Chronicles of the Weak Tight Player

I'm posting this because hopefully it may help some other people with the mental aspect of the game. I do consider this Hold'em Strategy, while the moderators may disagree.

Right before Thanksgiving, I was riding high. Doing really well, there were some bad streaks, but overall doing really well for several months.

Then something happened. I think it was all the planning I was doing for buying expensive Christmas gifts for my family, but suddenly I became a rock. It happened overnight and it's been a Kafka like experience for me.

For all the rocks out there reading this, I have no idea how you do it. It took me a long while to even realize that I was playing weak. It's not like I was just calling all the time instead of betting, it was much more insidious than that. I stopped bluffing completely. I would just stare at my cards and the cards on the flop rather than even think about my opponents. I'd complain about all the bad beats even when they're not showing their hands down. Like, "Oh great, another club. You bet? I fold, you lucky bastard." I started trying everything. Betting the pot, betting 1/2 the pot. Betting smaller and more often. Betting bigger and less often. Pretty much everything.

After 3 weeks of the most frustrating poker of my life, I have won $200 in a 200NL game. Yes, 90+ hours of play and I've won 1 buy in. I can't tell you how bad that is.

I tell my friends who don't really understand poker about my streak and they say, "Well, hey! You didn't lose money! That's great!" Um, yes I did lose money. I was averaging well over $1400 a week. So in my mind, I lost at least $3,000.

So now, I'm forcing myself to mix up betting patterns. Raise with marginal hands in position. Call them down when the story doesn't make sense. And yes, make a crap load of bluffs like I used to before the streak. I'm begging to lose money now. I'd much rather lose my ass off for 4 days than break even for 3 weeks.

I think it just proves that poker is not only a game of skill, but also a tremendous mental decathlon.

Nice post. Definitely a strategy topic.

I am also a recovering rockaholic. It's amazing how much you learn about the game, your game and your abilities (and make mo' money) when you push yourself to selectively open up and get "crazy." It does take a lot more out of you, though, as far as mental stamina compared to simply ABC-playing the cards you're dealt. Complete focus on everything you know about reading patterns and tells is key.

“One of the biggest differences between limit and no-limit poker is that with no-limit, it’s usually more expensive to play too tight than too loose.” — Doyle Brunson

Originally Posted by Demiparadigm

“One of the biggest differences between limit and no-limit poker is that with no-limit, it’s usually more expensive to play too tight than too loose.” — Doyle Brunson

I think that most players would disagree. You have to be really good to say this, and he is. But IMO this doesnt apply at all to most of us. note: tight does not mean passive.

Do we have to play crap hands in order to be "aggressive" and tricky?

I believe, tight play still has lot of room for tricky play, stealing on bluffs and semibluffs. Applying reads and dropping the hammer on flush chaser doesnt require set of aces, just pair of queens is g00t for it.

But frequency of being in "decision for large chunk of chips" is because of tight preflop play, BUT if TAG opens the pot for a raise, his pocket nines has bigger flop potential than LAG's usual junk cards - it means bigger pot equity against junk cards preflop and it forgives some misreads.

Plaing tight doesnt mean "being set-farming nit", you still have to make that laydowns and you still have the room for steals with unimproved over and questionable draws, just trust your reads


Tight is right...

Opinions?

Originally Posted by Vrax

Do we have to play crap hands in order to be "aggressive" and tricky?

I believe, tight play still has lot of room for tricky play, stealing on bluffs and semibluffs. Applying reads and dropping the hammer on flush chaser doesnt require set of aces, just pair of queens is g00t for it.

But frequency of being in "decision for large chunk of chips" is because of tight preflop play, BUT if TAG opens the pot for a raise, his pocket nines has bigger flop potential than LAG's usual junk cards - it means bigger pot equity against junk cards preflop and it forgives some misreads.

Plaing tight doesnt mean "being set-farming nit", you still have to make that laydowns and you still have the room for steals with unimproved over and questionable draws, just trust your reads


Tight is right...

Opinions?

I can tell you this. I started learning how to LAG a long time ago, but it never really became essential until I started popping onto Pokerstars 200NL tables. I think tight is safe. Personally, I don't like safe. I enjoy putting myself to tough decisions with sometimes marginal cards. If you "trust your reads" as you say, then why wouldn't you mix it up more? The fact is I only LAG now if the table is right for it. If the table has a bunch of rocks, I'll LAG a bad image and turn them into loose passive. Then I'll tighten and drain them with value. If the table has a couple loose aggressives on it, then I'll play more tight passive to them and build a bad image off the tight aggressives in certain spots with a burst of LAG. I'll value bet the shit out of any natural loose passive (read bad player) I can find, but they become increasingly rare at higher limits, especially in stars ring. Finally, I'll play all sorts of suited and connected cards to the raise of a tight passive, since he'll let me draw for the right price. This is the guy you call 4xBB against with 8T suited. Tight is right is a saying which is somewhat misguided. Tight is profitable but not efficient. The big money comes when you play correctly against the opponent. Play efficiently against his range, fear, and style.

Originally Posted by Checkways

After 3 weeks of the most frustrating poker of my life, I have won $200 in a 200NL game. Yes, 90+ hours of play and I've won 1 buy in. I can't tell you how bad that is.

I tell my friends who don't really understand poker about my streak and they say, "Well, hey! You didn't lose money! That's great!" Um, yes I did lose money. I was averaging well over $1400 a week. So in my mind, I lost at least $3,000.

