Comparison Between TAG and LAG (part 1)
Posted by Alien Slayer
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 40 Comments...
Great video alien!
Hehe I could feel that you were kinda nervous in the beginning, but overall I enjoyed the video, clear and excellent:)
thanks !
Great video, excited to see more PLO low to mid stuff soon. Great approach with the different playing styles too. Maybe some 40bbs in the future for the short stackers :)
thank you , I'm glad you enjoyed it! Tbh I am not very familiar with playing short stacks, I think there are some good videos from Tom Coldwell covering that topic here on rio.com.
Hi,
It was fun, but not educational imo. Being a coach is a big responsibility, because you are explaining strategy to people with lower skill, and in fact you can make terrible play and make it sound ok. I've learned in RIO that play is good for some reasons. I feel like in this video, the main reason was fitting style you decided to play. Style of play doesn't matter in RIO (of course that is my point of view). The only think that's matter is how to play a hand in most effective way.
It's not TAG and LAG but "missing value" and "spewy".
Folding QQ(T8) bb vs utg
[url=http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=QhQcTs8s&h2=16%25&s=generic]ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation[/url]
600,000 trials (Randomized)
QhQcTs8s [b]47.67%[/b] (280,587 wins, 10,866 ties)
16% [b]52.33%[/b] (308,547 wins, 10,866 ties)
folding A699ds bb vs co
[url=http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=As6c9s9c&h2=30%25&s=generic]ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation[/url]
600,000 trials (Randomized)
As6c9s9c [b]49.66%[/b] (296,325 wins, 3,215 ties)
30% [b]50.34%[/b] (300,460 wins, 3,215 ties)
there are not costly mistakes but clearly a mistakes.
The main reason I decided to write this post is a hand at 32:15.
You decided to squeze with AKQ7ds against a tight player opening from Co and cold caller from BTN.
I don't do this, but I don't know if its good or not. I want to expand my squeezing range so my first thought was. Oh!, "easy squeze", I have to think about that! Than preflop raiser 4bets you, and you started to explain, why it is ok to call this 4bet. WHAT? You said that you remember this player as being able to 4bet light. I play this stakes and remember him as a passive player, not able to do moves. And you have marked him green which is "passive reg" in your colours, and later in a video you folded AJJ9s in position against him claiming he has tight 3bet range. I have 4000 hands on him and he has 2,2 4betting range.
[url=http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=AhKhQd7d&h2=3%25&s=generic]ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation[/url]
600,000 trials (Randomized)
AhKhQd7d [b]32.28%[/b] (188,213 wins, 10,887 ties)
3% [b]67.72%[/b] (400,900 wins, 10,887 ties)
[url=http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=AhKhQd7d&h2=AKKx&s=generic]ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation[/url]
600,000 trials (Randomized)
AhKhQd7d [b]32.49%[/b] (169,459 wins, 50,955 ties)
AKKx [b]67.51%[/b] (379,586 wins, 50,955 ties)
[url=http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=AhKhQd7d&h2=4%25&s=generic]ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation[/url]
600,000 trials (Randomized)
AhKhQd7d [b]34.94%[/b] (201,668 wins, 15,911 ties)
4% [b]65.06%[/b] (382,421 wins, 15,911 ties)
All explanations in this hand was totally fake and as I said, being coach is a big responsibility. People have to trust that you want to learn, what kind of plays are good and why and not just trying to look good in their eyes.
So because of the hand with AKQ7ds I just can't trust your explanations anymore.
You're a total imbecile. A prat of the highest order, and that comment lets everyone know loud and clear.
Hi,
It was fun, but not educational imo. Being a coach is a big responsibility, because you are explaining strategy to people with lower skill, and in fact you can make terrible play and make it sound ok. I've learned in RIO that play is good for some reasons. I feel like in this video, the main reason was fitting style you decided to play. Style of play doesn't matter in RIO (of course that is my point of view). The only think that's matter is how to play a hand in most effective way.
It's not TAG and LAG but "missing value" and "spewy".
Folding QQ(T8) bb vs utg
http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=QsQcTd8d&h2=16%25&s=generic
folding A699ds bb vs co
http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=As6c9s9c&h2=30%25&s=generic
there are not costly mistakes but clearly a mistakes.
The main reason I decided to write this post is a hand at 32:15.
You decided to squeze with AKQ7ds against a tight player opening from Co and cold caller from BTN.
