Loose Versus Tight

JohnnyVk

Okay no jokes about your girlfriend.

Loose play is way more fun than tight play. Lots more action, but obviously bigger swings in the chip stack.

I tend to play lower limit tables at casinos around Ontario - $2/$5 and I prefer to play loose. I have not yet determined if it is the best financial decision.

Assuming 30 hands per hour I probably see the flop 20 times an hour when playing loose and 5-6 times when playing tight. I figure that seeing these extra flops costs me an average extra $4 per incremental loose hand thus and extra $60 per hour ($4x(20-5)). My reward is when I hit low trips, or two pair, or pick up the odd draw I can punish opponents playing a high pair for big rewards

Based on my stats I don't think that I have played enough to have a conclusive assessment yet - I get to the casino a couple of times a month.

I am curious to hear what other forum members think of the loose versus tight issue.

:jh

PokerKai

Of course you like playing loose. In fact, its perfectly natural to want to play loose. Playing tight is counterintuitive, nobody starts off playing poker wanting to fold hand after hand.

In hold'em however, even your regular 2/5 peppridge farm laden game, its wrong to play as loose as you do. Your just not going to gain enough of a "meta-game" advantage to overcome the equity disadvantage of poor starting hand value.

JohnnyVk

Kai - thanks for the feedback

I guess tight may be right

Other Opinions??

:jh

GTA Poker

Playing loose has many more advantages in NL, in limit you don't have the implied odds to overcome your poor starting hands.

pkrooster

IT ALL DEPENDS

Why do you play poker? To have fun? To make a little extra money? To pay the bills? Just for a night out?

I believe that the tighter you play the less fun you are having while at the table. Who wants to sit around for an hour waiting for a hand to play and then have your aces cracked by some joker playing 52 off suit. That being said I think the tight player will eventually have more fun when he watches his bankroll grow over time.

I believe the reason so many loose players lose money is that they are making more decisions. Playing loose forces you to make many more decisions and usually more borderline decisions. With the borderline decisions if you are choosing poorly you are losing money long term and even if you are choosing correctly it increases your variance which is the bane of most low-limit players.

In your original post you ask the question as a financial one. If that is your sole objective I would agree that tight is right for most players. If your sole intent is to have fun then play every hand and have a blast when you go runner runner flush against a flopped set of aces. My guess is you want a little of both so find what works for you and go with it.

Hope that helps

Paul

AcidJoe

It all depends on the make up of the table. If I have a table of loose passive's I will play loose aggressive. If 8 people are going to consistantly see a flop with no raise, why should I not see a flop. However, if 8 people are going to see a flop and it's going to be 3 bet or so everytime, or some monkey is going to raise everytime it gets to him, I tighten right up and bust him when I have a hand. The key to this is being able to fold 90% after the flop because you won't hit.

beanie42

AcidJoe wrote:

It all depends on the make up of the table.

AcidJoe wrote:

The key to this is being able to fold 90% after the flop because you won't hit. 

Joe hit the nail on the head.  The key is being able to recognize the best strategy to use for the current table conditions, and being able to switch gears effectively.  And when you're in "loose" mode, your post-flop play becomes even more critical.  That said, I think it is easier (if less natural) to play tight, while playing looser requires more skill (due to the additional decisions required, as mentioned earlier).

Zithal

I think when you compete how much you're losing when playing loose you have to factor in the additional loses you'll take when you hit... but don't hit hard enough.

For example...

You have :jd :8d on the button and six players, including the blinds and you, limp in to see a flop. It comes...

:Js :Th :2h.

The SB bets, and everyone calls. What do you do? If you call, how much more is it going to cost you to show down to the river? What kind of hands could be beating you, or are beating you right now? Can you get away from someone that currently holds KJ? If you choose to fold here, are you really building a "loose" image?

I always seem to get in trouble when I see the flop for free with a moderate hand in the BB, which is why I try and avoid it in low limit games.

