In chapter 2 of Harrington on Hold ’em, Dan Harrington explains poker as a game of misdirection: you profit most when opponents think they know what you’re doing—and you then do something different. He lays out three core playing styles, shows how starting-hand requirements change across styles and positions, and then shifts to practical tournament adjustments and defenses against ultra-aggressive opponents.
Poker as Misdirection: Why Style Switching Prints Money
Harrington’s key idea is that your “default” style sets expectations. Once opponents form a read, you become predictable. The most profitable moments often come when you temporarily play the opposite of your usual style, because:
-
tight players get paid when they suddenly bluff or steal,
-
wild players get paid when they suddenly show real strength.
Style 1: Conservative (Tight, Stack-Preservation First)
This approach focuses on protecting your tournament life by:
-
entering fewer pots with higher-quality hands,
-
choosing lines that keep later decisions simple,
-
avoiding committing your whole stack without strong odds of being best.
Harrington notes this style historically fit cash games well (because blinds don’t rise), and it also works in tournaments early when stacks are deep. The tradeoff: you tend to win many small pots but may struggle to win big ones once opponents label you as very tight.
Conservative opening requirements (full table, unopened pot)
He sketches tighter ranges in early position and gradually wider ranges in middle/late position, emphasizing:
-
strongest pairs and premium big-card hands up front,
-
adding more medium pairs and strong broadways as position improves,
-
adding more speculative hands late.
He also introduces the idea that calling a raise requires stronger hands than opening yourself (the “gap” concept), since someone has already shown strength.
Style 2: Aggressive (Wider Starts, More Pressure)
Aggressive players open more hands—often including all pairs, many broadway combos, most ace-x hands, and suited connectors—without being as constrained by position.
Upsides:
-
you play and win more pots without showdown,
-
you’re harder to read,
-
you get paid more when you actually hit big.
Downsides:
-
postflop decisions are tougher (more marginal spots),
-
you run into hidden monsters more often,
-
your stack swings are bigger.
Harrington’s warning: this style can be strong, but it demands good reads and discipline—beginners often lose stacks with medium-strength hands.
Style 3: Super-Aggressive (Maximum Range, Maximum Pressure)
Super-aggressive play means you can enter with almost any two cards when the situation supports it. The goal is to:
-
see flops cheaply,
-
win many pots either immediately, by hitting, or by bluffing.
This style leans heavily on table factors: position, fold equity, opponent fear, stack sizes behind you, and who is likely to fight back. It can be optimal at weak tables because simply contesting more pots creates profit opportunities—but it’s exhausting and risky because you live in high-variance, thin-edge situations.
Why Aggression Rose in Tournaments
Harrington describes how tournament incentives differ from cash games: as blinds rise and payouts approach, many players tighten up to “survive.” Strong tournament players exploit that fear by increasing pressure—especially near the money—stealing chips that cautious players surrender. His takeaway is practical: conservative play can be fine early, but tournament success requires shifting gears later.
Defending Against Styles
Versus conservative players
There’s little “special” to do: they tend to have real hands when they show aggression, so the best response is usually to avoid donating chips without strong holdings. Their occasional bluffs work well because their image buys credibility.
Versus super-aggressive players: two main weapons
1) The Hammer
When a super-aggressive player attacks and you have a reasonable hand, respond with a large re-raise instead of calling. The logic: many super-aggressive steals are designed to be cheap; forcing a big confrontation makes them abandon lots of weak opens. You’ll sometimes run into a real hand—but if nobody resists, the bully accumulates chips uncontested.
2) The Rope-a-Dope
When you have genuine strength, you can underplay early (often just calling) to encourage continued aggression, then apply one decisive raise later. This works because the opponent’s range is wide, so your strong hands perform even better than they would versus tighter players.
Showing Hands and Controlling Table Image
Harrington generally advises against voluntarily revealing cards, because information is valuable. But he also explains a tactical exception: some aggressive players selectively show strong hands in low-risk moments to create the illusion they’re always legitimate—making future bluffs and steals easier.
Tournament Game Plans by Style
Conservative plan: stay steady early, avoid big coin-flips, accumulate chips slowly, and look for occasional big double-ups.
Super-aggressive plan: you need a stack to apply pressure, so build it early by taking pots; if resisted, shift into cheaper entries aiming to hit big and double. Once big, you can leverage stack power to control the table.
Balanced Strategy: Don’t Become Predictable
Harrington argues you must vary:
-
whether you raise or call in similar spots,
-
and your bet sizing,
even if one choice seems “best” in isolation. Small “imperfections” now can create bigger profits later because opponents can’t reliably put you on a hand. He suggests using a simple randomness method (like a watch second hand) to keep your mix consistent without being patterned.
How Format Changes Strategy
He finishes with adjustments for common tournament types:
-
Major live events: long rounds, generally tighter play, fewer multiway pots; observation matters more; selective aggression works well because respect is high early.
-
Small-stakes online MTTs: short levels, chaotic all-ins, many callers; observation matters less; pure bluffing tends to fail; value and doubling-up become central; implied odds can be huge in multiway pots.
-
Higher-stakes online MTTs / rebuy structures: stronger fields, more “serious” betting; still faster than live, so you must push edges more.
-
Sit-and-go’s: early = tight; midgame = prime stealing window as players get payout-focused; late = shove-heavy, high-variance endgame.
-
Live satellites: similar to sit-and-go dynamics but with stronger live-read value; only first place matters, and deals are common near the end.
What the End-of-Chapter Problems Teach
The practice hands reinforce the chapter’s themes:
-
speculative hands should be chosen carefully and often only when conditions are right,
-
pot odds can transform a hand from “speculative” to “mandatory continue,”
-
against aggressive opponents, you generally play fewer hands—but play them more decisively,
-
passivity against pressure (especially giving free cards) is a major leak,
-
correct defense includes both re-raising resistance (Hammer) and slowplaying strength (Rope-a-Dope) depending on your holding and the situation.