Hi, forum. I am knew to the site but have been lurking for a few months now. I have been playing the lowest microstakes offered at PS, and obviously I'm not playing aggressive. I'm playing strict ABC poker. I fold about 80% of my hands, and when I do get a hand I raise hard, while still not falling in love with any one hand unless it's the nuts. I think my reads are at the very least above average, and even in such a wild, loose game I can accurately put people on specific ranges of cards, usually.

My question isn't about ABC poker though.

You see, Viktor Blom is a fascination for me. I don't understand how he can play so aggressively, even more so than Durrr who is known as hyper aggressive, and still come out on top?

I wasn't playing poker for real money when he was at FT, but since he signed to PS I make it a point to watch his matches, and he's crushed them so far at even lower stakes than his FT games. And against seemingly weaker opponents.

I know the users of this forum are infinitely more wiser and experienced than me, and I would really like to have a discussion on the merits of hyper aggressive play. I would also be very interested in learning any tips about how to improve my game...I really want to make a run at this for the rest of my life. Not millions, but grinding a 30k year living.

Anyway, thanks. I know I rambled in this topic but basically, how do Blom, Dwan and Antonius play so maniacal and still end up on top?

DO NOT TRY AND PLY LIKE TOM DWAN AND ISILDUR

If you play hyper-aggressive, you will win big pots but you will also lose big pots. You gotta have a strong mind. You have to be smart about it. Don't just raise every hand without thinking about it.

These guys seem to be taking advantage of the fact that very often tighter players cannot have the nuts in their range, whereas a looser player can. They therefore rep the nuts and make big bets, which their strong opponents interpret correctly. Likewise, they hand-read well, so they understand when the progress of a hand means that their opponent cannot have a strong hand (because on previous streets, current strong hands would have been played differently.

One thing that should be pointed out is that this hyper-aggressive style simply isn't profitable against many opponents, especially at lower stakes.
There's a well-known hand where Durrrr has Tx vs Barry Greenstein with AA and Peter Eastgate with 42o on T22 flop.

Durrrr manages to get both to fold. GL trying that at $10nl!

Slowjoe, that's very interesting what you wrote. What did eastgate put Dwan on? Ten Duece, because his range is so wide? Or an ace duece?

I understand they read hands very well, I've watched negreanu(sp?) play for a while and he advocates a very loose preflop strategy and a sound postflop strategy, and it all depends on reading your opponent. Though not nearly as aggressive as some of these online gurus, he certainly plays a lot more hands than a typical TAG.

Anyway, what tips would I need to learn in order to play this style? And at what limits does it start to be effective.

I understand completely playing at low-stakes is a matter of ABC poker and getting the most EV for each decision you make. But at some point, the poker has to start getting tougher.

I would even wager to say that lower stakes are as tough as some of the higher stakes were years ago. It's because of the fact everyone thinks they are a great player. So they all read and do as much work as possible. Everyone on 2+2 isnt a winner, but I'm sure this site is a stepping stone to winning

LOL durr would try that at 10nl and get snap called in both spots. Ur average micro player isnt going to say, "how can he lead into the field twice knowing that its highly likely one of us flatted 2x so we dont lose our action?" Those plays work against world class players who think through their levels properly. At the stakes you are at your playing against level 1 what do I have players so TPTK is going to be the nuts to many of them. Do not try and get people to fold TPTK at the 2nl level. Cut your losses and save the fancy stuff for when you are BRd enough to play higher stakes

Just because its Dwan doesnt mean Dwan cant pick up a good hand. At the top of Dwans range there was 1010 which had Eastgate crushed and any 2x hand that Dwan could have been holding would have had him crushed as well. Eastgate probably thought ahead and realized he would have been facing a 200,000+ bet on the river and decided that its too hard for Dwan to be bluffing in that spot.

Hyper-aggressive style is okay in the right spots, but it's important to be flexible as to when you switch it up. Flexible aggressive.

I played a forty five player SNG today, it was only a quarter buy in so I figured it would be much more of the same as the cash games. A lot of preflop calling to see a flop, and a lot of showdown action with top pair, and to be surprised a lot of people were folding and playing tight.

Do you think the level of awareness at lowerstakes as improved? Is the average 2nl player going to be as good as the 50nl player was 10 years ago?

It's all about money. Big money. There are lots of dwans at low limits and nobody knows them let alone any respection. If you have the balls dwan is an ordinary player for you. Maybe even fish.
A couple of examples
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWqfkCrDk7Y&feature=fvst
Have a look at the face of your hero antonius when somebody not impressed by his hyper agression. (anyway i dont think Patrik superaggresive player like dwan)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtaAnS_uKVw
This boy soiled his pants

If you cannot see the difference in how Dwan plays to Farha your the fish not Dwan.

Besides, what exactly was your point in those videos, they show nothing of what i think you were trying to get across.

The video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GXmLPbTmE0 starting at around 35min, and a discussion is at http://www.pokerlistings.com/blog/dw...astgate-on-hsp

It's the weight of money at issue. Greenstein is marked with a big pair, and knows that Durrrr can easily have a deuce. Durrrr "has to" have a hand, because he bets the turn after Eastgate cold-calls a bet and a raise.

