Ugh, ya I know and understand all of those concepts Dad, I only typed highstakes because thats what calidonks called them im not trying to jump levels. Was just interested in reading what he was talking about.

I'm late, but since I'm about 2 months into a concerted effort to increase my aggression, I might share some thoughts.

Firstly, Rusty's obviously right- we should be aiming not for a style or category but just the optimum way to mmaximise profit each hand. Sometimes this is folding, sometimes its check-calling all the way to the river and sometimes (mostly) its taking the initiative one way or another.

I knew this, too- but putting it all together required (I felt) skill and experience in wielding a wider range of the key skills/ components of the game.

So, I noted that the players who had most success against me were the super-aggressive raise-raise-bet-bet players and then forced myself to use their key weapons despite how "wrong" it felt), in defined and measurable ways, in each session.

For example, read this post I made (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...36/index8.html), but, essentially, I forced myself, regardless of cards/ situations etc, to 3bet and 4bet a specific number of times in session.

By itself, this is more "wagging the dog", but as a part of your self-improvement programme, as Dgi suggests, I have found it ridiculously helpful. It's genuinely amazing what I've learned doingis- although, I am now having to compensate the other way.

So, in summary, I'll reinforce Rusty strategically but, for tangible exercises, Dgi's post is spot on. It reminds me of Stephen King's book, "On Writing" (?) in which he explains that being a good writer is like being a good carpenter- you need to be proficient in the use of the tools in your toolbox before you can go from chipboard-erector-guy to sculpter.

incidentally, your post is titled, "Pitfalls of ..."

in answer to that specific question, I will warn that my game, currently in mid-change, really is polarised/ jekyll&hyde. The problem with that is that I find it difficult (actually, often impossible) to be confident as to what V's are putting me on.

This makes all my marginal spots far more difficult against good players.
Now, there aren't enough good players to make this a problem, you would think, but the big pots are often the ones which end up being the most marginal when against good players, I'm finding...

(b^2 - 4ac) is -423

I didn't want to imply that playing PLO had no advantages for a NLHE player. I played PLO for about 4 months online, basically not playing NLHE. It is a huge help to your game, just as playing any other forum of poker than NLHE helps your NLHE game.

For me, I became much stronger in board reading. It ended any residual leak in calling bets on the river just because "I might be good." It teaches post flop play. Finally if you've ever posted a BBV type of hand, you aren't going to survive PLO.

I observe this a fair bit in my games. An 'action' player will sit and run over the table building up big stacks by creating an image that gets them paid, and by get a tonne of folds in between.

These players often aren't good, and then tend to not be able to shut down when it's obvious they should. But, when you watch someone play this style that can fold when he gets raise, they typically have a lot of success.

I can't get my self to play that super aggro, but I am still much more aggro than average.

On the other side, I watch the way people play against it just shake my head. They go completely passive, waiting to make hands versus the guy. then when they do make a strong hand they play it fast taking away his aggro ability. If they make medium or weak hands, they end up folding middle pairs, or middle pair turned 3rd or 4th pair to these guys. Essentially their strategy ends up being call a lot early, fold a lot late, and watch the aggro player print money.

My last session there was this super aggro guy, that could fold. He seemed terrible, and kinda was, but yet was smart enough to pick his spots. People at my table essentially never 3bet pre, never raised the flop, checked a lot etc.

I was out of position for most the time he was at the table. So, I had to tighten up. But, my strategy was to basically not fold versus him with my medium-high strength hands, and then avoid his aggression with my weak/nothing hands. Ie, if I had a weak/nothing hand I'd either just c/f, c/r, or bet depending on the case and position.

The strategy is essentially to let them be aggressive when you want them to be, and don't give them the chance to be when you don't want them to be.

I finally got position on him when I seat became available later, and then I started to 3bet him. I 3bet him 3 times in the 2 orbit before he left and took two buy-ins off him because I hit and let him do his aggro thing.

Thanks. Who knows, before all is said and done maybe I'll pop out on the LAG side...?

Will give PLO serious consideration. Only played it a couple times. That "slowhabit" guy has a book on transitioning from NLHE to PLO. Might pick it up. Anyone recommend it?

Some really interesting spots, Poe. I liked your aggressive play. That all-in on the river with nothing was impressive. Did you have a specific read besides, "his hand isn't big enough to call my represented monster"? The Q8 play was wild, but I did something similar with T9 last night. How did it feel during and after the session? What were some of the comments made at the table? Did you ever reveal your hand after it was over (other than showdown, of course)? If so, did some opponents think you were crazy, were you shown noticeably more or less respect?

