Poker Discussion Post

Next >   Poker Discussion

Re(1): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By acecatcher26 on 06-09-2006 6:17 AM Its obv to me,  I say swtich poker rooms.  Lol,  problem solved.  Very good article.  I just try to keep the pots small when Im bluffing and even if ur caught, they always think that u will also play the big pots the same way bluffing at them.  Low limit players I have noticed in the casinos, they dont pay that much attention for the most part.  However, five ten nl Im sure is a completely different game. Another thing I use toward my table image, and it seems to get me paid off alot is my mouth.  I run it alot.  Constantly blabbering and just joking and messing with everyone, and for some reason with this,  when ur never serious, and ur caught bluffing a couple times they never think u have a hand.

Re(2): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By doubledave22 on 06-09-2006 7:06 AM i personally am a little bit confused by this article. I think it tries to make a good point, but in my opinion this is actually better for you than you think.  What you are saying is that your strategy that works for you is no longer good because everyone knows "how you play" and gives you no credit.  Well all you have to do is play more tag all the time.  I play lag often and i enjoy it, but sometimes its tough getting away with those first few bluffs.  You dont even have to because your reputation already gets your table image out there.  You just need to play more agressively with your bigger hands, obviously make a few bluffs so they know you arent a rock, but raise more than 45$ preflop with 5/10 if you dont want 5 people calling your raise. The first hand you described bothers me.  You say yourself you play tag utg and utg+1 and here you are raising 45$ with k9suited. If you want to see alot of flops definately call here and maybe call a small raise, but dont put a mark on your head when your way outa position and you have no idea what the table is holding.  Then your 175$ bet is only gonna get called by things that beat you, so i dont even like your follow up here.  You say your sucessful and i beleive you, but i do still think you have room to improve. Just change your game around a bit and im sure you will find yourself winning again.

Re(1): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By dandickau on 06-09-2006 7:18 AM I don't get this article...he says his LAG image hurts him, and then he cites a hand where he got all-in with an overpair against ace high as a 2-to-1 favorite and happened to lose the hand.  Isn't that exactly the spot you WANT to get your money in, and isn't it your LAG image that enabled you to get your money in there?  Yeah you lost the pot but it was still a major +EV situation.  As for the other example, normally if you're raising in early position, I think you want hands like KT calling you, assuming you're able to read hands well (and if you aren't, you shouldn't EVER be playing LAG).  You said you played TAG in EP but you're raising 4.5x with K9.  You said you wanted someone to raise with a flush draw or a "weak king" when you had a 9 kicker...and then you're surprised someone stayed in with KT.  I don't get it.  I like to show bluffs and control the action in a lot of pots too.  And when I have a hand like top pair 9 kicker I like to keep the pot fairly small, even if I have a flush draw also.  I like to take advanage of my LAG image (if that's the way I'm playing) to build a big pot when the other player has top pair T kicker and I have them destroyed, not the other way around.

Re(1): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By CSuave on 06-09-2006 8:32 AM I have played against players who were LAGs and they used to relish when they would raise less than premimum hands and beat my better hand.  Now when their good cards are called down by hands that normally wouldn't be in against them they get frustrated.  I simply say fruit of the vine you initially planted and enjoyed nuturing so much.  Course the games I am playing at are much much lowerand are limit but the correlation is there.  Granted Nesor77 apparently was not just a reckless LAG but the image still holds.

Re(2): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By Crazy Cypriot on 06-09-2006 9:51 AM Its one of the very few negative comments i ll make... IMO the article should be moved in the bad beat section.. Its simply well... not smart, to relish ur image if it makes Ace High , to call all in or flop or anything else... for me the article is nothing more than the daily bad beat story... I am a LAG player, with an extremely LAG image.. i see ppl making plays that never make any sense against me... i p ost many such hand histories here if i ever complain cos my aces get called by  23 , well shoot me:-) Boooo (N) for the article

Re(3): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By BKiCe on 06-09-2006 10:28 AM i don't understand the point of this article. isn't a huge part of poker adapting to your opponents and knowing what kind of table image you have and knowing how to take advantage of it? what you're saying is, i have a specific image and it's hurting me because no one respects my raises... well, isn't there something you can do to counteract that? don't you feel like you can more easily trap people for all their stacks whenever you have a big hand now? correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't this what poker is all about??