I don't do this, but I don't know if its good or not. I want to expand my squeezing range so my first thought was. Oh!, "easy squeze", I have to think about that! Than preflop raiser 4bets you, and you started to explain, why it is ok to call this 4bet. WHAT? You said that you remember this player as being able to 4bet light. I play this stakes and remember him as a passive player, not able to do moves. And you have marked him green which is "passive reg" in your colours, and later in a video you folded AJJ9s in position against him claiming he has tight 3bet range. I have 4000 hands on him and he has 2,2 4betting range.
http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=AhKhQd7d&h2=3%25&s=generic
http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=AhKhQd7d&h2=4%25&s=generic
http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?g=oh&h1=AhKhQd7d&h2=AKKx&s=generic
All explanations in this hand was totally fake and as I said, being coach is a big responsibility. People have to trust that you want to learn, what kind of plays are good and why and not just trying to look good in their eyes.
So because of the hand with AKQ7ds I just can't trust your explanations anymore.
(posting again because couldn't format it)
Hi witek, thank you for your constructive feedback. I am aware that the
topic of the video is working out a bit dificult in practice when
playing two extreme styles at the tables for the purpose of pointing
out the idea behind it. Since in practice I play a style in between
(tighter preflop then the LAG, but way more aggressive then the
straightforward approach), I may have acted in some hands during the
video in a sub-optimal way. The intention behind it was basically to
show unexperienced players that a)feel that they get into
unconfortable situations postflop by playing too loose preflop where
they can tighten up and save themselfs some trouble until they feel
that they have improved enough to start loosening up their ranges ...
which leads to
b)show TAGs good spots to apply more pressure pre- and postflop and how to
play more hands and play tougher by bluffing in the right spots
postflop.
Like I explained during the presentation at the beginning, a tight-passive
player avoids playing OOP as much as possible and even though a hand
like QQTs8s has close to 50% EQ vs a UTG range the playbility is
highly reduced because oftentimes the flushdraws or the overpair will
be dominated and we end up c/c a marginal flop just to have to c/f on
later streets. For example on a board like KdJs3s we flop strong with
2nd
pair, OESD +FD , but can easly dominated by a hand like AsKsQx , so
we are likely going to c/c, then when we hit a flush on the turn c/c
again just to have to c/f any river. If we hit a straight and donk
out our hand is face up and if we get called we don't know what to do
on flushing or pairing rivers. Always when we hit a bare overpair
like on 522r we have high reverse implieds on c/c because we have so
poor EQ vs AA/KK . On boards like 976r it's very unlikely we get any
action. For all these reasons a fold is the best option when playing
tight and trying to avoid marginal spots. The more we know about the
oponent the looser we can justify defending but against unknowns or
solid players the hand is more of a fold then a call. With the Q-high
flushdraw or QQJT we hit more flops more often and calling becomes
better. Similar reasons go for the other example of A996ds OOP
because we end up flopping marginal oftentimes on for example a AQ3r
or 753 two-tone without a flushdraw for us. There is a big difference
between raw AI-equity and playbility/flopability postflop. A hand
like A987ds has much more playbility even though its raw EQ will be
worse then the above mentioned examples. A prime example are also
weak KKxx hands, I would for example advocate folding KK83r from the
blinds vs a CO open from a regular unless there is a weaker player
involved/likely to overcall – for the same reasons that most of the
time we have a bare overpair that we will not be able to get to
showdown and realize that way our high raw preflop-Equity.
As your PPT-analysis shows, the call of the 4b is close indeed and my
explanation was a bit unfortunate, it was rather a clear call for the sake of
the idea of the video (no LAG would ever 3bet/fold this hand) and
like I mentioned as well there are some flops like T98 with a FD
where we can expect a some foldequity when donking AI. A tight
passive player will sometimes folds from a bare OP in this spot which
increases highly our EV.
I still think that it is a different situation whether we make a close
call of a 4bet OOP with the possibility to create some foldequity
postflop from deciding whether calling or folding to a 3bet with the
threat of beeing dominated vs a tight 3betting range and not beeing
able to hit enough boards on which we have a)solid EQ vs an overpair
or b)beeing able to rep a strong hand with some backup EQ to make him
fold better hands.
Making videos is indeed a great responsability and especially as a
non-native english speaking person it takes practice and efford to
archieve both parts of speaking in a clear, fluid english and
expressing the thoughts in the best way possible. I am confident that
the more I get used to record and explain my thoughts the more
'natural' it will become in upcoming videos.
I recorded already part 2 +3 of this series which will be a continuation of the
current sessions, but this time it will be with live commentary.
For future videos I will focus more on playing a style that
matches more with the 'optimal-standard play' instead of showing the
possible extremes of different approaches. I think the educational
value of this video series is in understanding and realizing the
styles and when facing oponents that play a similar style beeing able
to adjust in the right way (stealing and barreling a lot vs a tight
passive player , beeing aware of the possible bluffing lines of the
LAG)
I hope this post cleared most of your doubts, but feel
free to comment and let me know if there is something that you don't
agree with.
