The biggest problem with AF is misusing it imo.

I hear people so often say something like "well he's aggressive because he has an AF of 3, so he's probably bluffing here" or something like that without realizing HOW an AF of 3 is actually attained.


Take a donk who plays 50/0. Let's say he folds every flop bet unless he flops top pair+ or a good draw, in which case he raises. Well he's going to have a very high AF without ever bluffing with air. This villain will have a fold to flop bet of like 70%+, and an aggression frequency of 30% and under.

Now take a 60/40 maniac who bluff raises a ton of flops. He will also have a high AF, but will have much different frequency numbers.

Point here is that the stat in isolation doesn't tell you very much other than the ratio of raising to calling, but it often doesn't tell you enough on its own to base many decisions on.

I think it's an ok stat, but one that has to be used carefully, and in conjunction with other stats to be meaningful. After all, it really just a ratio of aggressive actions to passive actions. Also, street by street AFs are much more useful though take a much larger sample to become meaningful.