Re(1): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By Lenny on 06-09-2006 10:56 AM I agree that this article may have been written in a moment of frustration, as most of the situations described were either cold deck or bad beat scenarios, I guess I'm just more curious how people react to situations like this either live or online. I play in a weekly league game and I have been struggling lately where in the past I have dominated this group of mostly casual to very bad players. Part of my problem is that where I used to be able to win more pots without showdown people who used to fear my bets have been keeping me honest. I'm still happy with the situations I'm getting my money in with, so I guess there's not too much I'd do different, but if I'm missing something I'd like to know. BTW, I'm probably the furthest thing from a LAG player you will find, but because I'm one of the few people in the game who bets and raises rather than calls their chips off, the rest of the table seems to have finally gotten fed up with my agression (after 2 years! ; ). I guess I should say that I have been getting shortstacked here trying to make some more "creative" plays which are obviously lost on most casual players, so I know where I can easily plug some leaks. How do you handle a table that has put a target on your back?

Re(4): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By Pokerghost2 on 06-09-2006 11:00 AM the article itself is contradictory, it makes no sense at all. i mean his image is getting him into huge +ev situations he would never get otherwise and hes complaining about it. im surprised it got printed.

Re(2): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By haleike on 06-09-2006 11:33 AM The article points out the importance of understanding your own image.  The position you find yourself in can often become more profitable once the other players have put you on a particular style of play.  The fact that they are calling you down with weaker and weaker hands should be increasing your profit as long as you are aware of the situation and adjust accordingly.  1st Key  You are aware your preferred style of play 2nd Key You are aware of how others perceive you 3rd Key  Determine the most profitable style of play to counteract their perceptions Bottom Line:  Once you have determined how they perceive you, use that info against them to extract their chips. To answer Lenny's question, you wait until you have a monster and play it the same way you played your bluffs.  In other words, treat them like a calling station.  After you pop them for all of their chips a few times, they will adjust to your tight play and then you get to shift gears again and steal them silly!  Isn't poker fun?

Re(1): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By peterpjames on 06-09-2006 11:40 AM Isn't the point of poker to figure out what your opponents think you'redoing and do the opposite? If they think you're really LAG, tighten up, and then make thempay you off huge when you hit a hand. Simple as that!

Re(1): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By junsie on 06-09-2006 11:47 AM I don't get this article either.  You want people calling raises with K-10off, he got lucky and hit it that one time, he'll keep calling your raises with crap hands like that and have to fold when you continue bet and he didn't hit, which is most of the time.  The hand with A-K against QQ, I would love someone to call me with just A-K in that situation, in cash games you are looking for edges like that anytime you can get them.  These hands both sounded more like bad beats to me.  Didn't you build up your bankroll because you get so much action from worse hands?

Re(3): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By Marcstar on 06-09-2006 11:57 AM " but raise more than 45$ preflop with 5/10 if you dont want 5 people calling your raise." I was thinking the same thing...not that this guy is not changing up his preflop raising amounts to adjust.  But yeah if you are getting more than 2 callers then you have to raise to $55-70 and see how that works. As for the K9 hand I think you are right with your comments but I think the author or the article was focused more on the fact that this guy called preflop raise cold with a weak hand like K10.  But I think you are right...if you are getting called on the turn you know you are probably in bad shape.

Re(2): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By BKiCe on 06-09-2006 12:06 PM lol thank you for rewording my post

Re(2): Tagged as a LAG : good, bad, indifferent? In reply to By OMG_LOL_WTF on 06-09-2006 12:07 PM The point of the article was table image can affect you.  He's not making any claims that one image is better than the other, he's just stating how his affected him. I guess the reason I liked the article so much is that I find I am playing my best when I am acutely aware of what others think of me.  I can make adjustments and plays based on that. He's not telling you what to do.  Just giving you something to think about.  Namely that table image is another aspect of your game that needs to be managed.

Return to Top Poker Discussion Page 1 of 2 (29 items) 1 2 Next >