flop-, turn- and river agg% [Archive]

Patvs

02-21-2011, 07:11 AM

Any Agg below 1.5 can be exploited if the player is TIGHT.
Because combined with a high Fold to turn bet/fold to river% he will mostly fold if you double barrel into him. And he will only bet the turn/river himself if he has a really STRONG hand.

Any Agg higher than 2.5 can be exploited if the player is LOOSE.
And if he has position on you.
Because he will do most of the betting, and when you check to him he will bet. (and he will bet his draws)

So I guess a AGG between 1.5 and 2.5 is optimal.

It's important to have an overview of ALL the AGG stats.
If his Flop Agg is 3.0. But his River Agg is 1.0. He simply cbets 100% of the time (+ donkbets, + raises a cbet, etc.) but he'll only value bet the river.

If his flop Agg is 1.0. And his river Agg is 3.0. He'll only cbet the flop if he improved his hand/ or has an actual hand.... but this player is capable of floating in position, trying to bluff you off the hand on the river.

RanGoot

02-24-2011, 07:21 AM

yes, but i dont mean the agg factor, i mean agg freq % for every street

by oracle3001 on Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:00 am
AF :- (% Raise + % Bet) / % Call

AFq:- Times Raised + Times Bet) / (Times Raised + Times Bet + Times Called + Times Folded)

AFq basically addresses the fundamental problem with AF where if a person just bets and folds alot, it makes him look super aggressive when in fact he might be passive. Aggression Frequency, in a nutshell, is how often the person chooses to be aggressive when they have the opportunity.

Furthermore, as I understand it, the problem with AF is that is effected by a players VPIP, therefore a 50/10/3 (VPIP/PFR/AF) player doesn't have the same aggression as a 24/18/3, because the first is playing way more hands. AFQ is a "normalised" version, which attempted to measure a players "real" aggression out of 100.

I think somewhere in the documentation for PT2 and PAHUD there is probably a better description, including the actual formulae used to calculate them.

Aggression Factor
Agression Factor, or AF, is a ratio (not a percentage) which describes the nature of a player's bets.
The formula for any given street is ( (bets + raises) / calls ) .
Bets, raises, and calls are all "money bets." Bets and raises, however, are aggressive (increasing the cost of playing) and calls are passive. Checks and folds are not in the equation because they are not bets.
An AF of 1.0 implies that the person makes bets about as often as they call bets.
Generally speaking, an AF dropping below .75 is to getting passive; many poor players online have AF's of .7 or lower. An AF over 1.5 or so is generally getting aggressive.
What does it mean to me?
Someone with a very low AF who bets or raises is very likely to have the strength they represent. You must respect their bet when deciding how to play your hand.
Someone with a very high AF is liable to be bluffing or semi-bluffing much of the time. You might call or raise back more liberally.
More to it than that
There's an important subtlelty to understand regarding AF vis-a-vis someone's looseness. A rock who only sees the flop 15% of the time and folds the flop 50% of the time may produce an AF of 3.0 by merely betting legitimate hands. Because they are so tight, they nearly always have a pair or high cards when they come in. Consequently, the 3.0 AF doesn't actually suggest excessive agression. The mere fact that they're on one of the few hands they didn't fold tells you they are holding strong cards; StraighforwardPlay will lead to a lot of bets and raises.
On the other hand, someone who sees the flop 75% of the time who has a 1.5 AF is ridiculously aggressive. Someone seeing almost every flop can't possibly be catching their cards that often, so a high AF tells you they must be bluffing and semi-bluffing, probably too often.
Someone's AF for a given street does not tell you how likely they are to bet. However, if they do put money up, it describes the kind of money. Bets made by a passive player are very likely to be legitimate. Bets made by a very aggressive player may also be bluffs, semi-bluffs, or marginal value bets.
Consider someone who bets 25% of the time, raises 15 % of the time, and calls 10% (the rest of the time they check or fold.) Their AF is 4.0. ((25+15)/10)
Compare to someone who bets 35% of the time, raises 20% of the time, and calls 30% of the time. Their AF is 1.833. ((35+20)/30)
The second person is a lot more likely to bet or raise -- they do it 55% of the time, far more than the first player's 40% of the time -- yet their AF is lower, because they call so much more loosely -- three time as often!
Generally speaking, you should adjust your perception of their AF based on how often they fold up to that point. If they fold a lot, that high AF doesn't mean they are they are all that aggressive, and if they rarely fold, a low AF may not mean every bet is legitimate.
What about YOUR AF?
Most good players suggest that a good limit player's AF will tend to be above 2.0; some advise 3.0. The best advice is that once your aggression is over 1.5, do not try to to raise it merely for the sake of raising it. If you do, you may end up exercising DumbAggression. You either need to add aggression at the right times, or to reduce your bad calls. You need to know which is which, and to adjust your play accordingly. If your problem is calling to much, adding wanton agression will not solve your calling problem! If you study when to avoid bad calls, and study when to add appropriate agression, your AF will rise and so will your profitability. If you just slam, slam, slam the pot, your AF will rise, but your variance will skyrocket as your bankroll plumme