Originally Posted by 33plus1
i'm a firm believer if you can have your play broken down to a three letter acronym at a table, you're doomed.
you'd better be able to adjust from TAG, LAG, maniac, calling station, etc. all within a single session in order to profit long term imo.
poker is people and adjustments. other factors like position, pre-flop hand selection ,etc. are secondary concerns to me, albeit very important and never to be ignored. read the people and adjust your play and you can lay KK down against a rock who 3 bets, limp with it UTG against a maniac and call a raised pot from a LAG with 7 high in the big blind.
This is how I see it as well. Not only do I adjust and play players accordingly to how they play, but I find it also disguises my hands as well.
I often get miscategorized by weaker players when they see me play a starting hand that fits into a box they are looking for. I then use this perceived image against them. (if they're good enough to even be looking at this stuff). So if all they see me play is strong starting hands, I can bluff them more easily. Or if they see me play Q6s, now they think I always play ATC, and they pay me off when I bet for value. They don't realize I was only playing a certain hand because I was isolating a donk, or maybe it was a multiway pot and my value went up, etc...
You know it frustrates a TAG when I always show up with the nuts against his 2nd nuts, but then he sees me win with a marginal hand but better than the LAG donk I isolated, etc... He can't figure out why I always have the goods against him, and gives me further action later.
Lately, I'm doing better against strict LAGs who don't change gears, by calling down more, giving them rope to be aggressive. But I do get confused at how many of these guys just don't adjust. Just today, I'm playing with a LAG who had fearless agression, good reads, not a maniac. But he was playing a very high VPIP and PFR. But even as a few players such as myself caught on to him and became selective in how we played against him, he didn't adjust to us. He continued his aggressions, cbetting missed flops etc... (I define "not a maniac", in this case to be the fact that his bet sizing was intimidating, but not rediculous, he wasn't instashoving all the time, etc...)
So my question regarding that is, is there a certain mathematical formula or reason why he continues to do so? I mean, he seemed good enough to read when he was getting resistance, yet he would still keep firing, and playing many many hands.
For me it was exploitable to the point that I would give up the marginal hands with him early on if I didn't smash the flop. Because I knew he would pay me when I did. (which he did).
In my recent observations, I've found that a true LAG, even bordering on maniacal, will do the best in the first hour of play. People give them more credit for hands, because they don't have info yet. The big raises are super intimidating when you haven't seen them showdown yet. And I've seen many a LAG get their stack inflated 2x to 5x in the first hour. Only to lose it as people start to adjust. Wouldn't Optimal LAG play be to only play that first hour, or until players start adjusting then? I'd think you could just be a LAG hit and run artist in a room with 10 tables or so, which in my area, there are a few to choose from. (not to say I'm considering this, I don't like to stay stuck in LAG gear, although I do use it at times)