Tips for finding good games: The Art of Table selection?

[Smurph64]

Many of us currently in the micro levels are in a different environment than our predecessors, where the amount of game choices have gone up, where rakeback and bonuses are major decisions to ponder, and where data and screen management is now a science.

Some of us out there are not proficient necessarily at the skills that some good online players possess outside of being able to play solid poker.

There are obviously tools out there like PT and Hud and Starsky and Hutch and what have you which are designed to help us find the good buddy, soft table, super sweet wallet widening opportunities out there today but I don't want to talk about them.

I don't care if I have these tools or whether or not I can use them to their utmost, lets assume that we all can.

I am curious however in the THOUGHT process one uses to select a good game.

Let's say our datamining, backscratching, profitpoking tools give us our daily bread and it points to 10 tables.

Ok so we multitable all ten you say and start weeding out the ones that aren't as juicy as Lucy?

Ok well if that is your game then this thread isn't for you.

Let's say you only have the skillset/screen size to only play 3 games at your utmost skill level, to your utmost capacity of data processing (its one for me but I am old) and today that is what you want to do.

How do we narrow down our choices to pick the 3 best games out there.

Here are my questions:

1. Is it more important and financially prudent to pick a game with the best bonus/rakeback because that percentage of return is greater than the difference between the juiciest of the ten? (Assuming different sites)

2. Assuming one site however is it better to expand our search to games above and below our current comfort level for more profitable opportunities? (In other words is it better to bat .350 in minors or .275 in the major leagues or take a shot at the all star game's home run derby contest for a 15 swing run because you know the pitcher isn't throwing his best stuff?)

I know a lot of us are married to bankroll and its hard to assume the risk of a game with more money at the table. With a variance of 18bb/100 that means I could be out 36 of my normal big bets in 100 hands. That is a pretty high opportunity cost to have to offset.

I am interested in hearing the thoughts of players on our boards answer and discuss the two questions I asked and hope that people are able to give solid examples as to how and why they narrow down their search to 3 tables or less.

I have my own approach which apparently is a lot more intense than most people's including some very solid rep players here so I am hoping people can enlighten me enough here.

Thanks for your help.

[tiltaholic]

it really depends on what your motivation(s) is/are for playing. if it is ultimately all about the benjamins (i know you're old smurph so here you go ) then definitely option 2 with the goal of moving up, learning new skills/seeing more game conditions, and making higher limits our new home.

and with respect to option one, i don't play at sites without effective rakeback because i am currently pleased with my choices among the sites for which it's an option.

[tiltaholic]

also, when i am playing there's usually only 1-3 choices of tables anyway and i usually have notes on at least some of the regular (read: good) players immediately.

i evaluate my seat wrt to them and any known poor players and decide whether i want to play or not.

sometimes i play until i can evaluate the nature of the table/seat.

i just like playing, so i don't worry about winning or losing (since i know i win eventually).

[MrWookie]

The Wookie Method For Table Selection For Full Ring Games (shamlessly stolen from Grunch):

1. Get good at poker.
2. Get good at playing short handed.
3. Get good at playing HU.
4. Sit at an empty table. Yes. Empty.
5. When a player sits down, start playing. He will suck.
6. When another player sits down, play with him, too. He will also be bad at poker.
7. Repeat step 6 6-8 more times.
8. Profit!

[Vern]

[ QUOTE ]
The Wookie Method For Table Selection For Full Ring Games (shamlessly stolen from Grunch):

1. Get good at poker.
2. Get good at playing short handed.
3. Get good at playing HU.
4. Sit at an empty table. Yes. Empty.
5. When a player sits down, start playing. He will suck.
6. When another player sits down, play with him, too. He will also be bad at poker.
7. Repeat step 6 6-8 more times.
8. Profit!

[/ QUOTE ]
Hey, I think I used to sit down as the second player at your table all the time.

[PokerBarney]

I use the same method as Befolder - go for one with a small avg pot size (so I can bully them), and a moderate players per flop percentage (so the pots aren't overcrowded). I'll occasionally jump onto 2 player tables, but generally I prefer 4-6.

The real art of table selection is working out your style of play and determining how this affects the table statistics, so you know what to look for.

[Befolder]

[ QUOTE ]
I use the same method as Befolder - go for one with a small avg pot size (so I can bully them), and a moderate players per flop percentage (so the pots aren't overcrowded). I'll occasionally jump onto 2 player tables, but generally I prefer 4-6.

The real art of table selection is working out your style of play and determining how this affects the table statistics, so you know what to look for.

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess I didn't specify where I wanted flop % and pot size to be.

I actually want the opposite of what you said. As high a percentage as possible and huge pot sizes. I don't have a problem playing in aggro games and more people to the flop, just means I get to play more drawing hands to cash in on.

[Befolder]

I think I personally ride the line between time efficiency and the best game.

I prefer a site with RB/bonus to one without. I haven't played Party regularly for over two years. I do often wonder if the choice I'm making is the best one. There is something to be said for getting money at the other sites, regardless of running good or bad.

I choose my seats based on flop percentage and avg. pot size, as that's what's offered at Absolute and Hollywood where I currently frequent.

I will make table switches if I don't see enough poor players, or just too many tricky ones that I am already aware of.

My PT and HUD have broken recently so I've been going solo again, which is interesting.

Guess I'll junk all DBs and start over since there are better ways to do it than I have been apparently. The results are still tracked via an old Excel sheet I've used since I started getting serious a few years ago.

[stormy455]

I struggle with table selection so I hope to find some enlightening replies here. My experiences online say that table selection is problematic at best. Using our tools we discover a great juicy table only to find that 3 people are waiting ahead of us. So we put our name on the waitlist and take a seat when it comes open. Unfortunately the 3 ahead of us were TAGs that saw the pool full of fish. They've now replaced the fish and this pool is no longer good. Or we could just take a seat at the first open table. Sometimes we hit the jackpot and the table is great. But soon enough the loose passives lose their chips and are again replaced by a random player (often a TAG). The third option is to use Mr. Wookies idea and sit at an empty table waiting for the fish to come. Since I currently suck shorthanded (lost 25BB last night playing heads up when my table brokd) this won't work for me. Generally, I just take the first available seat, play a couple of orbits and if it doesn't fit my style I move on. Having said all of that, I think table selection comes down to finding the site you are most comfortable with, generally has the best games, and offers good incentives to play (rakeback, reload bonuses etc) and stick to it.

Now for the live games at the B&M where turnover is much, much smaller table selection is crucial. Don't let yourself get stuck on a bad table when there are other good tables around. Keep your eye on the other tables and request a table change when your table dries up.

[Befolder]

[ QUOTE ]
Keep your eye on the other tables and request a table change when your table dries up.

[/ QUOTE ]
I get to play live very infrequently, but would like to know how you watch other tables while you're playing at one?

It must be simpler than I think. Do you look for a lot of limping and cold calling?. I figure you can't have much time to observe other tables, so what are the most important things to notice?