Stars $100 NL - some queries:

[pokerlaw]

hi all,

pretty new to cash games, have some questions about them. Quick background on me before I get into my question: Been playing poker seriously for 1 1/2 years, have 2000 or so SNGs (1-3 table SNGs on Stars mainly, some on UB, a few on party) under my belt and am very confident I am a winning player in those. Played some $100 and $50 NL on Stars this past week and over ~1200 hands, well, lets just say that I am on a really really big heater (FWIW, I have been 4 tabling the games mainly, sometimes I would have 1-2 SNGs or a MTT and 2-3 cash games, but i digress).

Anyway, in that brief stint, I can't help notice that in comparison to the Stars SNG action 1) there aren't nearly as many tables of action going; 2) the turnover in regard to players is much much lower than in SNG's; and 3) as a correlary to #2, there seem to be a lot of regular multi-tablers (2-3 per table at least) in said games (some/many of whom may be reading this now, hah).

So, in regards to those findings i would like it if I could get responses to the following:

1) of course, being able to multi-table and playing frequently do not mean that the person is a winner. In that regard, how does knowing someone is 4-8 tabling $100 NL affect your decision to sit at their table? Are there any players that you avoid outright?

2) Is party more liquid, in terms of seeing new faces/more dead money? Is my correlary bet'n the two (turnover and profitability) not as strong as my gut says it is?

3) Misc inquiry - If you could tell me your opinion on Stars $100 NL - anything and everything that you have to say about it (difficulty of game, best time to play, anything) - I would greatly appreciate it.

Regards.

[miajag]

This is my primary game. To touch first on the Stars vs. Party question, I think the games at this level are slightly better at Party but not by as much as people here seem to think. There are a few solid regulars (none of whom I avoid entirely), some regulars who suck, and plenty of complete fish on both sites. Because I like Stars' software, support, etc. so much better than Party's, I mostly play on Stars and only play on Party when clearing a bonus.

In summation, Stars $100NL is quite a beatable game. Without turning this into a brag post, my results there over my past 50K hands are extremely good and I'm far from being an extremely good player. As far as best time to play, evenings (8pm-2am Eastern) seem to be the fishiest.

[jsnipes28]

Yea i've played my last 25k hands at 100NL on Stars and find the game very beatable while still doing stupid things like c/r all in with 77 on a 569 board. The players are not amazing and there are plenty of maniac/donators.

I actually like to play in the daytime better because players seem to let me run over them with pfr and c-bet and i get to play more laggy, but it is probably, no definetly more profitable at night as long as you don't try and pull any stupid moves.

There are some players who i don't necessarily avoid, but if i raise pf and bet my overpair and get raised it is an insta muck bc they have showed me a set numerous times in the past. I have stats on players who multitable and are losing, but it's pretty easy to run bad for 1 or 2K hands.

[pokerlaw]

thanks for the feedback guys. Did another 250 hands in the last hour (4 tabling) and I will definetly continue to play here (and wait for my hot streak to end, hahaha).

On average, I would say that the guys who multi-table SNGs seem to be better than the average cash game MTer. Today, one guy that was 4-6 tabling $100 NL open-pushed to take the blinds from EP w $120 on one table, then on another table, his button AKo and my SB KK danced for the tune of $85 preflop, good times. ok, off to drink my profit [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[BlackRain]

This is also my primary game and I agree with much of what the other posters said. I probably know them both fairly well [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] My 2+2 name = my Stars name so you know who I am.

I would stretch the time frame a bit further to 7pm-6am eastern. I find that there are nearly always several if not half a dozen good to great tables during that time.

There are several regulars in this game who multi table and basically set mine. There are a few rocks. The large majority are fish and the odd maniac or two.

These games are very beatable because of the large volume of bad players and the fact that most of the regulars are straightforward set miners and not tricky at all. I don't have enough hands on most of the regulars to draw conclusions but I believe most of them are at least modest winners, playing a very uncreative and obvious style.

But heck, all the fish are at party, only rock gardens at stars [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

edit: btw, I assume you are talking about full ring. If not, disregard the above.

[pokerlaw]

thanks for the advice so far. yeah I am talking full-ring. hope to (not) see you guys at the tables [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]