A Nit's Apology (why tight is right for me)

[tpb221]

Excellent article FP. Def helps me with my game and how to look at it. Thanks.

 

[kmixer]

I want to thank FP for this post. Gives me more reasons not to lossen my play. Thanks also to everyone else that has contributed thoughtful posts that lead me down the right path.

 

[Irexes]

Tremendous post FP.

And lol-me that it's encouraged me to loosen aspects of my range

(Just realised this could be as interpreted as contrary to the OP advice. It's not, I'm just coming at it from the nittier-than-fp side of things)

 

[GunslingerZ]

Amazing post, FP, excellent stuff!

 

[jazzaxe]

Outstanding post. I play a very tight game and have been taken to task on my viewpoints which have been validated by your post. Especially, the rake issue.

 

[rugby0]

great article.. i had to read it 4x to begin to apply it to my game but a mine of information.

 

[blankoblanco]

Not really. cbetting depends a lot more on the texture of the flop and our opponents than on the hand we actually have.

your hand matters a good bit though. whether or not you have SD value/can call a bet on the next street pretty often will be the determining factor in if you cbet or not when you're in position

 

[zachvac]

Apologizing for being a tag doesn't quite have the same ring to it. And I've been called a nit on more than one occasion, so I figured it made sense for the purposes of this post to refer to myself as one.

lol yeah I get why you did it I can just see someone in a CC game 2 weeks from now folding KQs unopened on the button saying "Well FP said tight is right and showed how nitty was good" and folding. Like I said an incredibly good post and I wasn't really arguing with you, just trying to point out that it's not like you don't still play a good amount of hands aggressively. This is a good post arguing against being super-lag, not an argument against playing the non-nuts aggressively. I'm pretty sure you agree with me and I wasn't arguing with you just pointing out that in the grand scheme of things you are hardly a nit to those not very familiar with these stats.

 

[Duke0424]

Good write up. One of the big things that I need to do to improve my game is tighten up. This post has really thought me some things about the benefits of playing tight.

 

[vanquish]

i just open folded QQ UTG because FP said tight is right!

 

[WVHillbilly]

I just 4bet shoved KJs from the BTN because I figured the BB had read this post and would fold everything.

 

[c9h13no3]

Someone teach me to be a nit.

 

[vanquish]

Someone teach me to be a nit.

you have to sell your soul to the devil


i refuse to negotiate with that guy ever since he took my $20 bill and vanished in the air

 

[cAPSLOCK]

Someone teach me to be a nit.

Fold.

 

[F Paulsson]

lol yeah I get why you did it I can just see someone in a CC game 2 weeks from now folding KQs unopened on the button saying "Well FP said tight is right and showed how nitty was good" and folding. Like I said an incredibly good post and I wasn't really arguing with you, just trying to point out that it's not like you don't still play a good amount of hands aggressively. This is a good post arguing against being super-lag, not an argument against playing the non-nuts aggressively. I'm pretty sure you agree with me and I wasn't arguing with you just pointing out that in the grand scheme of things you are hardly a nit to those not very familiar with these stats.

Sorry if I came across as having taken it the wrong way; I didn't. I should probably have added a smilely in there somewhere.

My point, as Zach has already noted so I'm directing this to the general population of CC, is of course only that one is treading on very, very thin ice if one looks at the "typical" reg stats (which, at least at Party, seems to be roughly 23/19) and try to emulate their play. There's a very big risk that they have huge holes in their game and attempting to open up to that point is just going to add the same holes to your own.

The way to open up your game is to first and foremost know which hands are "universally" profitable, by which I mean that they can be played by default and show a profit. Some hands that are universally profitable should probably still be folded under certain conditions (aggressive 3-bettors to your left, for instance) but we should try to build a solid game that works even when we're not paying maximum attention. If I'm always opening 98s in the cutoff, I'm showing a profit. This is not true for 98o.

But then there are times when opening 98o in the cutoff is good. When the button is tight and passive and there's a big fish in one of the blinds, for instance. Finding those spots and abusing them is how you open up your game, not by adding K6s to your default cutoff opening range. Being very observant about these things, and finding good spots to 3-bet light and isolate can and will drive your VPIP/PFR up. I guarantee that that's not how the typical reg arrives there, though. They do stuff like flat my UTG open with A9o on the button. Grats me.

