75/25 pass/agg at the low stakes imo, we tend to remember aggressive manics because they either do something completely ******ed, run like god vs us or some amount of hands, or generally do something memorable. Whereas the passive players we just valuebet into oblivion, and forget them when they leave.

Last year I would have said the same. But in my experience it changed a lot in the last half year. There are a lot more aggressive players even in the lowest stakes. And the good old passive callingstations really slowly vanishes.
I would say something like:
50% aggros
25% nits
25% stations

Yeah even passive guys who begin usually spazz out after about 50-100 hands sometimes before depending on the level.

I really haven't had this problem since adapting limping into my game tbh, it pretty much negates any edge a spazz has but you have to be able to play decent (really decent, knowing you should cbet doesnt count) postflop and be good at developing reads (Not putting him on a draw 100% of the time)

Both style are playable. There is a lot of very successful smallballers. Cog Dissonance being the master of the style as Docdevil said.

Personnaly, the day I changed from long ball to small ball (about 8000 HUSNG now) is the day I started making money and learn how to exploit my opponents better (as most of my game is now played post flop). I find that Small ball is particulary effective vs LAG players.

I also agree with Borg7. Playing small Ball doesn't mean that you have to be passive! in fact it's quite the opposite!

If you play long ball and are having trouble (<$100) stay open minded and definitely give it a go you might be surprised to find that it's a style that suits you. I certainly was.

Its not a problem, I meant that vs an aggro you're going to either lose or win 10 bi playing "big ball" and you're going to remember it. Vs passives that won't happen.

After being a pretty good loser for a lot of years, I got coached by Brokerstar...and my last $50 deposit is now at $600 in pretty short order. I'm not a big baller by any means, but I seem to be doing well in the lower stakes ($10 - $30).

Broker emphasizes post flop poker...seeing lots of cheap flops and taking advantage of your opponents' weaknesses. It usually involves doing a fair amount of limping early on in a match, stabbing at a lot of flops, tossing in a PFR here and there...basically figuring out your opponent cheaply. As the game progresses, and you've (hopefully) identified some general characteristics about your opponent, you adjust your play accordingly. That may mean raising a lot more buttons, betting to induce, checking to induce, overbetting the snot out of your station for value...whatever.

I've played games where I minraised 100% of buttons after the first few hands, and I've played games where I basically limped most buttons. It all depends on the opponent.

I think the coaching he provides, and the advice on his site is wonderful for many, many players...but like anything else in poker, it's not for everybody.

Is it really fancy?

I dont know anything about my opponent yet, I'm fact finding early on and I explain to my students what I'm doing at the start of a match and why.

Truth is that a lot of my students just start 3 x raising everything early and when I ask them why the most common answer I get is along the lines of "emmm, I don't know, I guess it's because it's plus EV??"

I'm not saying it's wrong one way or the other but to do something without reason is generally a flaw in 99% of peoples games. These tend to be the same people that ask me questions like "at what point do you start shoving?" which again is another totally flawed question.

Anyway the debate will rage on forever and I think it'll always be like the age old argument of which martial art is better than another, Karate or Taekwondo? (well in this case they are both as useless as each other but that's besides the point).

Just use what works for you, cream the games for a 10 - 25% ROI and who cares right?

Good luck.

Broker

Ahh yeah, true, misread your post I guess.

Also in SNGS raising 67o is pretty standard so I assume limping is fine too. If you think its fancy or w/e you arent playing enough hands, limping allows you to play an even wider range from both positions if you understand how to apply pressure correctly.

You open raise 167bb deep vs an unknown bc position advantage is quite large and you also want to be able to build a pot for whatever reason postflop, not be restricted by a very small 2bb pot with 167 eff stacks.

Yes, it's exploitable, if they 3bet you maybe you know nothing so you fold. But what if they limp raise you? Same result.

Regardless (and not your thoughts Broker) those are weak mindsets to be thinking about if you're limping or raising.

At first I thought this thread would be a joke, but it actually should help newer and less experienced players realize that there are different correct decisions in the same spot vs different opponents. At the end of the day, that should be a good foundation for improving at a fast pace.

Btw, not saying you can't limp 167bb deep. I think it was Raptor who limped a ton of buttons heads up, but he was known for having an unconventional style.

I think if you're going to limp deep (in husng deep terms or hu cash), at the very least you need to really utilize over bets and really have a better understanding of how to play postflop poker. That's not exactly friendly to beginners, but in the lower and slower structures of husng the limping/tighter players succeed, not due to their postflop skills, but due to their patience and their opponent's lack of patience.

