I still like this definition by DOGISHEAD.

I'm more on the clowntable side of the argument, I think the nitty version of solid play is overrated and I have a number of friends who cannot get past micros despite their (apparently) solid play where they only raise when they have it.

Look preflop stats are so so overrated. There are big losers at SSNL who play 18/15 and at the same time funkeemonkee is one of the biggest winners playing the exact same "style". "18/15" is completely misleading because it doesn't take into account positional awareness (e.g. some nits steal 35+% of the time) or having balanced ranges (e.g. some nits only flat EXACTLY 22-99 from any position while others flat wider BTN vs CO, BB vs SB; the latter is much harder to play against).

I guess there's something to the point of not being a total playmaster LAG idiot but the "solid" play you're describing is good (maybe even great) for exploiting fish. I play more full-ring than most people here and you can REALLY see it in FR where nobody opens up, they just all wait to stack the fish with big hands. One big winner in particular is the biggest nit in the universe playing 12/9/1% 3bet, and yet when he 3-bets the fish calls and then stacks off with Q8 on the Q32 flop when the nit only ever 3-bets AA/KK.

Thing is, the ratio of regs:fish is now like 4:1 at every SSNL table and most regs are not going to give a lot of action to nitty "solid" players, especially not those who only 3-bet for value (5% 3-bet = TT+/AQ+).

The span of winning styles at SSNL is huge, one reg in particular comes to mind who plays like 36/31 and is my least favorite opponent because, well, he puts you in very annoying spots where you kind of need to hero call because he's a LAG idiot. Except that he's good enough where he's not always bluffing, understands your hand range, etc. 18/15 can certainly get the goods (in fact I bet even like 15/13 could for some players) but it's hardly necessary.

But I agree that this is a good discussion, let's keep it up.

also, are solid and ABC the same thing? ABC is solid, but solid can probably go beyond ABC. that's a nice definition by dogishead, but i think it applies only to ABC

Im Jacob!

solid <> nitty

solid = making the right decision in every siutation and adapting to different players

i think the point of his post is that alot of people take on certain aspects of playing laggy and apply them incorrectly, I did this for about 300k hands at one point in my life and didn't know what the F i was doing wrong

Errbody wanna be Jacob, nobody want this ****ty ass win rate. I do it, though

I think you guys are being distracted about what solid play is, which is not what I took to be the point of this post. The point is not what style you play (which is why citizenwind probably should have left out his brag about crushing .5/1 at 18/15), but what style yields the most profit for you, which is by definition the most EV. The point is that it is still a mistake for players to push edges early in a hand when that decision is going to cause them to make -EV decisions later on in the hand or in future hands if the don't understand and apply the reasoning that makes that play +EV. I do think citizenwind's post is a little contradictory and misleading in some places, but let's not reduce it to a LAG vs TAG debate.

Edit: Do you other non-nits have a W$SF over 45%. Mine is right there at it.

I'm with team clowntable

I think solid is a wider encompassing term than ABC

One factor is how much mental stimulation you need. I dont think many people would be able to play ultra nitty because its so boring. I bet the suicide frequency is higher among nits than LAGs. Just reading your post I get the impression that you are very controlled, disciplined and risk averse. More flamboyant personality types would probably just shoot themselves if they had to play 17/12-

Another factor is the possibility to learn. LAGs put themselves in more spots, play more poker, and have more chances to learn. They are also better equiped gear-wise since they too always have the possibility to gear down and play nitty. A person who only knows how to play 17/12 or whatever will probably never be able to play NL 2000+ profitable and in these days when games become tougher and tougher its prolly advisable for the future not only to learn how to beat fish, but also how to beat regs, because in some years a fish may be a rare sight.

Then the argument that you should avoid marginal situations because you can make big mistakes is logically flawed, because your opponent will be in the same number of marginal situations as you if you LAG it up, and if they are worse theyll be more likely to make big mistakes than you.