Regards
The less you know, the more you believe. During this video, I was sold on what Alien was trying to teach, but after reading this thread, I feel indifferent!
Are there any videos for the 'essential' videos that talk/analyze tough spots? Most of the stuff in the few essential videos I've seen is standard more or less, it's the ability to make correct decisions in tough spots that I'd be most interested from a learning perspective. Thanks.
p.s. if the answer is that 'you got to join the elite membership for the more advanced stuff' that's fine too, just need to get clarity regarding expectations here
I understand your request but it depends mainly on the format. in a live session / session review it depends if tough spots occur to be able to discuss them. I may do handhistory-reviews in the future focussing on interesting hands though.
very good video alien
thanks I'm glad you enjoyed it!
Great video Alien! You seem to size much bigger than the standard cbet sizes most players use and I like your style. Instead of trying to take down pots on the flop with cheap stabs, you bet big to apply pressure and set up a nice pot for a double barrel on the turn. I'm just curious about your sizing on static flops. It seems a bad idea to bet so big on boards like monotone or paired flops.
Thanks! you are right, on static flops I use a smaller sizing. It comes down to how I would play a strong hand basically and whether I want to induce calls or not. Since with KKxx on KTs7s even a weak draw like a low FD or a bare OESD has around 30% vs our hand I don't mind if they fold right away, for that reason I want to protect my hand and bet large. On the other side on a board like 992r or 8s4s2s if I hold trips or a strong flush my hand is not vulnerable, so I want to induce calls from weaker hands and therefore bet on the smaller side.
Great having you around here sir :)
:)
I really enjoyed this video. I am a NLH player trying to learn PLO I have maybe 40 hours live experience and I am fairly confident that I am terrible. This video format that you can play as tight as one style or as loose as another style is extremely helpful. For me I could see myself sitting in a low stake live game where it is pretty clear almost immediately who the guys who know what they are doing are and who the live players who have absolutely no clue are, so Id probably be more towards the tight style against the players better than myself (though probably not quite as tight, I play a loose NLH game and just don't know that I could fold the QQTs8s from the blinds or some of the tighter button folds to opens you made) and play a wider range of hands a more LAGy post flop game against the weaker players.
I do have a couple of beginner questions.
1) Do you think my above reasoning is a good idea assuming that I can correctly identify the player skill levels (Im pretty confident I can) or do you think it is better to come up with my own game that gives me a more solid theoretical game as opposed to the exploitative approach I outlined.
2) This is kind of just a curiosity question. I see a lot of video producers, yourself included, who are in spot where they advocate betting, whether it is a cbet of a donk, on the bigger size for a given board. In these spots to bet big they usually aren't potting, especially on the flop they are like 90-95% potting. Is this just a it doesn't really matter whether you bet full pot or 95% pot type thing or is it to set up stack sizes correctly etc? Basically I'm curious is there a reason to not be mashing the pot button in a situation you advocate betting big?
3) In the hand 43:50 where you flatted AA23 with A high hearts I was really surprised . I mean to a new player like myself a spot to squeeze with Aces with a suit and some straight potential against 3 players is like exactly what you are waiting for even if they are going to put you on Aces most of the time. You'll have hearts dominated, you'll actually hit some low flops that they are not expecting you to have better than AA on and given the raise and 2 calls you can actually get a good enough amount in preflop that even if you get 3 callers, there are enough boards that stacking off on is good that we should be taking this spot. If my inclination is incorrect which it very well may be, where is the line for hands that a new player implementing a tight strategy should be squeezing here?
hi joe, thanks a lot for the positive feedback!
regarding your questions:
1) your gameplan sounds fine, it all comes down to how good you can estimate the behaviour of your oponents. A tough player will disguise his hand, make thin valueplays and good bluffs in spots you don't expect it, so you are better off to play tight vs them, esp. OOP. On the other side vs loose-bad players you have a pretty good idea what they are doing all the time and are able to make the thin valuebets, bluffs -catches yourselfs, so you can play a wider range vs them and outplay them postflop.
2) I think there is no real difference , some might argue that a PS-bet looks stronger then a 90% PS bet but I personally treat them the same.
3) Squeezing mediocre Aces OOP like these is not a fault by any means, but when you can expect 3callers oftentimes there are just few flops you really get your money in happy. On a lot of boards when you have an OP+FD at least 1 player has a strong made hand (2pair+), your straightdraws can be dominated (on a 654r board for example) and all the times you have the bare OP you are also likely running into at least one strong made hand or huge draw. In my opinion a hand like AAT9ss is a much better squeezing hand because these sidecards help you much more often to be able to stackoff +EV.
Really great video!