I just started playing HU SNG's, and I have watched all of brokerstar's tagpoker vids, so I'm chiming in my two cents.

I think his smallball is a great way to start off at low stakes; you see a lot of flops, and since you're playing everything from AA to 27, you experience a range of postflop situations. Right now I am employing the limp strategy to pretty good effect. I think it works best against tight/passive and loose/passive players; the tight/passives will often play fit/fold on the flop, allowing you to win the lion's share of small pots; meanwhile the loose/passives will let you value bet them to death whenever you flop a hand. I played a player the other day who would literally call two streets in position with any kind of draw, and check behind missed rivers. Once I caught on to this read, I was literally value betting bottom pair on flush/straight boards and since he never bluffed on the river I always got a free showdown. On the other end of the spectrum, I played against a maniac who open raised 10x frequently from the button and raised every time I limped. I adjusted by limping my 3bettable hands, (AJ, KQ, 88-AA, etc.) raising my mediocres (QJ, KT, J9s, etc.) and folding absolute trash (27, 83, 94, etc.) Bottom line, smallball lets you learn an opponent's style at a good price, as well as teaching you postflop play. Go Tagpoker!

Me personally, I don't think I keep raising I think, because I don't see a reason to make the match any longer. I'd rather skip a small edge by limping and make the match shorter an play one match more an hour.
I like narrowing the range of my opponent down by raising myself. I play Small Ball OOP from the button I'll only start limping if my opponent is in flipping mood and starts open shoving 30BBs.
The closest I get to Small Ball poker is minraising and half pot cbets against certain opponents.

+1

went from losing player to a slightly winning player. I've learned how to exploit many player types using this strategy. For micro, low and mid stakes, this is obviously a winning strategy, the graphs dont lie. Ty for everything Broker!

2 things I read ITT and I thinking are misconceptions:
1. it is still easy to build a big pot even if eff. stack are 1500 and BB 20!
2. when opponent start raising your limps often, you can also limp-call more and still play bigger pot with the advantage of position.

Both style are playable as long as you know why you are doing what you are doing. Most people raising 3x pre certain hands as standard just do it cause they read somewhere that it was the right thing to do but really don't have a clue why. Then they find themself in all sorts of trouble post flop. Your preflop play should be consistent with your post flop play. (As an exemple : How many time have we read a thread where someone said I 3bet AK as standard vs a station flop comes T72 pot is 400 I cbet he calls what do I do now?)

lol_limping

Constructive stuff.

LOL_@havinganyonpiticularplayingstyleandnotadjusti ngittoyourvillianstendencies

Yes that's how I have and teach people to have over 20% ROI's by not showing them how to adjust to opponents playing styles.

More well thought feedback. Good effort.

I've met so many cool people from this site and by cool I mean friendly, helpful, open minded and geniune guys that just want to help each other as a team improve their skills and enrich each others life.

There are also some truely great poker players and minds that are willing to share as they once needed help when they were starting out.

Then there's everyone else!

Seriously there is nothing more annoying than an insecure keyboard warrior who has zero social skills to the point that they try and validate themselves by coming online to be smart asses in a poker forum.

For those of you that know who you are, keep enjoying your right hand and self harming. For the rest of you, I'm always here to help.

Broker

Your two points stand, but there's misconceptions on the other side as well.

1. It's much harder to play for stacks when you limp deep.
2. When opponents start 3betting you they are often not doing it with a wide enough range to exploit your open raising (particularly minraising), so you can have you cake and eat it too, so to speak (FE PF, a built pot, not being exploited by 3bets).
3. People often limp for comfort. It's more comfortable to give up on a limp raise if you limped than if you raise. It's more comfortable to fold. It feels easier to play the smaller pot. This can lead to a lot of weak play.
4. Limping in the end game areas can also sometimes be a crutch. "I don't know how to play Kx here, I'm just gong to limp it." as an example.

But limping does have its place. It can absolutely be correct vs certain opponents to limp deep. And for beginners that may get themselves into tons of trouble postflop (as Broker points out), limping can be a good way to control the size of the pot better while they learn patience and let their opponent hang themselves/spew.

At the end of the day, every lower stakes player should be able to play profitably by limping their button. Some won't, some will, etc. But as people get into the higher stakes, I just don't see anybody ever limping against good opponents. You let them see too many flops OOP, you lose too much value in too many spots and so on. But it works good vs worse opponents.

But for every limping advocate in this thread I hear the opposite a few times more, through PMs, emails and on forums. A lot of the limping people think it's gold, a lot of the non limpers think it's nonsense. It's something different entirely