Eastgate puts him on a bigger deuce or tens full, since he has to be able to beat Barry's big pair. The only deuce he can beat is 32, and he's sitting with 500k in front of him facing a bet of 100k+.

They're playing 400/800/200 ante, so Eastgate and Durrrr are playing ~600bb deep. This kind of move simply can't work against short-stacked fish. Having a fairly huge ante in there plays into Durrrr's hands also. Those conditions don't exist in other games, and many of the guys in the game simply cannot afford to lose a couple of stacks in twenty minutes vs a madman.

(Brunson, Greenstein and Eastgate are probably ok, but I'd be surprised if Phil Laak, for example, can afford to stack off multiple times. I know that when Phil Galfond was there, he only had one buyin available in Vegas on the day, and was essentially playing under-rolled "scared" poker.)

In general, High Stakes Poker not withstanding, Dwan is playing shorthanded or six-max poker with antes. If anyone tried to play that loose-aggressive in FR, they are going to get eaten alive.

This is amazing. Thanks everyone. I understand completely not to play like these professionals at lower stakes, and hell even at higherstakes I'm now dwan or Blom, but it seems the respect they command at a table is enormous. I mean they raise reraise and completely terrorize a table.

I don't see how playing TAG can completely dominate a table the way hyper-aggressive does.

I'm just fascinated on how to incorporate that into my game, and why it works? Wouldn't these pros just play TAG and bust Dwan eventually?

I did see on PS "The Big Game" last night, they take an amateur and throw them into a table full of pros, she played TAG, actually tight weak but you see my point, and the more aggressive pros destroyed her. It was an eye opening table for me personally, showing that just folding until I get a strong hand might not be the right way to go.

I also understand changing gears btw and she failed to do that.

I think it's overly simplistic to say not to LAG it up or bluff at the lowest stakes - there are a few nits among the level 1 calling stations who will instantly shriek and jump out of the window if you bet a scare card...

I think a good idea is to experiment by table-selecting for super-tight tables at the smallest stakes and have some fun bullying the nits - you won't make much money even if you pwn them lol (and more likely you'll lose a bit from the times they have a hand) but you'd probably learn a lot more about post-flop play (esp turn/river) without much risk to your bankroll. You'll start to see useful bluffing opportunities based on board textures / opponent tendencies, ranges etc. More importantly, you'll start to see spots where you shouldn't be making moves.

You really don't learn much at all just isolating the 87/0/0.3 megafish, despite them being the end of the rainbow as far as these stakes are concerned. So yeah I reckon as long as your bankroll can handle it, hunt down some jittery paranoid nits with weak hearts and practise your aggression on them. No need to curb-stomp their teeth in every hand, just give them the occasional gentle slap and see how they react, then maybe slam their face into a table, then have a go putting a cigarette out on their arm. Mix it up, have fun

The show the Big Game, you notice they also play scared money which they dont do online at low stakes. Which is why the pros terrorize them.

It's also 6-max and Pot Limit preflop, deep stacked. A tight player will have to play at least 16% of hands, which is essentially K10s+. With this much weaker opening range, you are going to be put into very difficult spots, i.e. spots where you are somewhere between 40-60% equity vs. villains range. A lot of tight players don't like being in this spot, they want to be 75% or more, otherwise keep the pot small.

I promise you that if you try to terrorize a Full Ring table against competent players, it won't work. Since players a lot of players are opening 11%, they just aren't going to fold.

Works at higher stakes since it means more. None of the FPS plays the pros make work at micros, so just master the fundamentals. Also playing LAG you need to have a good read on your opponents and have good postflop skills. This is where floating with air and restealing on the turn comes in handy, but you have to have good reads or you're burning money. If you can handread and read players, you can do it but also you need to realize LAG has more variance and bad beats since people will call you down lighter because of your aggressive image.

hyper aggressive can work at any limit, it's all about hand reading and understanding your opponents personality, and whether or not he can call huge bets with 2nd pair or top pair weak kicker, etc etc. You really just need to have a deep passionate understanding of your opponents thought process. If you can literally put yourself in his shoes and think exactly like he thinks, then you will know what kinds of bets will get what kinds of reaction from him.

Really? Try to explain this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf2j7mihX7E

He says "can work", not "will work". There is a difference.

You find someone at the micros that fires one barrel, or folds to flop raises > 80% of the time, or floats once and folds the turn, then they're a prime target for LAG style play in a generally TAG game-plan.

The reason people are playing tight in a quarter tourney is: they are broke.

jessica alba owns you all

The top pros aren't strictly playing hyper-aggressive. They're playing more like flexible-aggressive/hyper-aggressive.

They're already close. Haven't played as low as 2nl, but at 5nl, There's consistent cbetting, floating and 3betting in a significant part of the population. Five years ago, 3betting was really rare at 100nl.

I think poker will go like chess to an extent. Poker players will know certain "openings" like how to balance a 3bet/4bet range. This has already happened in high stakes NL, where the games simply don't run much any more because pro vs pro, they're all zero ev, and paying rake on top of that.