Thoughts on tight passive strategy?

Doesn't work.

Can work in the right fishy live games. But even where it can work, it's not as profitable as TAG.

yea ive been playing a while but making little profit.. but any other strategy i loose.

Tight aggressive is usually better.

Tight-passives don't get paid off by anyone except morons. They hardly ever bet or raise so when they do show aggression, anyone paying attention knows to get out of their way unless they have close to the nuts (and depending on the tight-passive, even "close to the nuts" might not cut it).

The most profitable bets in microstakes are value bets, and if you're not being aggressive, you're probably not making too many value bets, thus throwing away money. There's also very little chance that an aware player will call your bets when you actually do try to value bet.

can u elaborate on your strategy? i don't think it wins at any level. how many hands have u played?

I play 4 tables. I wait for a good hand and I play it. I need a poker tracker on 888 but i don't know of any.

You shouldn't have a strategy in that sense, you should play your opponent instead of being a robot that does the same thing in every spot.

Most microstakes players make the mistake of check-calling too much. A few make the mistake of betting too much i.e. being too aggressive. A "tight passive" strategy is good against such players.

i feel like i always lose with ****ty hands.. I know I suck but i just need to get onto the winning stage.

I think you mean to say you lose against them? Because if you lose with them, the simple solution is to fold them preflop (it's typically a good idea to fold sh*t hands pre).

It has its place in your poker toolbox. Playing too passive means you miss bets, so playing tight passive probably is most useful against an aggressive player who will do your betting for you, but who will fold too often to your aggression. What you effectively end up doing is turning hands that you would bet for value against other players into hands that are bluff-catchers against this particular player.

Playing a tight-passive style can also have some value when you find yourself in a massively mutli-way pot. You should bluff less into a crowd and your standards for value betting should rise against multiple opponents, so you should play tighter or more passively post-flop than you would against one or two opponents.

But how do you play it? Do you raise? Does your definition of "good hand" change depending on your position? Your stack size? Other player stack sizes? Other player tendencies?

that's the tight part. what about the passive part?

Actually I'm pretty sure that the "DO NOT LIMP" rule applies here.

This statement is a massive red flag.

There is an abundance of resources here on 2+2. Poker is not a simple game. There is no magic formula. You're not going to learn how to play within the scope of one thread.

Do the work. Learn.

Its problem.

It works if there are maniacs at the table.

I know to fold them but I get to much of them. That is why I fold so much and I feel like I am getting nowhere. I only play card that are above 9, which is why I play 4 tables so I can get more chances on picking up the good cards.. if that makes sense.

Haha.

FWIW, I think weak-tight can be profitable in the very softest games, but I sense that OP doesn't have much of a coherent strategy, and he might not really understand what tight or passive mean. When I was a beginner and first got a HUD, I thought I was playing tight-aggressive as a 22/7 player in full ring games, when I was closer to being loose-passive. :/

If OP wants to explain his strategy in more detail (or provide some stats) it might help us give specific advice.

So this is my stats with only one table using hold'em manager 2 for my first attempt with this poker tracker.

See this **** VVVVV help me!


[img]http://************/image/s0ivfq87n/[/img]

[img]http://s21.************/esew91lar/june12th2.jpg[/img]

[img]http://s21.************/rfz8zaplf/june12th1.jpg[/img]

Hello bud and welcome to online poker!

Tight-passive is basically a little above weak-tight which we do not really want to be. Aggressive poker is winning poker, hands down. If you choose to be tight-aggressive (TAG) or loose-aggressive(depends) on how comfortable you are playing various ranges postflop, but that will develop over time.

IMHO the only situation that a tight-passive style really works is when you are in a dream situation where you are up against an aggrodonk who bets a ton and you hit your hands nearly every time you get involved postflop, which rarely happens.

as for multi-tabling, the only issue I see is if you are missing opportunities to steal even with "bad" hands (preferably IP) due to the fact that you do not even use a HUD until recently which helps in times that you do not pay attention to the action of all the tables 100%. If that is the case, I would strongly suggest cutting down to say, 2 tables. If your play gets better over time, then add 1 table at a time.

I'm not a fan of spoon-feeding but I do appreciate it if you can work your way up from here, make the best of it and goodluck on the tables
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/69...hreads-430489/

learn push fold.

easiest poker to learn imo.

i mean. if i can do it, so can u!

play DONs. or 9man. u might be able to survive there.

gl

ive never come across a winning tight passive player. They are basically fish begging to be taken to the cleaners.