Gah, I got this idea in my head and thought I'dwrite it down. A month ago I essentially explained to my AIM buddies something I was thinking about in a lot of depth, as it was a concept that was integral in killing tight passive games.
Pretty much everything I write in this thread is expressions, applications, or branches of a trunk of this one concept: If you have decent equity against a range, and you think there is some fold equity, be inclined to bet/shove.


The premise of this is when I realized that you are never very behind preflop or on the flop versus any range with any decent hand. A gutshot is 20% to win about versus most any range you can put out there. Axs and small pp's are nearly 33% against most stack off ranges of opponents preflop! It's pretty unbelieveable when you realize with dead money in the pot you barely need any fold equity to make this a break even play, and the metagame can be absolutely ridiculous.

Now here are some applications of that concept.

If you have 20% equity or better on the flop and there's fold equity, be inclined to bet/shove.

If you have 33% equity or better facing a stack off calling range preflop facing a threebet or fourbet and you think there's fold equity, raise/shove.

If you can count two hands or more on the river you feel opp likely has and will fold to a bet/shove with, do it.

Try to manipulate your opponent to carry weaker hands into later streets

Try to manipulate your opponent to play a range that you have solid equity against

Try to manipulate your opponent to play passively (note, if he raises are bets and we have 0 FE so we fold, we didn't have any equity against his range did we? IMPORTANT)

If your range is ahead of your opponents range, be more inclined to bet/shove (ISF theorem)

Always try to play your nut hands in a way that leaves room for FE (aka balance your ranges)

Try to make bet sizes that allow for FE if you are called/raised

Try to play in such a way that easily defines your value bets and your bluffs


k done

(NOTE: All of these applications are easily debated by other variables of poker, and I don't refute those claims. But I do believe in spots where you will want to be aggressive, one or more of these applications will correlate)