AcidJoe

The SB bets, and everyone calls.   What do you do?  If you call, how much more is it going to cost you to show down to the river?  What kind of hands could be beating you, or are beating you right now?  Can you get away from someone that currently holds KJ?   If you choose to fold here, are you really building a "loose" image?

To me the choice is clear here.  I either fold or raise.  Calling gets you no where.  There is a potential flush draw out there, potential straight draw.  The KQ isn't going anywhere the Ax hearts isn't either.  If the KJ is out there he hopefully re raises so you know your in possible trouble.  On this type of board in a limit game I probably bail just because lots of players play any 2 face any 2 suits.  If the flop was :js :6h :2c I'd be all over it at most 2/5 tables at Rama.   

jpajamas

As previously stated, play the opposite of the table, make money. Play the opposite of your usual style, make money (famous poker guy), mix up your style, make money. Who said poker was hard?

JohnnyVk

Great feedback guys.

First of all I do play for fun at this point but my objective is to improve my game and try to earn a little change while having fun. At this point I stay at the low limit tables because the education costs less.

There were a few very good comments that I have played enough to recognize the value of. A few observations:

Many low limit tables are full of loose passives. :fish: I find I can play loose aggresive against these types and do quite well.

I have also sat down against a "player" who steps down from a 5/10 or 10/20 with the objective of playing extra aggressive and running over the table. My experience has shown me to tighten up against this guy but to stay aggresive when I get the tools to work with. Then I get to punish him.

While I noted off the top loose is definitely way more fun, I have been able to develop the discipline to mix up my style to my benefit. That said I have also experienced the price of loose play forcing me to make more decisions and greater chance for error.

In a normal session for me 4-6 hours on a 2/5 table I will catch myself making really poor decisions on 3-4 hands that generally cost me my total losses in a losing session. Try to learn from them.

I have also noticed something quite interesting and I have not figured out if there is a statiscal story to it. At the 2/5 level, if I go hot or cold the run usually costs me, or makes me $200. I have not gone more than $200 down without turning the corner or gone more than $250 up before I start to give it up.

I've tried to be conscious of this and determine if the $200 number is a psychological threshold that makes me change my style, or if there is some numberical logic to this.

Anyhow thanks for the responses.

:jh

ScoobyD

I find I can play loose aggresive against these types and do quite well.

I disagree. I suppose it depends on what you mean by being "loose-aggressive". If you mean that you can make more value bets with medium strength hands, and raise your draws in giant multi way pots, I'd call that aggressive, but not necessarily loose. If you are trying to bluff these loose passives off a hand, you're spewing bets.

AcidJoe

Your 100% right there Scoob, you will never bet most of those calling stations off their hands. A 2/5 loose aggressive to me means he plays a lot of pots and when he has something, large draw, trips, 2 pair bets it accordingly. Still most times after the flop you are still getting out. You certainly aren't raising your 9 2 off because you have the button. Even out of position, if the table is passive you will get the value out of betting the flush or the straight.

Meistro

You will never be able to make money in the long run playing 70% of your hands. At a 10 handed table around 18-25% of your hands is the best average (although certain conditions can push a 30% preflop standards to profitability, especially if your opponents bleed post flop).

At a 6 handed table something bewteen 25-35% is best.

You make money in poker by putting your money in as a favourite, both before the flop and after the flop. The way to ensure this happens is to play only your top, profitable hands.

Personally, I get alot of satisfaction out of folding. Especially tough folds. They make me very happy.

JohnnyVk

Thanks for the comments.

The comments re seeing alot of flops then betting the draws, two pairs, high pairs, trips when the show is what I was referring to loose aggressive in.

I have head the reference to playing ~25% of hands at a 10 seat table.

I'll try a little tighter the next couple of times out and report back.

:jh

Soup

You cannot only consider the extra money lost to see the flops. You must realize when you call with mediocre and hit, they are still just mediocre hands and are easily beat. Most money is lost post flop.

JohnnyVk

Soup,

Good Point on the mediocre chases.

I have tried to estimate this before, but may have underestimated.

If I don't catch decent action on the flop, I usually get out of these loose calls pretty quickly, but good food for thought.

:jh