This kind of thinking is pretty bad.

I find I become a little weak after 4 tabling Pot Limit Omaha for 4 hours. Do you see why?

Rondavu is right. The most profitable way to play poker is NOT to play the same exact way at every table. If you can adjust your play based on your opponents, you are way ahead.

It's easier said than done. I go on 6max occassionally and try to play LAG just to mix it up. It works at first and I think - this is the way to go. Then one hand wipes out all my gains and then some. Then the cycle begins again. I suck...but that's an entirely different post.

I think you can play tight and make money long term with out big swings. Playing looser adds variance but as you get used to it, you will see higher overall gains. At some point playing tight will only reap small profits relative to stakes because the players are just too smart. I don't know what level that is. I assume it's at least 200NL.

"I'd rather be weak/tight than strong/broke." - Tommy Angelo

I am puzzled by your comments Fnord...from many of the NL hands I have seen you post lately you are not playing overly tight - you mix it up based on the table structure etc.

What are you trying to imply here?

BTW I am probably a rock. I occassionally throw in a raise with 78s in the HJ or whatever and will reraise solidly with position and a strong draw as standard strategy dictates (I don't ALWAYS do this of course to limit predictability). I will sometimes call a raise with 8Ts with position etc. But in general I'm a standard good starting card/set farmer.
Reason being, that is generally what works well at the .05/.10 level at which I play. And yea, I'm definitely no hotshot - my profits are slow and steady, with few losses (generally only to bad beats or situations where you always lose your shirt anyway like set over set, quads over FH etc.).
I would like to improve on this but am still learning to get comfortable with lagging it up and risking more to win reasonable pots with greater aggression. It's tricky - once you've been a rock for so long you are a bit of a puss when it comes to bluffing regularly.

Originally Posted by Fnord

"I'd rather be weak/tight than strong/broke." - Tommy Angelo

Sounds agoraphobic. I'd rather stay in my house than go out and get hit by a car. Has Tommy learned to look both ways yet?

Originally Posted by r8ed

I go on 6max occassionally and try to play LAG just to mix it up. It works at first and I think - this is the way to go. Then one hand wipes out all my gains and then some.

That's standard. Don't let it retard your exploration. You just haven't learned to play chicken effectively yet. It's to be expected.

Okay, first off. I've never played a wide variety of hands in online poker. I'd do it in a casino when I only have one table to concentrate on and they're all rocks. So what I meant by my post is to be the aggro post flop player I used to be. I'm not arguing against tight. I'm arguing against passive. And it's not about passive like, "calling instead of betting". Even rocks bet when they have a hand. It's not about betting when you have TPTK. It's about raising with your TPMK, resteals, pushing rocks off their hands, calling with nothing and raising when the scare card comes out. Just good post flop play. Basically, my mentality now is I am going to try to win every single hand I play (which isn't many) until I'm for certain that I can't win it. That doesn't mean I bet and call every single flop. It means that if I'm not sure if I have the best hand or not, I'm going to raise it. I'm going to give my opponents the difficult decisions rather than take them.

This isn't a new strategy. I'm just trying to get my golf swing back and talking out loud here to help myself. I've become way too predictable over the last few weeks with my ABC play.

Originally Posted by Fnord

This kind of thinking is pretty bad.

It's not really about thinking. It's about feeling. I'm just trying to describe to people how crappy it feels to break even for that long.

jut out of interest who else has suffered from this weak tightness?
I had it for about a week and figured out iwas being a pussy. Did anyone else make this mistake? I did it i think because i was trying to get my flop percentage down from 26 to 20/22%. Anyone?

I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I don't think Fnord is advocating a weak/tight game at all. I think he is trying to imply that you have to be using smart agression as opposed to reckless agression. Those that don't know the difference may be better off playing like a rock.

Originally Posted by Checkways

....I'm going to give my opponents the difficult decisions rather than take them.

I like your line of thinking.

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

Did anyone else make this mistake? I did it i think because i was trying to get my flop percentage down from 26 to 20/22%. Anyone?

flop percentage shouldn't be something set in stone. @ a very passive table, if you find yourself behind 4 callers & need to pay 2bb for a flop w/ t8s, you should always call (assuming that you know that you're not shooting for tp or even two-pair on the flop.)

generally speaking, aggression does tend win--as long as it's correctly applied. knowing what player(s) you're up against, reading missed flops to preflop raises are both key.

most of all, aggression wins you money by creating a table image for you. if you keep showing draws after you've taken down a pot, people will pay you off when you dominate them w/ a kicker or two-pair...

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

jut out of interest who else has suffered from this weak tightness?
I had it for about a week and figured out iwas being a pussy. Did anyone else make this mistake? I did it i think because i was trying to get my flop percentage down from 26 to 20/22%. Anyone?

This is why I don't keep stats. It's too easy to allow them to dictate your gameplan.

Originally Posted by Rondavu

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

jut out of interest who else has suffered from this weak tightness?
I had it for about a week and figured out iwas being a pussy. Did anyone else make this mistake? I did it i think because i was trying to get my flop percentage down from 26 to 20/22%. Anyone?

This is why I don't keep stats. It's too easy to allow them to dictate your gameplan.

I only noticed them after i was playing losing poker for a bit and it became noticable i was seeing to many flops. It wasnt a goal i set out to master