Got to play for a couple hours last night, too. Tried to call as little as possible pre-flop. Worked out well, for the most part. I think the regulars are starting to fear my game. ^(;,^

VS

PLO has too much variance unless you have the time/inclination to grind millions of hands. Why choose a game that has more variance unless you just want to gambol?

As poker players grow and progress, they begin to think less in terms of winning an individual hand and more in terms of maximizing profits. In my experience that transition, from something that's discrete (focusing on winning a hand) to something that's gradual (focusing on winning $$) is the primary catalyst for transitioning from a beginner's passive play to play that is more focused and aggressive.

I see a lot of this on the river in particular. Say you raise a very weak standard loose-passive 60/5 limper from the button with A9s, they call, the flop comes 932r, they check you bet, turn 2, they check you bet, river Q they check. I see so many people check back here and it tilts the hell out of me. "I've won enough," they reason. "What if I get check-raised?" "What if they rivered two pair." "Oh they're probably not going to call me." Gaaaaaaaaaah! Failing to value bet here is a huge mistake. You are setting money on fire. This is almost as bad as making a horrible spew bluff against an opponent that is never folding. It only doesn't seem that way because of the positive psychological stimulus that comes from raking in the pot. The value lost is every bit as real, though.

This is why I tend to emphasize that aggressive play means much more than making the big sexy CRAI rebluffs; while I agree with the consensus that it's important to establish an image that helps get you paid off, a) it's also important to take advantage of maximizing those payouts when the time does come to get paid off, and b) that sort of play reinforces that image anyway. Make that 3rd value bet even if you're pretty sure they're on a busted draw and not calling. It disguises your hand to the rest of the table and, when they fold, works just as well to establish an "I'm a crazy bluffer" image as an actual bluff.

At a table full of weak players, if you're not value-owning yourself every once in a while, you're probably missing out on tons and tons of value.

But all this talk of "aggro play" comes with the caveat that it must be applied with intelligence. Even up well into the mid-stakes I see players making horrible mistakes, trying to bluff their way out of impossible pots, and in general burning money in the name of "aggro play" "because aggro poker is good poker hurrrrrr". The basic golden rules still apply: if you're up against scared money, bluff with a higher frequency; if you're up against a calling station, don't bluff and value bet very wide; always be conscious of your image, but don't project. Just because you would never call that all-in with those cards doesn't mean that they won't. And if you're up against a maniac, you have two choices: play passive and be prepared to snap off bluffs, or grab your nuts and play the optimal everyone-else-will-think-you're-crazy-too-but-you're-actually-slightly-more-under-control-than-they-are route. Either way, maniacs force you to ride the variance train.

I often say "let them decide what they can call with" when people advocate checking back what is almost always the best hand.

outstanding post.

have just played 25 hands of 6 max 4PLO. No idea what the results are but probably about break even,

Honestly, I'm exhausted. So much to think about. Raising, limping, calling ranges pre.

Thinking about the board post flop gave me a headache. Really forced me to work hard to understand what the nuts was and where my hands could be in relation to that.

fun but hard

Such awesome pride accompanies this type of win vs those aggros as well.

I'm not sure which hand you're referring to- but I wouldn't be too surprised if a shove I made wasn't optimal. It's a serious leak in my game at the moment- but, I do find that river shoves get more respect than they probably deserve.

During the session, I was aware I was on a heater, but I was far more focused on hitting my targets and learning. The actual game/ money was 100% irrelevant and I was able to keep it that way. Interestingly, I imagine it is precisely that sort of detachment which separates me from good players.

After the session, I was laughing with friends about how lucky I'd been as well as how the table had, pretty much, bent over and taken it. It made me realise just how much of a wuss I may normally be.

I never showed a hand- I only ever show down hands to friends in recreational games and, once in a while, I might show a bluff to a douche just to wave my dick around. I know I shouldn't, but...

But, the table was openly frustrated and they absolutely knew what I was doing. The ridiculous thing is that, even with that knowledge, they didn't adjust their play properly.

Darrick,

Read part of the your first post on this chain of posts and realized it was dated from 2008.

So replying the way I intended now is a moot objective lol.

Curious to know how have you improved as a poker player in these last four years?
Have you found a balance between new school and old guard poker?

LD

ps:- I shall add my two cents regarding your original post hopefully in the next two days.