What is really better??? LAGGY or TAG???

I'm getting a bit confused here:

BTW I'm talking ring games here not tourney's.

I'm thinking that playing LAGGY is to position raise pre flop with group four or less hands against seveal limpers. So when you do have a group 0-2 hand it pays you better because of the non-believers by then. I know what LAG means, but I'm having trouble with what the "GY" ending of this means.

While playing TAG, is to play tight and aggressive from begginning to end of each hand by waiting for group 0-3 type hands depending on position. More folding sessions, but better payoffs for the long term.

Now my question is this. Whish is really and truly better?

I'm seeing 30 to 36% of the flops per sitting right now (Around 2 hours). I'm starting to think that this is too much, but I probably need to start sitting longer also. I think that would make the percentage drop a bit.

What are your thoughts?

SwanDawg

There isn't a specific style that is superior to the others, each table has its own mix of opponents and its own dynamics. You need to adapt the optimal strategy for that table. LAG won't work unless you can get people to fold a lot, which you can't at the lower levels so stick to TAG.

A lot of people say that LAG won't work at lower limits but I don't believe this. Log on to any 0.01/0.02 table or any 0.05/0.10 table and you'll normally see somebody sitting there with 4 or 5 times the max buyin. Watch them play and chances are they will be super aggressive. It's not true that LAG play doesn't work at low limits, anybody who says that, I think they are just carrying on the myth and don't actually play at that level themselves.

This said - TAG is the way to go until you are a VERY good player...

What someone's stack is at one table is not indicitive of their long-term results. Any idiot can double up a couple times if they're lucky enough.

I'm talking about consistent good results from good LAG players at low stakes. There are a few people on pokerstars (R-UK-OK comes to mind) who kill the low stakes playing excellent LAG poker. I'm not talking about people getting lucky and doubling up, I'm talking about excellent aggression post flop based on the cards that don't come down and the styles of the other players on the table.

Anybody who plays high limits and is of the mindset that "you can't play proper poker on the low limits", go and play there for a few thousand hands and you'll soon change your mind. There are some very good players in there, and very few people calling to the river with rubbish just because it's only a few cents. Most people respect the stakes they play at. I expect that this is even more true for the lowest limit on each site where people have progressed from play money and want to try cash poker for the first time. Most of the people who just want to have a go at what they've seen on TV will jump on to the 0.50/1.00 tables.

Sure, some people might disagree, but that's been my findings, and down on these low limits is where I'm playing - I am not offering opinions from my ivory tower!

TAG is easier to learn, easier to play, works well, has less variance, and is much easier to multitable with. Therefore I play TAG mostly.

LAG can also work, just takes more skill and effort...more than the average player has IMO.

30 to 36%(full table) is pretty f'n LAGGY to me.

Originally Posted by satan1974

I'm talking about consistent good results from good LAG players at low stakes. There are a few people on pokerstars (R-UK-OK comes to mind) who kill the low stakes playing excellent LAG poker. I'm not talking about people getting lucky and doubling up, I'm talking about excellent aggression post flop based on the cards that don't come down and the styles of the other players on the table.

Anybody who plays high limits and is of the mindset that "you can't play proper poker on the low limits", go and play there for a few thousand hands and you'll soon change your mind. There are some very good players in there, and very few people calling to the river with rubbish just because it's only a few cents. Most people respect the stakes they play at. I expect that this is even more true for the lowest limit on each site where people have progressed from play money and want to try cash poker for the first time. Most of the people who just want to have a go at what they've seen on TV will jump on to the 0.50/1.00 tables.

Sure, some people might disagree, but that's been my findings, and down on these low limits is where I'm playing - I am not offering opinions from my ivory tower!

i see your point here, but playing successful LAG at 10/20 or even down to about 2/4 is a whole different world than playing it at the micros. I agree that there are decent, solid LAG players playing these limits, but I don't really think you can call any of them great, simply because of the lack of competition they face (not that they're incapable of being great).

LESS FILLING!

Tag. For everyone who needs to ask this question, the answer is tag. Your opponents are just not good enough or tight enough to make Lagg playing profitable AND you're just not experienced enough yourself to make it work. Start Tag, the learning curve is smaller and a year from now you can consider lagging it up.

-'rilla

I agree that playing TAgg is the way to go when you first start out. I think ‘Rilla has hit it by saying that, at the real low level buy-ins, the players just simply are not good enough to make playing LAgg worthwhile. That is not to say that you can’t play some creative hands, I just think that ABC poker is generally the way to go at these stakes. Playing LAgg, particularly when you are starting out, is likely to result in huge fluctuations in your BR.

I also think that, by learning to play TAgg at the outset, you get a much better feel for the game and the situations that arise, that, in turn, allow you to play more loosely (if you follow). You begin to spot the opportunities for playing unusual hands and learning when to push people around by playing a little looser because you almost instinctively know when to do it.

Originally Posted by Aces

LAG can also work, just takes more skill and effort...more than the average player has IMO.

I second this.

I guess the point I am trying to make is that, IMHO, playing TAgg when you first start out teaches you everything you need to know about the game in terms of hands, position, reading the boards and reading other players hands which are the skills essential for playing LAgg successfully.

Thanks for the responses folks.

I'm learning seemingly more and more each day here.

SwanDawg

the answer is both or neither
but as 'rilla has suggested initially the way to go is always tagg. You cant learn to be lagg until you know what a tagg player is and how they work. Once you figure that out the lagg part becomes more understandable and easier to do. Then you can simply mix between styles moiving up the gearas when you need.
Yeah its been said before but thats how it works.
And you only start getting laggy when you reach 100nl imo (and then thats only where you begin)

Neither is superior. Optimally you want to know how to play both. I play 6max and often will encounter (even though the field is decently large on Stars) a lot of the same players everyday, by having the ability to vary my play I can switch gears to make sure they pay off my big hands and fold to my bluffs.