Poker: Passive and Aggressive – Is it Better to Play Passive or Aggressive?

There are two types of people in poker: passive players and aggressive players. We know the differences, we know that these players play the game differently, but which is really better?

No matter who you are, whether you have just started playing Texas Holdem poker, have played the same game or are quite seasoned, you don’t want to know if its better to play poker passive or aggressive? Whoever you are, I know that you, like me, want to know which better type of player to switch yourself to play. Then you can win more money.

The question is, sometimes players don’t know how to play or what to do because they get so much information. If you are constantly struggling to win money at poker then chances are it is not your fault. It probably has nothing to do with you. So let us take aim at the question. In fact, we’re going to nail it down now.

How Poker is a Skill Game

Poker is a skill game. It means luck, but the game is not just based on luck. This is what makes it so interesting. Poker is not pure gambling like a slot machine or at the table. You can actually change how the game runs with your special actions. This is beauty poker (and some think its a beast as well).

Most importantly, the biggest single effect on the player is to influence the outcome of the game taking place in the betting! Betting on chips, pay, raise or reraising. This is the biggest factor you as an individual have to change the outcome of the game, preferably on your behalf.

Why This Is Important For This Difference

This fact is extremely important because if you give us valuable prior knowledge, we will look at the best way to play poker: passive or aggressive. You see, a passive player often bets, prefers to check or call another player then actually make the first move himself. The aggressive player, on the other hand, loves to bet, they love to make the first move and in fact, they really don’t want to check or call.

This is important because it begs the question “How much affect is each player causing in the game?”. The passive player does not have as much power to change the tide of the game as they do take full advantage of one method that is available. Aggressive players, on the other hand, try as much as possible to influence the game, change the way it is drawn, cut it short or beef pot. Looking at it at some point, it’s easy to see what’s better.

And the winner is …

If I had to make a decision I would say aggressive is the better way to play so passively. In reality, though, it’s not as black and white as this one. Sometimes a passive game can be useful, like if you want to check raise, and some bluff, if you want to see easily on the next card causing punting and draws etc. There are many situations where both are best, but overall, if I had to Being aggressive is definitely the right way to go.