Yesterday after I got off work, I stopped by a bookstore to do a little reading on some poker books. I decided to read Doyle's SS2. I indexed through the NL section of Holdem. As I began reading the first couple of pages, I had learned that he described himself as a very aggressive player, aggressive players tend to win more bigger pots than tight players, suited connectors that give you flush draws, OESD, DGSD win huge pots. Well I already knew those draws would give you more money but what was so interesting to find out was that he would push chips in with those drawing odds because it will give your foes more things to think about besides assuming your in a draw. Now I know that having pot odds is a big factor when your drawing out, but for those aggressive players its correct for them to bet a good amount size to the pot even if they are on a draw because: a) there's a good chance you oppenent will fold if they don't have top pair overpair. b) assuming they call, it will be hard for them to put you on a draw because your betting on the board.

Now here's my question:
Would it be poker politically correct to bet hard on draws in certain circumstances such as: a) you have top or middle pair. and b) you have two kinds of draws on the board.

IMO i think it is in these cases because your oppenents will have a tough time putting a hand on you.

I actually tried this today in cash games playing with a lot of suited connectors and gappers, and throwing aways all speculative hands and I found it to be more profitable. I made calls that normally i wouldn't make on the river and profited because I was able to get better reads and I doubled up quicker in a short amount of time. I now remember this is how i played when I was a Paradise and I jumped from 100 to 400 in just 3 weeks.