As stated and heard so much we all know that a pretty basic and simple TAG game can get it done at these levels... however...

Even though this is true could a good LAG player get it done equal to or better at these stakes or could he not BC the play just cannot allow for as much success as a great TAG game?

I know this would be largely dependent ont he specific game your in to play LAG or TAG, but in general, what do you think?

Would great LAG outweigh great TAG at 10nL?
Would great LAG outweigh great TAG at 25nL?
Would great LAG outweigh great TAG at 50nL?

In a sense would Durrrr, Ivey, Antonius have as much success at any of these levels in the long haul compared to someone who is extremly good at just playing a solid TAG game?


There are a couple reasons I would prefer doing LAG if it equal or better:

- I think you learn alot faster and better of how to play
- You don't get so burned out
- It usually is more fun
- It is preparing you usually for higher levels...

So what do you think... ?

why mess with a style that is known to be effective? so many of these great players you mentioned also likely learned a TAGish, disciplined style to start and look where it got them.

I'm up 24 buy-ins this month at nl10 playing 30/22/3.6 over 8k hands

Then again I run hot.

Still I think the good LAGs with great reading and adjustment abilities will always make the most $$$ at any limits above and including 10nl. But they'll have the biggest swongz.

I like playing LAG because you feel less like a robot making automated decisions.

The downside is that you can't play as many tables and your sessions must be shorter.

TAG is the way of security.

Its uNL for crying out loud. Play ABC