For shits and giggles, I filtered and looked up what my PFR would be if I only played my universal ranges with six players at the table, and checked my respective win-rates for those ranges this year:

UTG: 66+,QJs+,AJs+,AQo+ gives 1126/15519 = 7.2% (236.48bb/100).
MP: 22+, JTs+, KQo+, AJo+, ATs+ gives 1892/15454 = 12.2% (129.73bb/100)
CO: 22+,87s+,QTs+,A8s+,ATo+,KJo+ gives 2469/15569 = 15.9% (130.27bb/100)
BU: 22+, all suited cards, A2o+, K6o+, Q7o+, J8o+, T8o+, 97o+,86o+,76o+ gives 9481/15783 = 60% (82.45bb/100)
SB: 22+,A2o+,A2s+,87s+,97s+,K9o+,QTo+,JTo+ gives 5126/15756 = 32% (15.52bb/100)

Now, as you saw from the stats I posted in the first post, I'm actually not this tight. And I don't open the button quite as often as my universal ranges (which has to do with me being pretty perceptive about having an avid 3-bettor in the blinds, which is very common at Party). But I thought the numbers might be interesting nonetheless, to give an idea for what my default ranges look like.

Also, note that this does not correspond to my win-rates overall in those positions (I wish!) but only my win-rates for those ranges when I was the preflop raiser. Also, I filtered only for games with six players at the table, which explains the somewhat low volume (~100k hands) for this year, since I've played quite a large volume of 4- and 5-handed games.

 

[F Paulsson]

Just to be ultra-clear: The stated win-rate is ONLY for those hands. If you want to know my win-rate for those positions had I only played those hands, multiply the win-rate with the size of the range, i.e. UTG: 7.2% * 236.48 = 17bb/100. For the SB, you have to also deduct the cost of the small blind for all the hands where I didn't open in order to get the corresponding profit (or loss, as it were).

 

[F Paulsson]

Speaking of real nits, I have a 10/8 (over a large sample) guy sitting on my right at one of my tables right now. He opens 7% of his hands from the CO.

 

[NineLions]

Tremendous post FP.

And lol-me that it's encouraged me to loosen aspects of my range

(Just realised this could be as interpreted as contrary to the OP advice. It's not, I'm just coming at it from the nittier-than-fp side of things)

Nittier, as in what? My last impression of you is along the line of slightly-loose preflop, so either my memory is wrong, or you've changed, or that was exclusively for tournaments. Or some combination.

 

[Airon20]

I don't think you even have to apologize, lol. You play the way you want to play, at the end of the day it's your money, use it as you see fit! You may walk home at the end of the day with less money than a LAG, but you have a better greater chance OF walking away with some money.

 

[NoWuckingFurries]

Thanks for another fascinating piece of research FP

I don't think you even have to apologize, lol. You play the way you want to play, at the end of the day it's your money, use it as you see fit! You may walk home at the end of the day with less money than a LAG, but you have a better greater chance OF walking away with some money.

His style of play seems to work:

https://www.cardschat.com/forum/community-hangout-4/

EDIT: There is one bit that I found a little surprising, but please bear in mind that I don't play cash games, and there are usually 9 or 10 people at the tables when I play tournaments...

BU: 22+, all suited cards,

I can't imagine me playing 72s, even on the button.

 

[F Paulsson]

EDIT: There is one bit that I found a little surprising, but please bear in mind that I don't play cash games, and there are usually 9 or 10 people at the tables when I play tournaments...I can't imagine me playing 72s, even on the button.

It was tough the first few times, but with some practise opening 72s becomes second nature

As a sidenote, if someone has similar stats to me but don't open as wide on the button, chances are they're opening too wide in the cutoff instead. For reference, I feel much much more comfortable opening 72s on the button than I would opening, say, KTs under the gun. Position is by far the most underestimated advantage in poker.

 

[WVHillbilly]

On of my favorite Tommy Angelo quotes:

"Position is not important at poker. Would you say that water is important at swimming? That speed is important at racing? No? Then don't say position is important at poker. It's more important than that."

 

[begley01]

Good read, I'm far from a nit in cash but I did enjoy this perspective.

 

[Jurn8]

nice post FP, sorry I have only just read it I had been on holiday when you made this post.

few questions

do you think its ok to play this way in FR?

what are your stats the equivalent to in FR roughly?

I fit in with the reasons to play tighter which you have stated my hand reading skills arent great and the looser aggro players are much better thinkers in the game imo but im glad you posted this article as I was playing tight 14/10 FR and thought I had to open up my game to win more but I struggled and thought man I cant win anymore so I guess tight is right for me also

 

[F Paulsson]

I honestly wouldn't know what my stats would be like in FR. Tighter, obviously, since I'd have another 3 positions in which I'd be squeaky-tight. Maybe 15/12 or something like that? I definitely think it's OK to play this way in FR as well.

Like I said, I've found no evidence suggesting (at 200NL, at least) that LAG players even make more money than TAGs. If that's because the style isn't as profitable or because the players who play it can't do it properly, I couldn't say. So if you're struggling with turning a profit on certain hands, just fold them. If you later on get better at playing in certain situations, they might now show a profit so you can start playing them again.

Running filters and re-examining your preflop play (or your profitability for certain hands/positions) routinely is a little bit like having your car serviced. Not particularly fun, but useful and saves you a lot in the long run.