Finally I think its easier developing good tilt control if you practice more at it, and a person with more swings will get more practice.

I think the best style for SSNL is a mix between super-LAG and ultra-nit since people putting you on the wrong gear will make the biggest faulty adjustment.

You may be right but OP's example is nit who only 3-bets for value preflop = solid, LAG who 3-bet bluffs = breakeven idiot.

My point is just "style" <> preflop VPIP/PFR.

completely agree

I agree with pretty much everything you said.

When you say we should be cold calling regulars tightly what are your thoughts on MP raises and we are on the button with hands like Q9s, or KJo? Of course this depends on a lot on the situation, but I use to almost always flatcall these if there wasnt any squeezy players in blinds. Thoughts?

What about those sucky regs who are cbetting like 90%? You think its good to cold call with position and float/bluff raise these spots?

I wouldn't be too sure about that. I'm not sure if it's easier for nits to open up or for LAGy players to nit it up. I think on average it's probably equally tough for both the good ones can obviously adapt in either direction

Also I think overall the OP is pretty good advice. I think I'd do better often if I'd stick to his guidelines simply because I overestimate the quality of my reads etc.
But my goal is to fix the long term issues of not having the great reads

This would be super profitable, yes.

thanks for posting
I have problems right now with big folds..

I agree that 5b bluffing for the most part is bad at this limit unless you understand your opponents level and know he is 4betting light. So understanding that part of the game is going to be the only reason to be 5b shoving.

Not just oh we have been battling im gonna shove here xyz.

+1

I'm very rarely flatting Q9s IP for 100bb without a fish behind to overcall or an incredible read of what to do when I hit a pair or whiff completely.

As for how often they cbet, it also depends on how they play facing further action and what they do on the turn and river.

Great read and made me feel better about my play, i will try your tips out.

Could you possibly view my thread and give your opinion on this hand i played, as you style is the style i am trying to learn? thanks very much

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32...making-839294/

being edward is a good way to stay at 1/2 for the rest of your life too

I'd rather play against the LAG who plays pretty straightforward postflop than the slightly nitty player that is capable of multiple barrel bluffing.

I think Verstehen makes a couple of key points.

1. Preflop play is totally overrated. This "solid"/"creative" debate is looking too much into the pre game. It's more about how they both play postflop. I really think it's about time we all moved beyond looking at preflop play having any real significance (after we see a flop).
Pre has just become the game within the game. And it's not about Poker. It's about "how wide he opens so how often I can 3-bet his range, light, in position?" to "he's 3-betting me light a lot here, so I can can 4-bet bluff him with card removal" on and on. It's a leveling war all about charts and percentages.

2. Games are so much more reg infested now. Most of these regs play some version of "solid" or ABC. But that in itself can be significantly exploited. Because it is by definition fairly predictable.
They never flat 98s(A9s/A8s) v an UTG raise? So when they F with you on a A98 flop their tighter ranges help you out massively.
So I think, day by day, the game that exploits regs becomes more important than the game that exploits fish. And the creative player should be exploiting both. I'd argue he should be playing a "solid" game versus fish and a more creative one against regs.

I think as the argument is phrased ("solid" versus bordering "lagtard") it's largely weighted in the benefit of the former.

Would you rather be a player who is solid, and therefore fairly often predictable. Or the player who was solid, but who has moved beyond, and is now creatively looking for ways to exploit the former.
A solid player cannot exploit another solid player. But a player who moves beyond solid and becomes imaginative can.

I agree with CW that playing "solid" is the goal many should be aiming for. It's the base. The foundation.
But I don't see it as the ultimate goal. As waow said

Says who? Seriously? I think this is something that's "accepted," but is not really the case.

Also, I disagree that most regs play some version of solid. See: FTP 2/4 games.

yeah, pretty sure the reason nano is a beast is he can play as many tables as he does with a style that many of us could only do on 4 tables at most