Aggression, aggression, aggression

[Mr Bungle 34]

It is SO stressed in poker, don't be weak, Agression is the key to
winning poker. I play very low limit .25/.50. and I used to to live by
this maxim. However I got sick of betting AK on a flop of A 8 2 only to
run into some azzwipe playing A8. Lately I have been checking and
calling...on many pots I surely don't win as much as I should but I
also don't lose as much on those bullsheet hands. What is so wrong with
being passive as long as im willing to call when I believe I might have
the best hand (of course when I have near nuts I look to extract the
most chips possible). With evweryone trying to be super aggresive what
is so wrong with being the guy who checks and calls? I seem to be doing
better since I've adopted this approach...

[JamesColeman]

By purely check calling it will make it cheap for people to stay in and chose
those longshot draws...

On Oct 25 2005 6:53 AM, Mr Bungle 34 wrote:

> It is SO stressed in poker, don't be weak, Agression is the key to
> winning poker. I play very low limit .25/.50. and I used to to live by
> this maxim. However I got sick of betting AK on a flop of A 8 2 only to
> run into some azzwipe playing A8. Lately I have been checking and
> calling...on many pots I surely don't win as much as I should but I
> also don't lose as much on those bullsheet hands. What is so wrong with
> being passive as long as im willing to call when I believe I might have
> the best hand (of course when I have near nuts I look to extract the
> most chips possible). With evweryone trying to be super aggresive what
> is so wrong with being the guy who checks and calls? I seem to be doing
> better since I've adopted this approach...



_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com

[Goran]

Who says there's anything wrong with it?


--
The contents of this email and any attachments are strictly confidential and
intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s). If you
are not the addressee(s) you are not authorised to and must not disclose,
copy, distribute, or retain this message without my authority. Any attempt
to do so will result in legal action.
"Mr Bungle 34" <michael_grove34@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130219585.762537.131870@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> It is SO stressed in poker, don't be weak, Agression is the key to
> winning poker. I play very low limit .25/.50. and I used to to live by
> this maxim. However I got sick of betting AK on a flop of A 8 2 only to
> run into some azzwipe playing A8. Lately I have been checking and
> calling...on many pots I surely don't win as much as I should but I
> also don't lose as much on those bullsheet hands. What is so wrong with
> being passive as long as im willing to call when I believe I might have
> the best hand (of course when I have near nuts I look to extract the
> most chips possible). With evweryone trying to be super aggresive what
> is so wrong with being the guy who checks and calls? I seem to be doing
> better since I've adopted this approach...
>

[Oliver Tse]

The median winning hand in limit hold'em is 2-pair, not top pair top kicker. 

That means you need at least 2-pair in order to win 50% of the time.

If you can't learn to lay down top pair top kicker, then you should not even
play at the 0.25/0.50 level.  You need to get more practice at 0.01/0.02.

On Oct 24 2005 10:53 PM, Mr Bungle 34 wrote:

> It is SO stressed in poker, don't be weak, Agression is the key to
> winning poker. I play very low limit .25/.50. and I used to to live by
> this maxim. However I got sick of betting AK on a flop of A 8 2 only to
> run into some azzwipe playing A8. Lately I have been checking and
> calling...on many pots I surely don't win as much as I should but I
> also don't lose as much on those bullsheet hands. What is so wrong with
> being passive as long as im willing to call when I believe I might have
> the best hand (of course when I have near nuts I look to extract the
> most chips possible). With evweryone trying to be super aggresive what
> is so wrong with being the guy who checks and calls? I seem to be doing
> better since I've adopted this approach...



_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[Blackize]

Everyone gets dealt the same amount of good hands. It is your job as a
successful poker player to make as much as you can with your winning hands and
minimize your losses with the losers.

Poker books and players suggest you use selective aggression. Push people around
who will let you, bet for value, etc. Not just BET BET BET RAISE RAISE RAISE. If
you are getting played back at you have to realize that you might be beat. If
people are just calling down when they are kicking your ass like that AK v A8 on
an A82 board then great they aren't making as much as they should on their big
hands. They are making a mistake and according to The Theory of Poker you are
gaining by these mistakes.

On Oct 25 2005 1:53 AM, Mr Bungle 34 wrote:

> It is SO stressed in poker, don't be weak, Agression is the key to
> winning poker. I play very low limit .25/.50. and I used to to live by
> this maxim. However I got sick of betting AK on a flop of A 8 2 only to
> run into some azzwipe playing A8. Lately I have been checking and
> calling...on many pots I surely don't win as much as I should but I
> also don't lose as much on those bullsheet hands. What is so wrong with
> being passive as long as im willing to call when I believe I might have
> the best hand (of course when I have near nuts I look to extract the
> most chips possible). With evweryone trying to be super aggresive what
> is so wrong with being the guy who checks and calls? I seem to be doing
> better since I've adopted this approach...



_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[Mr Bungle 34]

The limits I play at it is impossible to put people on a hand. Often
they will bluff of their entire stack with pure rags. I actually can't
wait to build my bankroll so I can play with folks that have a clue.
Until then i think it best to call and hope they are doing the betting
for me, on the occasion when they have me beat I don't lose as much.
Can't wait to get away from this low limit crazy dumb shit...

[kylewat@gmail.com]

In very low limit agression is important but it is also important to
remember that when more people see the flop as is common in low-limit
that you hand requirements go up and then you should still be
agressive.

Passive play is the key to losing poker - although a very tight passive
player may not lose, he will not win as much as an agressive player. In
"No-Fold 'em" games, however, you just have to play for bigger hands
and agression will still pay off.