Its cool to compare the two styles and im looking forward to see your normal playing style at these stakes. :-)
Just
one comment/question. Dont you think you kind of took a very
conservative Tag style? Imo it is very tight especially pre the way you
played. Do yout think that even with such a tight style you can profit
at those stakes?
Can you put some pre flop numbers on the two
playing styles??? Would LAG be somewhere around 35/25/10 and the TAG
around 23/18/5????
thanks !
Indeed I applied a overly tight approach in the video, basically always choosing the tight fold when facing a close decision. I suppose that against weaker players it will still be profitable but not vs solid players.
And yes, you are right that the stats are around 21/15/5 for TAG and somewhere around 35-40/25-30/8-12 for LAGs.
Welcome AS. and thanks for the great video, I love the concept of you playing both TAG and LAG, but I would prefer to have a week where you played TAG and the next week where you played LAG fwiw..
thanks zuzupet! i wanted to try out this format during this video series, but in the future i will focus on one style.
YW. I'll looking forward to it ;)
Wow, i really loved that format. Would absolutely love to see a 1/2 Zoom video from you in the future
thanks! not sure yet if I gonna do that, but I will consider it.
nice debut.
I'd prefer to see regular tables in the future, fast fold variant doesn't run on the site I play
thanks sean, I will def. also include regular tables in future videos.
Good video, I completely disagree with Witek's criticism ^^; Just because you are playing two sub-optimal playing styles does not mean you are not providing valuable coaching. These are common play styles and players ought to be aware of them, and of their respective flaws, in order to exploit the 'LAGs' and 'TAGs' they come across. Poker is a game of exploitation; by furthering my understanding of common player types it will only help my win rate vs them.
I would like to request some PLO 5 card content in the future. Having played the variant for a brief period, I know you are one of the best players of that format and would very much like to hear your insight, particularly as there is effectively no 5 card content on RIO despite there being decent traffic for this variant. Thanks ??? Predator ???
thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed the video!
Given the small % of players that play 5card PLO I am not sure if videos covering that topic would be wanted. I don't rule it out completely , but the upcoming videos will def. cover regular small stakes PLO.
Nice video! No direct questions, just +1 for 5 card PLO and +1 for 1/2 ZOOM PLO future vids :)
There is this one hand im surprised noone mentioned in the comments. at the very end, we open Kh9h2d4d on the BTN for 2.5 which is fine for tight style, but then we call a pot 3bet without much trouble. You mentioned it was a small size and the hand was good, although it was a pot sized 3bet and I'd consider K9 24 kind of weak when we're playing "TAG", even if double suited. Especially after making those tight folds to a single raise with A995 and QQT8.
yes, the defend was on the loose side and a fold would avoid getting into tough spots postflop. The fact that it was button vs blind leading to a postflop play in position against a 'wider then in other situations'-range lead me to make the call.
Nice video, a lot nice spots we can use in a game (mostly on right tbl tho:-)))) I dunno why some ppl saying it's not educational. Yeap, I agree, that some play on left table were kind of questionable, but the main idea of video is to show completely different style and I think we should give credit for this, coz not that easy to play completely different same time with same people. I def gonna watch next part and another videos from you. Also I finished PLO quick pro video and it was very useful for me. I have experience in live game full ring 5/10 and 10/20 euro and doing it full time for leaving, but online just my first steps and I am very happy to learn from good PROs. Thanks a lot!
Hello Alien Slayer,
First and foremost, welcome to the RIO Essential team! I am
excited to see a new face teach us some strategies on PLO! I am looking forward
to seeing more videos such as this one in the near future.
25:53 A763ds – it is not okay to call $1.45 in big blind to
see a flop with this hand versus linvoyd
32:27 AT74ds – fold out UTG/LowJack
42:55 A995ds – fold out BB versus CO IES2010
Here are a couple of hands where I need some further explanation.
Would you have played these hands on the LAG table?
I know you were in the process of talking about other ideas/topics
when these hands came up, but I didn’t like how you just folded them without
any reasoning. What I am trying to get at is, am I just a fishy that plays too
many weak ranges out of position such as these three hands?
Hi, really nice video, I think it was very educational and you quantified LAG/TAG-style good in a 1h vid imo.
As someone else mentioned, I would also like to see 1 video of LAG style, and 1 video of TAG style. Maybe using the merged/polarized cbetting strat in the videos.
Also, could you elaborate more on how to attack capped ranges OOP vs polarized cbettors?
for example flop checkbacks on boards that hit villain range badly?
Anyway, looking forward to new vids!
Thanks!
It depends on the tendencies of the player: Some are showdown-bound and feel obligated to calldown light once they checked back the Flop, others are 'nitty' and either call Turn, fold River or just fold vs a Turnbet. It's important to pay attention and adjust properly.
Where are you from?
nice vid! like your style on the right ta ble
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.