Loose or Tight - which is best?

[WladiYoga]

This has no doubt been debated a million times over the years here, but I'm bored so here goes. I'm pretty sure the theory leans towards tight, but the reality is when I look at a final table it's usually the guys playing the most hands who are there in the first place, and of those the loosest tend to have the biggest stacks. Occasionally there's a really tight guy who's been lucky mixed in, but usually not, and he usually doesn't win.

What are you seeing?

It is very specific to compare A final table to A style. Maybe you are right: Those who make it to the final table do so, because they are not afraid to call 4 BB for the possibility of looking at the flop woth suited connectors like 9-T for example and then betting another 6 BB if there are 2 clubs on the flop for the possibility of a flush.
If you only play High deuce and high cards, you will surely miss out on some possibilities and even loose against small deuce or triples sometimes.
It really depends how ofte your opponents are allowing you to look at the flop. When you understand this aspect of the table situation, you can try tocall or raise more often or less.
I don't think it's all about playing more loose or tight, I think it's about intelligence and balls.

 

[23maxim88]

The best approach is to balance your styles — sometimes play loose-aggressive, sometimes tighten up. You need to feel the game; I think that comes with experience.

 

[23maxim88]

Another important factor is how the table lets you play. If there are a lot of passive or tight players, you should definitely play more loose. But if there’s a very aggressive loose player, they won’t let you do that — you need to adjust, trap them, and catch them at the right moment.

 

[Natiq 90]

You're onto something real here and I think a lot of people are afraid to admit it because it goes against the 'conventional wisdom' of poker theory.
The tight approach makes perfect sense on paper. Protect your stack, wait for premium hands, avoid marginal spots. Clean, disciplined, safe. But safe doesn't build the big stacks that win tournaments.
What I've noticed at final tables is exactly what you're describing. The big stacks usually belong to players who've been involved in a lot of pots. They've taken risks, accumulated chips through aggression and pressure — not just by waiting for Aces and Kings.
Here's my theory on why: in tournaments, the blinds and antes are constantly eating your stack. A tight player is essentially slowly bleeding out while waiting for the perfect spot. Meanwhile the aggressive player is constantly adding to his stack through steals, re-steals and well-timed pressure.
That said, I think the real answer is somewhere in between. The players who consistently go deep aren't just loose — they're selectively aggressive. They know when to apply pressure and when to step back. Pure looseness without purpose is just gambling.
But between a purely tight player and a purely loose aggressive one? At a final table, I'm putting my money on the guy with the big stack who got there by playing hands.
Tight might keep you alive. Aggressive gets you the trophy.