Who claims Party beginner tables are loose?

[BruceN]

I am a beginner and have started at Poker stars. Too my surprise it is much tighter than I expected from the books, and Im about 200BB down on .05 -.10 FL.(My post flop play has been appaling.) However, provided you move around, I would say there are normally one or two tables with 4-5 players seeing the flop consistently. There appear to be a lot of Europeans, and they play very tightly early. However, from my extremely limited experience, they are not agressive with their marginal -good hands, so good players will clean up in post flop play. (Not me at the moment!)

cheers.

[knicknut]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is probably headed toward a "religious war", but I'm of the school of thought that, if you can't discipline yourself to single-table effectively (i.e., by spending downtime observing the action) then you're asking for a bloodbath by multi-tabling. Full disclosure: I say this as someone who has all kinds of trouble observing the action when I'm not inolved. I see this as a huge flaw in my game to be improved before I can really maximize my potential. This is part of the reason why I don't multi-table that much, and never more than two for now.

I'm not against multi-tabling; in fact, for those that do it well, it's stupid not to. In this regard I agree that Pac is seriously flawed. I hope to improve my own observation and concentration to the point where I can multitable without reinforcing bad habits. I'm just saying -- of the valid reasons to multitable, I don't consider impatience to be a sound one.

To be sure, I don't doubt that any of us can beat 10c/20c hold 'em soundly while multitabling, but I don't think it's laying the groundwork for future success. To each his own.

[/ QUOTE ]

AK...I'm glad you say this. I've seen you say it before and seen it elsewhere on this site from others. Multitabling is profitable, but it also magnifies your leaks...if you have the habit of playing weak hands OOP, now you will have more opportunity to do that.

Discipline and patience are required to become a solid poker player. Spend some time learning them at the lower limits and you will get a cheaper education.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it much easier to play tight and play properly (preflop, at least) when I multitable.

If I'm only seeing 50 hands an hour, that AT OOP looks good, or calling that UTG raise with QTs from MP is very tempting. When I'm seeing 450 hands an hour, that's not longer an issue--I've got enough going on that I can keep my VPIP down below 17 without temptation.

Not saying I would make loose calls OOP preflop single tabling, but the temptation would certainly be there.

[Splossy]

Isn't that the point in what the guy was saying - that one is not learning discipline & patience when mulitabling as a beginner?

[JussiUt]

I know it would be wise to play only one table at a time occasionally, because then your reading skills become better. However, I agree with KnickNut that when you play many tables at once it's easier to play tighter and it's also more entertaining.

I should and I probably will play only one table at a time, at least then when I move up the limits, but for now multitabling is more fun more profitable.

[stigmata]

I think you should all be happy to play at tighter microlimit tables, at least that way you can't entirely win through preflop hand selection. You have to learn some postflop skills, all of which will help as you move upwards.

[dardo]

I'm a beginner myself and 1-table. I think the idea is to crush the game, not to make a nano-profit at the low levels.

Sometimes is very boring, but when complicated and new situations arise you can center completely on them, also
you can center in squeeze every advantage, that I think is a key point in winning poker.

Also, have lack of attention, but I think I play too many hours, and stay too much time thinking about poker. So, sometimes get just collapsed.

regards,

dardo

[twoakers]

I recently join Party and play the $1/2 limit tables.

I recently had one short session where I played approx 100 hands and the avg. to flop for the entire table was 28%. Thta's pretty tight.

It seems to depend on the table, and especially how many loose players are there. It seems that on the profitable tables there are at least 3 people seeing upwards of 45% of the flops. If you get stuck at a table where there aren't at least 2-3 of these loose players, move.

[smbruin22]

i played canbet.com till fairly recently. and it was pretty loose (45%-50%+ on flop), although getting tighter all the time... one big canbet problem was availability of games (not so great, although you could multi-table but you might have to play every table to met your criteria).....

i played party for awhile and certainly did not find to be the "fish barrrel" i expected.

[fabadam]

[ QUOTE ]
I recently had one short session where I played approx 100 hands and the avg. to flop for the entire table was 28%. Thta's pretty tight.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm playing those same $1/$2 beginner tables at Party. What you usually (~2300 hands, 15 sessions for me) see is one or two real calling stations, people with VPIP>40, and zero aggressivity, and a bunch of people from 15-30 or so.

What I also note is that many people are unable to abandon a good pre-flop hand that's obviously drawing dead after the flop. (I made this mistake a few times too.)

[Nottom]

Its actually pretty well known that the lowest limit party tables aren't the loosest. There are many sites (usually tied to sports books and the big online casinos) that have insanely loose micro-limit tables.

However when it comes time to move up most sites have no game selection at all above 2/4. This is where Party shines.