bad to start playing very tight, the bad thing is to stay tight even when the conditions of the game demand that we take other actions and open the game more.
 
Alizona

Alizona

Visionary
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Total posts
820
Awards
1
That quote is what finally convinced me that my "tight is right" playing style wasn't optimal.

I finally realized, after YEARS of being a nit (a very tight and stingy player at the poker tables) that I NEVER won bad beats. I only lost bad beat hands. When you only play AA, it is impossible to bad beat anybody! But you will lose a TON of them - about one in every five times we get AA we will lose the hand - just in general, AA has approximately 80% equity against 2 random cards, so while we'll win 80% of the time, 20% of the time we'll take a so-called "bad beat" and lose to an inferior preflop holding.

So... for years I did nothing but get angry and upset every time I'd lose a bad beat. The game seemed hopeless to me, how can anybody win at this darn game if the best hand in the game will lose 1 out of 5 tries? Sometimes it seemed my AA would lose 5 out of 5 times.

Well, after a lot of reading poker help books and doing a lot of thinking on my own, it finally hit me one day!!!! The reason I never won any bad beat hands is because I was playing WAY too tightly. And so, in an effort to even the scales on bad beats, I began to play a lot more loosely. Sure enough, I began to win my share of bad beats and coolers. And my anger also began to fade away as well. I started to really appreciate this great game and "embrace the variance". Today, I am a much different player than I used to be. I take more risks now - not stupid dumb risks, but calculated risks in situations where it seems profitable to take such risks. And I changed my preflop ranges dramatically, learning much from the whole "Game Theory Optimal" discussions that many players are having these days.

The bottom line is, that quote is a terrific summary of my own journey in learning how to become a winning poker player. As a beginner, I thought the object of this game was to only play the best starting hands... but years later I realized how I was doing it all backwards! If only I had heard that quote in the beginning, but perhaps I wouldn't have agreed with it and maybe I wouldn't have take the advice it offers. Probably not. Sometimes we just have to make the journey, bad beats and all, in order to learn. Best wishes at the tables!!
 
ADRI7HO

ADRI7HO

On the road...
Loyaler
Joined
May 6, 2020
Total posts
4,125
Awards
2
With a very tight game, you only win big if good cards flow all the way through. Which is why it doesn’t happen in a tournament too often.
 
B

bapfel

Visionary
Joined
Jun 7, 2020
Total posts
752
Awards
9
Thank you for sharing your development, exciting too read,..although I started too loose, we seem now to hit in the middle between, where you always search for the right balance in playing.
That quote is what finally convinced me that my "tight is right" playing style wasn't optimal.

I finally realized, after YEARS of being a nit (a very tight and stingy player at the poker tables) that I NEVER won bad beats. I only lost bad beat hands. When you only play AA, it is impossible to bad beat anybody! But you will lose a TON of them - about one in every five times we get AA we will lose the hand - just in general, AA has approximately 80% equity against 2 random cards, so while we'll win 80% of the time, 20% of the time we'll take a so-called "bad beat" and lose to an inferior preflop holding.

So... for years I did nothing but get angry and upset every time I'd lose a bad beat. The game seemed hopeless to me, how can anybody win at this darn game if the best hand in the game will lose 1 out of 5 tries? Sometimes it seemed my AA would lose 5 out of 5 times.

Well, after a lot of reading poker help books and doing a lot of thinking on my own, it finally hit me one day!!!! The reason I never won any bad beat hands is because I was playing WAY too tightly. And so, in an effort to even the scales on bad beats, I began to play a lot more loosely. Sure enough, I began to win my share of bad beats and coolers. And my anger also began to fade away as well. I started to really appreciate this great game and "embrace the variance". Today, I am a much different player than I used to be. I take more risks now - not stupid dumb risks, but calculated risks in situations where it seems profitable to take such risks. And I changed my preflop ranges dramatically, learning much from the whole "Game Theory Optimal" discussions that many players are having these days.

The bottom line is, that quote is a terrific summary of my own journey in learning how to become a winning poker player. As a beginner, I thought the object of this game was to only play the best starting hands... but years later I realized how I was doing it all backwards! If only I had heard that quote in the beginning, but perhaps I wouldn't have agreed with it and maybe I wouldn't have take the advice it offers. Probably not. Sometimes we just have to make the journey, bad beats and all, in order to learn. Best wishes at the tables!!
 
ChickenArise

ChickenArise

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Feb 24, 2018
Total posts
2,089
Awards
1
Yes there is a lot of truth to this statement but you say you are new to poker and as Eliziof suggested when you are new you should be playing tight. As your game progresses and as you move up in stakes you would explore the best spots to bluff and have good reason to.

It doesnt make sense to execute bluffs at the early stages of a micro tournament. You need to be playing against a thinking opponent to pull of many of the good bluffs.

Focus on having a solid tight game before you think about opening it up. Bluffing is more of an advanced tactic for when you understand range versus range concepts and blockers.

I have been coaching my son for 2 years now. He has developed a solid tight game and we are just now beginning to explore bluffing. There is no short cut and there is really no place to explore it without a proper foundation in place.
 
6

619Leafs

Legend
Joined
Jan 30, 2017
Total posts
1,790
Here's my take, I tried playing looser than tighter, what happened is players kept calling my bets thus losing money then lost my stack. I didn't suck out rather I got a bad beat while shoving all-in.
 
Igor Popadyk

Igor Popadyk

Visionary
Joined
May 7, 2015
Total posts
629
Awards
5
often amateurs and not only after winning a couple of hands with a successful play of their hand get excited and feel like the king of poker and start playing too many hands and very aggressively - which can lead to a stack loss - such is poker and variance
 
Top