The Fatally Flawed Tag

I had actually read this post earlier from aim786 but stiff posted up http://www.stoxpoker.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1427 a 2p2 link in there about someone who I guess believes the TAG play is fatally flawed. His argument is:A tight aggressive style is fatally flawed.
1) Tight means your starting cards are most often superior to your opponents' cards.
2) Aggressive means you bet and raise a lot.
3) Because of (2) (aggression) your opponents are then free to fold when they have not improved; because of (1) (your cards are better than theirs) this is not a mistake. You therefore get minimum money in the pot when you are winning.
4) Your opponents can call, raise, check-raise etc. at will when they hit. You therefore put maximum money in when you are losing.
(3) and (4) mean postflop disaster, which is in no way compensated for by your relatively small preflop edge.
Before I go on, I want to state for the record that these are just my thoughts. I am only a winning player at 5/10. I have not been playing limit for that long. In no way do I claim to be an absolute authority on the game, everything here is up for discussion and this argument is focused on primarily a 5-6max person game.
I don't believe the TAG system is fatally flawed. It only fails when: 1) your opponents are observant, they'll realize you're only playing good cards, which translates to: PREDICTABILITY2) People who play tight preflop and may not have enough experience postflop and may make a lot more mistakes in short handed games i.e. not pushing their edges when they're ahead, or pushing too much when it is a marginal situation, value betting, etc.
I hope that makes sense, the logic is kind of killing my head right now. But to continue, a 2p2er joker122 makes a great statement:"TAG" is a relative and evolving idea. TAG used to mean 24/17, but it's hard to beat up the mid-stakes games today with that style because it will be handily exploited in the ways you mentioned.
Translation: Tight is a relative term. TAG just means playing tighter than everyone else at the table, there is no specific # that equates an actual TAG, it is defined by the general sort that play the game.
So let me ask you this, why do you play a LAG style in the first place? For more profit? Fun? Action?
Or is it ego?
I'm willing to bet a large portion of you relate most to ego. Hell, I did for a long time til I realized I made a lot more money, and easier money, playing tighter than a 30/20 player.
Do you want to make money the easy way or the hard way? What is poker about? Making money.
Especially when you're multi-tabling, a LAG approach, which I guess is defined as a 45/30 player, is so incredibly hard to employ properly. LAG requires even more reads and attention to each player as certain moves gain or lose value - donkbetting scary turns, or check-raising draw heavy flops - work differently versus different people. Also, per table it's necessary to keep in mind your table image (which imo is the most important attribute to remember) as people may call you down light or heavy depending on your performance.
But...as one poster mentioned to me:
aim786: Let's say u play the first 10 hands at 1bb/hand so the next 10 hands i play at 0.5bb/hand, since the more hands you add the less you make on them so that means im playin 20 hands at 0.75bb/hand but per 100 hands, im makin 15bb/100; while ur only makin 10bb/100 so you have to keep opening up more and more until you pass the optimal point thats the only debatable part, ie whats the optimal vpip/pfr combo
The example is obviously a little extreme but for arguments sake, those #s make it easier to imagine. But is that optimal vpip/pfr combo possible to figure out?
Rather than trying to find this optimal #, it's more important to play tight, play good cards until your opponents catch on and your play becomes too predictable. Then you play more hands, mix it up, and play a little LAG so that people start calling you down lighter. Then you play tight again and get paid off. Isn't this what poker is about?
Baronzeus:the key to poker is to get more from your opponents when you are ahead than they get from you when you are behind. this can be done in a variety of ways: value betting, playing tightly (ie folding second best hands), hand reading and making correct plays (bluffing etc).
ultimately the TAG will win in almost all of the above categories, especially the 1st and 2nd. ------------------------------------------------------------------I liked tmfs's post the best:
"But the main reason I disgree with your post is poker is way to complicated to play well by playing one fixed strategy such as "Tag" and "lag". When I think of good players that I have played against, I don't think that they are a "Tag" or a "Lag", they have the characteristics of both and in the end just play good poker. You might be able beat non-thinking players with just a prototypical "tag" strategy, but soon as you face thinking players you better be able to do something more than follow a hand chart and telling yourself to be aggressive postflop. "
Summary: TAG is a winning strategy that is probably more profitable than a LAG. (Do you know any 45/30s who crush sh lhe?) You play LAG to give the deception that you play bad cards, so people pay you off on your good hands. If they're not paying attention and pay you off anyways, why deviate and play even more cards?