Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

Is there an optimal time of day to find tables with these figures?

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

The tables at 25 and 50 NL get looser as the evening goes on, with the worst times being in the morning, the best times are probably after I go to bed. Whenever people get home from work and start playing around. I think you can pretty much always find a lag to exploit at the micro limits though.

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok thanks. And may I ask what time of day you play? Are you from the UK? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm in Florida and I need to play at night instead of in the day. The day games suck! [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

[ QUOTE ]

Hopefully CMAR will chime in with his views and he seems too put alot of effort into selecting the right tables to play on.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

Well, I don't have a ton of $10NL experience...

IMHO, you want as high a players per flop as possible. Looking through tables it seems 35%+ should be a realistic goal for $10NL. However it depends how many tables you are playing. If you're playing 1 table you can be an awful lot more picky than if you 12 table.

You don't necessarily want a super-high average pot size since it implies LAGs which are more difficult to deal with than loose-passives. However, average pot size is tricky because one or two stackages can throw an otherwise tight table's average pot size through the roof.

Do keep an eye on hands per hour, if it's very high with a high players per flop it just means the table was recently short and the numbers are completely unreliable.

Thing is, you should consider your playing style as well when choosing tables and opponents to play against. Also your own flexibility and ability to adjust. If you play a very LAG style, playing against a bunch of calling stations may not be ideal. You'd actually be better off playing against a bunch of weak-tighties and TAGs you can steamroll. OTOH, if you're a meticulous value better then a table full of calling stations are just right for you.


If you're sitting at a table where you're 4X+1 raises are always getting 4 callers, then start raising 6X+1, then 8X+1. Whatever you can get away with, particularly with position and strong hands. If they want to call big raises and then fold all the better for you. And limp/call preflop with a wide range looking to get paid off when you hit. SC's, PP's and even suited aces are gold at these kinds of tables. You can also start making small pf raises with these hands in order to juice the pot to help you extract postflop.

Lay off the cbets with air. Particularly if you're OOP, against multiple callers and/or versus a bunch of stations. You don't have to disguise your play much at these levels. So if it comes down to it, bet when you have a hand and check/fold when you don't. They'll call you no matter what anyway.

These kinds of tables can be very high variance, but also very profitable. Just be very wary of playing cards that make second best hands like KQ/KJ/AJ/QJ. You want to play small pots with TP with these kinds of hands and that's often not possible at super-loose tables. So unless your hand reading skills are top notch, avoid getting yourself into trouble. Play them strictly for 2pair or better and monsters/monster draws. If you meet resistance with KJ or QJ on a jack high flop, slow it way, way down and as weak-tight as it sounds consider folding in some situations.

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

I search specifically for an average pot size of around $2 and then I proceed to looking for a % of players seeing the flop above 40% (this is on FTP), I then go on to look at stack sizes. I dont like any more than 2 SSers at any table I am playing at. Tables without SSers are difficult to find, but you can usually find tables with these stats and a reasonable amount of medium-big stacks at a table.

This is how I start every session

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

I am on PS now and it is a struggle to find any games above 30% [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] I must play at the wrong time.

Thanks for that info Cry me a river. I have saved it to read again. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

Really? Looking at Stars $10NL right now there's a dozen tables at or above 30% with about 1/3 of those about 35%.

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

At the time I was on there was just one table above 30% and it was 31% with two people waiting. I logged on just now and can see 11 tables. Well that's good then. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

In a poker book I read the author said that the money that a poker player makes is more dependent on the weakness of his his opponents than in his own superior skills. I think this is very true, in the way that I don't need to be the best player at the table to win some money if there are several donkeys playing.

[ QUOTE ]

Do keep an eye on hands per hour, if it's very high with a high players per flop it just means the table was recently short and the numbers are completely unreliable.


[/ QUOTE ]

Good point, I never thought of that.

Personally I use SpadeEye which scans all the players at all the tables and then I search for the table with highest average vpip (automatically counted from my PT stats for the players). When I've checked through those tables I look for all my favorite fish - who need to have close to full stacks, and join them for the fun. My only problem is that my fish don't know proper table selection. They might be sitting at a table full of nits, in which case I'll take another table and occasionally there will be several juicy players in one table in which case there often is a waiting list.

Sometimes I see a good table, but which is short. I play horrible short handed, so I just take a good seat and sit out hoping that it will fill soon.

Maybe this is a bit extreme for NL5, but I do see results quickly when playing with the weaker players.

Re: NL 10 players/flop question
 

It hasn't occurred to you that a table full of nits is ideal for the LAG we are looking to target?