|
|
#2
08-25-2006, 02:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: table selection
relative positions are key, especially at higher limits where you won't be able to find tables without other decent/good/expert players very often. It's really important to consider who you can push out of pots with position, who you can isolate, how the blinds line up when you have stealing potential, who will be in position to steal when you're in the blinds, who will be in the blinds with you and how that will effect how many hands you can play...
In 6-max especially, it's not nearly as simple as 'keep the aggro players on your left, and the passive players on your right'. I think in general you want to have a lineup that is conducive to you playing as many hands as possible, and playing them aggressively. 
|
|
#3
08-25-2006, 09:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: table selection
Relative position is definitely important. I think about 6-max games as basically falling into three categories: tight, loose and really loose; or HU/3 to flop; 3 to 4 to flop; 3 to 6 to flop. Generally, the players in the tight games are not very good post-flop, they just play fewer hands pre-flop and/or respect openers and there is little to no limping first-in. Occasionally, I might find myself on the wrong side of a player I respect, but otherwise I find these tables quite profitable and somewhat easier to play than the looser games.
I think it is just a question of making the tactical adjustments that maximize profit for the type of game you are in and then playing as well as you can.
|
|
#4
08-25-2006, 11:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: table selection
[ QUOTE ]
relative positions are key, especially at higher limits where you won't be able to find tables without other decent/good/expert players very often. It's really important to consider who you can push out of pots with position, who you can isolate, how the blinds line up when you have stealing potential, who will be in position to steal when you're in the blinds, who will be in the blinds with you and how that will effect how many hands you can play... In 6-max especially, it's not nearly as simple as 'keep the aggro players on your left, and the passive players on your right'. I think in general you want to have a lineup that is conducive to you playing as many hands as possible, and playing them aggressively. [/ QUOTE ] you mean the aggro players to your right and the passives to youe left?
|
|
#5
08-26-2006, 01:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: table selection
[ QUOTE ]
you mean the aggro players to your right and the passives to youe left? [/ QUOTE ] I'd rather have the TAGs to my left so when I raise they fold. And the fish on my right so when they limp I can isolate. Right? Or does my entire concept of poker table selection need to be changed?
|
|
#6
08-26-2006, 02:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: table selection
this seems to always get mixed up. i think some books (dont quote me because i haven't read any) have recommended sitting to the left of aggressive players and to the right of passive players. ed miller says to sit to the left of loose players and to the right of tight players. typically everyone always hears "tight aggressive" and "loose passive" so this gets flipped. if all variables are equal but the aggression levels vary, you would want the more aggressive player to your right. if all variables are equal but the tightness levels vary, you would want the looser player to your right.
|
|
#7
08-26-2006, 02:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: table selection
[ QUOTE ]
this seems to always get mixed up. i think some books (dont quote me because i haven't read any) have recommended sitting to the left of aggressive players and to the right of passive players. ed miller says to sit to the left of loose players and to the right of tight players. typically everyone always hears "tight aggressive" and "loose passive" so this gets flipped. if all variables are equal but the aggression levels vary, you would want the more aggressive player to your right. if all variables are equal but the tightness levels vary, you would want the looser player to your right. [/ QUOTE ] The players you want to be in the pot with to your right, and the ones you don't on your left, in general.
|
|
#8
08-26-2006, 02:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: table selection
yeah, and vpip has to be the best single thing to use to determine who those players are without actually observing anything about their play
|
|
#9
08-26-2006, 03:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: table selection
[ QUOTE ]
yeah, and vpip has to be the best single thing to use to determine who those players are without actually observing anything about their play [/ QUOTE ] Often times i look at the discrepancy between their VPIP and their PFR as while a 45/35 guy is probably not a winner they can be much more difficult than a 35/5 player.
|
|
#10
08-26-2006, 04:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: table selection
[ QUOTE ]
The players you want to be in the pot with to your right, and the ones you don't on your left, in general. [/ QUOTE ] This is 50% correct. The worst player to have on your left is a LAG-TAG that knows what u are doing when u try to get headsup with weak players. You dont want him in the pot but he will be there all the time. You want the unpredictable players on your right and the predictable players on your left, because u want to have position on the unpredictable ones. But u also want the weak players on your right so u can isolate them. So: U both want the tricky ones that make money from the table on your right, so u can lose as little as possible. And u want the weak ones that are losing $ on your right, so u can win maximum from them. Basically u want all players on your right all the time. Thats the problem.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
