Can't win at FT, need help..

[Brad1970]

Okay. Sounds like you've got all the bases covered. Must be variance then.

I realize that ante/blind structure could make a difference but I've never heard anybody complain at the table about it. A 2/4 game at FT with a .40 ante vs a 2/4 game at PS with a .25 ante, ain't gonna make me play any differently. IMO, I don't think most folks (i.e. recreational players) stop & think about it.

[Andy B]

You might not be adjusting well to FT's ante structure. I have a lot of experience playing in relatively high-ante games, and I play too loose and aggressive for the structure on PokerStars. I come out all right, but I'd do better if I tightened up a bit. Where's the fun in that, though? Anyway, back to you--you might be happier playing on a site with a tighter structure, say, PokerStars. So they don't have rake-back or whatever--so what? Is that that big a part of your earn? The most important factor in the beatability of a game is the difference in skill between you and your opponents. I won't say that rake is irrelevant, because it isn't--especially at low limits--but your profit comes from bad players, not rake-back. PokerStars has a lot of games at a lot of limits, and I think you're doing yourself a disservice by not at least considering them.

[electrical]

I know what the Worm is talking about. Pokerroom had a bizarre structure, where in all games the BI was 1/2 a SB, regardless of the ante. In some games the ante was 1/10 SB, in some games 1/4 SB.

In the most extreme disparity, the ante in the $6-$12 game was $0.50, the same as the ante in the $4-$8 game. That $6-$12 game was teriffic, because the BI was huge relative to the ante, and most of the players played far too many hands. You could sit on your hands for a few rounds and then make a killing in a big multi-way pot.

The other quirk was that on 4th street, you were only allowed to make a single bet or raise with a pair showing. This made it more likely that players would chase from behind against trips, made it harder to protect a weak two-pair hand, and inflated pots beyond what you would expect in a normal structure.

When I moved from Pokerroom to FT to play stud, I had an immediate downswing, and I've had to adjust my playing style quite a bit. For a start, I am playing against mostly-unknown players, and I have to play technically better, because there is no gimmick structure to exploit.

With a larger relative ante, and a smaller relative bring-in, I have to play more hands for a limp, and fewer if the pot is raised. I have to avoid making mistakes if there is a double-bet on Fourth, and use the double-raise to protect my hand or thin the field on 4th, a skill I haven't had enough practice with.

That said, I am learning to adapt, and I enjoy playing on the site. I don't think this need-to-adjust is that uncommon, since I have noticed a few familiar players from the Pokerroom network turning up there, and I'm always happy to have them in the game.

That site had a couple of world-class donators. Whoo boy.

[lstream]

I don't have a ton of experience with FT, but so far I like it better than Stars, which can be pretty dull and tight due to structure. My guess is that you will figure it out. For some reason, there seems to be more "know it alls" on FT who lose their senses when they lose a hand that they think they shouldn't. It can make the game even wilder [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Andy B]

This sounds really appealing. One thing I hate about Stars (and a lot of other places) is all the damned table coaches.

[MrBlueNose]

Worm,

One more thing I forgot to add. As I play for a living, I play at basically whatever games going(so I could be playing 30/60 at one table, 2/4 at another), and the 3/6 game on Full Tilt is one of the SOFTEST games I've seen online. I recommend as you try and turn things around at Full Tilt, you stick to that limit for awhile, as it should be a lot easier to get back in the positive [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

And Andy, IMO Full Tilt has even more table coaches than any other site. It can be pretty bad there....but you have to keep that player chat on, so you know who is tilting [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Brad1970]

BlueNose is spot on about the 3/6 tables at FT. Very soft. Full of holdem players who will call all the way down with a small unimproved pair.

[Wahoo73]

[ QUOTE ]
BlueNose is spot on about the 3/6 tables at FT. Very soft.

[/ QUOTE ]

I third that...definitely my fave stud table at FTP!
[img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

But aren't we shooting ourselves in both feet by publicizing this too much and too loudly? The last thing I want to see is those 3/6 games become shark-infested by 2+2'ers! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Brad1970]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BlueNose is spot on about the 3/6 tables at FT. Very soft.

[/ QUOTE ]

I third that...definitely my fave stud table at FTP!
[img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

But aren't we shooting ourselves in both feet by publicizing this too much and too loudly? The last thing I want to see is those 3/6 games become shark-infested by 2+2'ers! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. I agree. shhhhh.

[amaranto]

Loading FTP software... Granted, they'll have to be Soft Batch cookie soft for it to make much of a difference for me.