For instance AK you should definetly raise preflop 'cause you probably
have the best hand - but passive play when the hand is 5 way after that
isn't terrible if you think you might be against 2 pair. That being
said - if the flop is AK8 you should again be agressive and never slow
play because the game is normally loose to the point where you'll
always be getting paid more by betting - possible check raising but
definetly not slow playing. That is my 2 cents.

[da pickle]

"Goran" <G-Man> wrote in message news:435dd18d$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...


> The contents of this email and any attachments are strictly confidential
> and intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s).
> If you are not the addressee(s) you are not authorised to and must not
> disclose, copy, distribute, or retain this message without my authority.
> Any attempt to do so will result in legal action.


Goran ... what you post to a Usenet newsgroup is NOT an "email." I know
that you work "in the legal profession" so you likely have your cute little
"confidential" signature file when you send emails at the office, but it is
really tedious for you to include your email signature when you are posting
to a newsgroup. I know that you are going to be angry with me (and the
others that have attempted to point this out to you) but we are really
trying to assist you in this matter. Please, eliminate this from your
posts. (I do not know if "authorised" is some foreign spelling of
"authorized" or not, but if that is the way they spell the word at your
office, you might check their email programming as well. You also have a
bunch of split infinitives, but that is not so much of a sin these days.)

[Swearenger]

You never will build your bank roll playing at that level.

Or it will take a very long time.

Becasue not every session can be a winning sessions. And losing sessions tend
be bigger loses then your winning sessions are winners.

All it takes is one session where you're luck is so bad -- great cards losing to
draw after draw after fish after fish gets lucky and luckier -- to undo the good
work of three or four winning sessions.

Try tournaments. You get more play for your money, and the long-term EV is
better, if you work at it.

swear


On Oct 25 2005 12:55 AM, Mr Bungle 34 wrote:

> The limits I play at it is impossible to put people on a hand. Often
> they will bluff of their entire stack with pure rags. I actually can't
> wait to build my bankroll so I can play with folks that have a clue.
> Until then i think it best to call and hope they are doing the betting
> for me, on the occasion when they have me beat I don't lose as much.
> Can't wait to get away from this low limit crazy dumb shit...



_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com

[Lou Krieger]

"Mr Bungle 34" <michael_grove34@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130219585.762537.131870@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Lately I have been checking and calling...on many pots I surely don't
>> win as much as I should but I also don't lose as much on those bullsheet
>> hands. What is so wrong with being passive as long as im willing to call
>> when I believe I might have the best hand <<

You might want to take a look in the October 18 issue of Card Player for the
article that Barry Tanenbaum and Dr. Rachel Croson wrote about "Prospect
Theory." My blog has an entry about Prospect Theory, and a real quick
overview of what it's about, at http://loukrieger.blogspot.com, but the full
article can be found in the magazine.
_____
Lou Krieger
Raise your game with Lou Krieger, author of "Internet Poker: How to Play and
Beat Online Poker Games" at Royal Vegas Poker.
http://www.royalvegaspoker.com/lou
http://loukrieger.blogspot.com
http://www.loukrieger.comon "Prospect Theory."

[Mrs. LHE]

On Oct 25 2005 9:08 AM, Swearenger wrote:

>
> You never will build your bank roll playing at that level.

This is simply not true.
>
> Or it will take a very long time.

Yes, it's about patience and discipline. And lots of it.
>
> Becasue not every session can be a winning sessions. And losing sessions tend
> be bigger loses then your winning sessions are winners.
>
> All it takes is one session where you're luck is so bad -- great cards losing
> to
> draw after draw after fish after fish gets lucky and luckier -- to undo the
> good
> work of three or four winning sessions.

This can be true, but if you have the discipline to control the amount you lose
in a losing session, it's really not so much of a factor.

>
> Try tournaments. You get more play for your money, and the long-term EV is
> better, if you work at it.

It depends on your tournament-playing skills. Some people just are better in
the cash games and have no clue how to properly play tournaments. (That would
be me.)
>
> swear
>
>
> On Oct 25 2005 12:55 AM, Mr Bungle 34 wrote:
>
> > The limits I play at it is impossible to put people on a hand. Often
> > they will bluff of their entire stack with pure rags. I actually can't
> > wait to build my bankroll so I can play with folks that have a clue.
> > Until then i think it best to call and hope they are doing the betting
> > for me, on the occasion when they have me beat I don't lose as much.
> > Can't wait to get away from this low limit crazy dumb shit...
>
>
- Mrs. E



_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

[XaQ Morphy]

> Goran ... what you post to a Usenet newsgroup is NOT an "email." I know
> that you work "in the legal profession" so you likely have your cute little
> "confidential" signature file when you send emails at the office, but it is
> really tedious for you to include your email signature when you are posting
> to a newsgroup. I know that you are going to be angry with me (and the
> others that have attempted to point this out to you) but we are really
> trying to assist you in this matter. Please, eliminate this from your
> posts. (I do not know if "authorised" is some foreign spelling of
> "authorized" or not, but if that is the way they spell the word at your
> office, you might check their email programming as well. You also have a
> bunch of split infinitives, but that is not so much of a sin these days.)

I don't know about you, but I'd much rather see a 5 line "legal
disclaimer" than scroll through 5 pages worth of previous quoted messages
just to read a 3 word reply, as seen in damn near every other thread here.

Morphy
http://donkeymanifesto.blogspot.com

----- 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com

[Mr Bungle 34]

Wow...Lou Krieger just posted to me.

I read one of his books. Sweet!