As of November 2021, the APT Forum is closed to new posts. Like with many online forums, usage has decreased in recent years. All previous posts are still available.
APT training vs super system (Brunson) advice
APT, as I've studied espouses the tight aggressive style. Brunson teaches a LAG much more loose aggressive style (which seems difficult to beat when I encounter it in live games). Help us understand why tight aggressive plays better and wins more. Or does it???
Sign In to comment.
Welcome
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Good question. I don't think you'll find a single answer to which plays better, as there are bound to be lots of opinions on both styles and good arguments for either.
From my experiences at live games, a lot of which style works best is really going to depend on the table you are at. If you are at passive/tight table you might find that playing a LAG style will be more profitable as you can steal more pots. Whereas a TAG style will work better against a very loose and active table. I feel that it is important to know both styles and when to use which.
Against live LAG players you are going to need to find ways to make them pay for their loose aggression. This can typically by done by applying extra aggression on them. You can typically do this by 3-betting them more pre-flop in position with decent holdings (broaden your pre-flop 3-betting range in position). Giving them draws on the flop at a reasonable price (say half pot instead of 3/4 pot) and punishing them on the turn/river then their draws don't come.
I adjust my play to the table makeup. If I feel I have a post-flop skill edge over most of the table, I'll loosen up. If I feel I'm at parity or behind in post-flop playing, I'll tighten up. I don't think 1 style all the time is optimal.