[Dire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good post. I really wish I made more of an effort to table select sometimes. When tables start to break and it becomes me and like 2 solid regs or heads up, I just hate to stand up. I don't really get angry and start making bad plays against people, but I do hate to feel like I'm admitting I'm not confident I can beat them or whatever. It's stupid, but it just feels like I'm admitting defeat or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a massive leak you have.

the best way to think about it is the following:

i have earned in total $9,170.16 this month at NL200 in 20,678 hands (w/o rake). that is a winrate of 11.1ptbb/100.

if you remove the rake my winrate is only 8.1ptbb/100, so i am paying 3ptbb/100.

so to make a profit sitting at a table of regs you have to have an edge of more than 3ptbb/100. so even if you are the best player at the table, you are probably losing money in the long run.

every table you must look and see the spots where you are making alot of money from. you may have an edge against some 19/13/2 player but is it really enough to overcome the 3ptbb/100 in rake you are paying.

i am usually the 1st person to leave the table, and i am very confident of my ability. i laugh to myself at their stupidity and join another table where i have a massive edge instead of breaking even against a bunch of regs + massive rake


as you move up in stakes, the rake becomes lower in ptbb/100 so at 300/600 the rake is virtually insignificant and playing the same table of regs you figure to have an edge on is a very reasonable thing to do as you probably only have to have an edge over them of 1ptbb/100 to make a profit


an often overlooked fact about table selection....

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are remotely decent at very short-handed play, your edge against a 19/13/2 'reg' in a 3-handed game should be massive. Certainly more than 3BB/100. Those guys are extremely unlikely to have even remotely close to the proper skill set for 3 handed play.

Again, just another way of looking at things.