A Question

[SunDrop 0]

What is a LAG and what is a TAG?

[MasterLJ 0]

Hmm, I feel that you are getting philisophical here... but just in case you're not.LAG = Loose AggressiveTAG = Tight AggressiveA LAG can be a label put on a range of players, from DN himself, to a total maniac. The LAG label is relatively weak without a qualifier of whether that player profits from their playstyle or is a total maniac. LAGs have very loose hand selection requirements and bet their hands aggressively after the flop.TAGs are the flavor of the year. Most of the successful limit strategies discussed here employee a TAG strategy. Playing quality hands. Not cold-calling two bets with QJ etc. It means you are tight with your hand selection, but bet out your hands aggressively (capping with TPTK etc).

[SunDrop 0]

Hmm, I feel that you are getting philisophical here... but just in case you're not.LAG = Loose AggressiveTAG = Tight AggressiveA LAG can be a label put on a range of players, from DN himself, to a total maniac. The LAG label is relatively weak without a qualifier of whether that player profits from their playstyle or is a total maniac. LAGs have very loose hand selection requirements and bet their hands aggressively after the flop.TAGs are the flavor of the year. Most of the successful limit strategies discussed here employee a TAG strategy. Playing quality hands. Not cold-calling two bets with QJ etc. It means you are tight with your hand selection, but bet out your hands aggressively (capping with TPTK etc).

lol...I didn't know it was that simple...i just had never seen those abbreviations before. Thanks.

[Stallion714 0]

Course the same principle's apply, but LAG and TAG refer to the game types. LAP and TAP refer to players. TAP= Tight Aggressive Player, and TAG= Tight Aggressive Game.

[BIG_L_RIP 0]

TAG is not the flavor of the year, it was basically commodified by David Sklansky and his disciples. It'll never go out of style, especially in tourney play, but successful cash game players often play much looser, to attack TAGs. You must give action to get action is the general credo. Playing TAG in a tourney makes more sense because players inevitably have to clash. In a cash game, a player can sit for 2 hours and play 3 hands if he so desires.

[Scott3705 0]

TAG is not the flavor of the year, it was basically commodified by David Sklansky and his disciples. It'll never go out of style, especially in tourney play, but successful cash game players often play much looser, to attack TAGs. You must give action to get action is the general credo. Playing TAG in a tourney makes more sense because players inevitably have to clash. In a cash game, a player can sit for 2 hours and play 3 hands if he so desires.

In my escapades into limit atleast at the lower limit I've tried (2/4) you really need to play TAG. I think this is what the poster was originally referring to. I do agree with you RIP that TAG is not the flavor of the year for NL.

[SuperJon 175]

Moral of the story: mix it up.Ask yourself if you are a LAG or a TAG. Then play in that style, but you must play in the other style as well to confuse your oppenents. If your table is made of mostly LAGs, then play as a TAG, and vice versa.

[BIG_L_RIP 0]

true Scott.I always think about the stakes I generally play, and the tough opponents I admire/fear. They are not TAGs.You are right, at lower levels complicated moves are often lost in translation, so TAG is a winning style.I could never play TAG however, so I had to jump up in limits without a roll :)Oops.

[Scott3705 0]

true Scott.I always think about the stakes I generally play, and the tough opponents I admire/fear. They are not TAGs.You are right, at lower levels complicated moves are often lost in translation, so TAG is a winning style.I could never play TAG however, so I had to jump up in limits without a roll :)Oops.

Yeah, I'm retarded in limit right now and have no real sense of showdown value, (See my LHE posts), so I have no real option but to play TAG.