The perfect NL25 NLHE Full Ring Strategy

[GaF]

I thought that this is quite an interesting article (mostly because it's backed up by data from 3500 different players): http://www.pokertableratings.com/blog/2011/03/the-perfect-nlhe-strategy

What’s the best strategy for $0.10 / $0.25 NL Full Ring? We analyzed 3,565 players that played over 50,000 hands in 2010 to find out. It’s probably not gonna come as a shock to you that you should be tight and aggressive. But just how tight should you be on the button? How often should you raise in early position? We’ll answer these questions (and more) in this post. First, let’s compare the general stats of losers, winners and breakeven players:

	Loose Losers	Tighter Losers	Breakeven Players	Winners
BB/100	-5.86	-1.84	0.10	2.34
Number of Players in Group	10	14	63	20
VP$IP	41%	19%	9%	13%
PFR %	9%	2%	9%	11%
AFQ %	44%	37%	13%	48%

Not surprisingly, the winners are tight and aggressive. But what IS suprising is that the biggest losers aren’t the typical loose-passive fish. They’re definitely loose, but they’re aggressive too! Also, the really tight passive players (AKA nits) manage to breakeven and can scrape out a decent profit when you factor in rakeback / rewards. Bottomline: You want to be tight and aggressive, but being tight is more important than being aggreessive. Let’s look at their VP$IP (Voluntarily Put Money in the Pot) stats by position to get more insight:

	Loose Losers	Tighter Losers	Breakeven Players	Winners
Early Position VP$IP	42%	20%	3%	7%
Mid Position VP$IP	42%	19%	5%	10%
Cut-Off VP$IP	40%	18%	11%	18%
Button VP$IP	41%	19%	15%	22%
SB VP$IP	51%	26%	15%	18%
BB VP$IP	28%	11%	12%	11%

Note: Click the numbers in the “Winners” column to see a ROUGH ESTIMATE of what hands are in their range. Notice a pattern? The losers don’t change their VP$IP by position! They have almost the same VP$IP in early position as they have on the button. The winners, however, are MUCH looser on the button than they are in early position. Let’s see how their PFR (Preflop Raise) stats stack up:

	Loose Losers	Tighter Losers	Breakeven Players	Winners
Early Position PFR	9%	2%	2%	7%
Mid Position PFR	10%	2%	5%	9%
Cut-Off PFR	10%	2%	11%	16%
Button PFR	11%	2%	15%	12%
SB PFR	9%	2%	15%	12%
BB PFR	7%	2%	12%	6%

Again, the losers don’t adjust their preflop raising strategy based on their position. It’s like they’re just blindly following a starting hands chart. The winners DO raise more when they’re in position. Note: The winners raise significantly more than the breakeven players EXCEPT when they’re on the small or big blind. Finally, let’s look how their 3bet percentages and aggression frequencies compare:

	Loose Losers	Tighter Losers	Breakeven Players	Winners
3 Bet %	4%	1%	5%	4%
Flop Aggression	42%	35%	9%	50%
Turn Aggression	45%	40%	14%	47%
River Aggression	46%	41%	26%	41%

So here are the key take aways

• Be tight and aggressive (duh).
• Try to match the stats of the winning players (only if you play $0.10/$0.25 Full Ring NLHE).
• CAUTION: Matching SOME of the stats probably won’t work — it’s all or nothin’

[Nade]

Re: The perfect NL25 NLHE Full Ring Strategy It's pretty dangerous for players to be playing a set % of hands just because they see it's 'right'. No doubt there will be some who follow that article to the letter and play those % in each position. The key though is what hands make up those percentages. It may be a lot more profitable to play suited connectors than high off-suit broadways in position at fullring but if you do a top 20% hand filter it will show all the broadways and no suited connectors plus there's the point some hands are better played against some opponents than others, you have to be fluid. Nevertheless, i think a lot of people will get a lot of good from that article. Also i think it's pretty unethical of them to publish such in-depth stats, and most things they post about players imo.