|
|
#31
11-20-2007, 02:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
I think very similar to ILP on this issue, and again id like to repeat that I left the table about 10 seconds after it become 4 handed ... and I didnt even have to play against me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
I attribute my relativly high winrate like 50% due to my rigid table seleciton. If someone said "play two table 2 random stars 10/20 tables during a random hour or dont play at all" id probaibly choose just not to play. 
|
|
#32
11-20-2007, 02:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
[ QUOTE ]
I think very similar to ILP on this issue, and again id like to repeat that I left the table about 10 seconds after it become 4 handed ... and I didnt even have to play against me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I attribute my relativly high winrate like 50% due to my rigid table seleciton. If someone said "play two table 2 random stars 10/20 tables during a random hour or dont play at all" id probaibly choose just not to play. [/ QUOTE ] WOW. If I were in your spot I would consider myself to be in a pretty juicy situation, provided the 50/30's stats were for AP~5.5. I think 4-handed is the ideal table size for me (starting to finally accept that I tilt too much huhu). Just realized this post might come off as insulting to OP. I don't know his sn and I was assuming he was sitting out anyhow.
|
|
#33
11-20-2007, 03:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
I dont like playing short short handed cause it requires me to focus too much at the tables..
I like 4 tabling.. I can play pretty abc 6-max, but I cant really do that 4handed.
|
|
#34
11-20-2007, 03:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
[ QUOTE ]
Just realized this post might come off as insulting to OP. I don't know his sn and I was assuming he was sitting out anyhow. [/ QUOTE ] No offense taken. It probably is a juicy spot for heis, esp with me in there.
|
|
#35
11-20-2007, 05:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
I have to agree that with the unknown sitting out this table looses a lot of its value as 50/30 guys gets better in shorthanded setups
But I also have to object to ILPs post. ILP If you can find better tables than this on a regular basis. Good for you. But shut the [censored] up when you assume that I can. No way in hell I can play 20k hands a month if I turn down this table. Well I could but then I'd have to mix in 1/2 or start sitting in front of my PC 20 hours a day, but I like my social life too much for that. I have never considered this a bad table cuz I have never been able to find better ones. Not even at 3/6. And that has been at AP, FT, UB, stars and now at party. If the tables are better at US times. Good for you guys. But plz to be stop hating us europeans for party cuz this table is as good as it gets on party 5/10+ at any time of day. Also. Assuming pr default that a 50/30 guy is good is just as retarded as assuming he is bad. Only one way to figure it out and thats playing with him. The same with a "relatively unknown 30/15". If these stats are over a small sample he can be anything type wise. 22/14 or 40/20 or 29/20. I'd say lets find out. But again. I dont have the luxury too find the tables with 2 50/5 guys. If I could I wouldnt play this table either. Party offers me the best tables right now. When I open party at european prime time there will be 10-12 tables of 10/20 to 20/40 going. Of the 30-40 unique players you find at those tables I'd say that on average there is 1 50/5 guy overall. Good luck playing 20k hands there turning down OP's table. Maybe I should move to California or Thailand...
|
|
#36
11-20-2007, 08:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
"I have to agree that with the unknown sitting out this table looses a lot of its value as 50/30 guys gets better in shorthanded setups."
I agree with this statement. "But I also have to object to ILPs post. ILP If you can find better tables than this on a regular basis. Good for you. But shut the [censored] up when you assume that I can." I forgot the European time zone difference, but that still doesnt take away from the fact that your statment about being able to only play 5 hands per month if you table selected as strictly as Thehip41, is just plain wrong. I know you were exaggerating but I dont want other poker players to think that table selecting is hopeless becuz this is not the case atleast for people in US time zones. Also do you really think I will ever shut the [censored] up? Do you think youre the first person who has told me that? It's hopeless so I wouldn't even try if I were you. "No way in hell I can play 20k hands a month if I turn down this table. Well I could but then I'd have to mix in 1/2 or start sitting in front of my PC 20 hours a day, but I like my social life too much for that." Again, this may be true for you, but I have been able to get in 20K+ hands per month several times this year rotating between AP,FT & UB using my strict table selecting parameters. My highest monthly total has been 31K in the last year. This wasnt very hard for me and my social life didnt suffer. I imagine a U.S. poker player who added PokerStars and other smaller sites into the mix may have an even easier time getting to 20k and maybe be able to sustain 30k per month. "I have never considered this a bad table cuz I have never been able to find better ones. Not even at 3/6. And that has been at AP, FT, UB, stars and now at party." If what you say is true then Im glad I dont live in Europe. I never realized there was that big of a difference. "If the tables are better at US times. Good for you guys. But plz to be stop hating us europeans for party cuz this table is as good as it gets on party 5/10+ at any time of day." Lol, based on what you have told me, I will never envy you guys for having Party ever again. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] "Also. Assuming pr default that a 50/30 guy is good is just as retarded as assuming he is bad. Only one way to figure it out and thats playing with him." No one assumed he was good. All I said is that we dont know for sure that he's bad and that we'd have to watch him play to find out. Based on my own subjective probability, I think its safe to say that a 50/30 is more likely to be bad than good and that is essentially why I think there is a small edge to expliot here, but this is still a terrible table based on the relative choices most U.S. players have meaning if a US player was only playing 10K hands a month I would strongly recommend him to avoid this table. "The same with a "relatively unknown 30/15". If these stats are over a small sample he can be anything type wise. 22/14 or 40/20 or 29/20. I'd say lets find out." Oink the thing I need you and others to understand is when a table is "good" you dont need to sit down and find out, the stats themselves will tell you it's good. I would use an extreme example to point this out to you and others but that might confuse people into thinking that that would be the only kind of table I play at. I think you get the idea though. For example: If I see a 50/8/1 sitting at the table I dont need to sit down and "find out", I already have the answer. I would venture to say that if you cant judge whether a table is good or not by simply looking at the stats then that reality alone should let you know that your edge is likely to be small at best. "But again. I dont have the luxury too find the tables with 2 50/5 guys. If I could I wouldnt play this table either." Having direct position on just one of these types would be sufficient in my mind. "Party offers me the best tables right now. When I open party at european prime time there will be 10-12 tables of 10/20 to 20/40 going. Of the 30-40 unique players you find at those tables I'd say that on average there is 1 50/5 guy overall. Good luck playing 20k hands there turning down OP's table. Maybe I should move to California or Thailand..." This is so sad. If I were you I would move to Thailand cuz the girls there are hot and the erotic massages are very cheap.
|
|
#37
11-20-2007, 08:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
[ QUOTE ]
This is so sad. If I were you I would move to Thailand cuz the girls there are hot and the erotic massages are very cheap. [/ QUOTE ] I lolled! You had to add that, huh? This thread has made me realize playing LHE in european times sucks donkeyballs. And you are right. Just because I dont have great access to good games doesnt mean I should tell others to play in bad games if they have that access. Southern California looks more and more appealing.
|
|
#38
11-20-2007, 08:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
[ QUOTE ]
This is so sad. If I were you I would move to Thailand cuz the girls there are hot and the erotic massages are very cheap. [/ QUOTE ] I receive a Thai massage... never again. That [censored] is like torture. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
|
|
#39
11-20-2007, 09:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: uncertainty seat selection principle
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This is so sad. If I were you I would move to Thailand cuz the girls there are hot and the erotic massages are very cheap. [/ QUOTE ] I receive a Thai massage... never again. That [censored] is like torture. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Ha! You probably got the wrong type of massage? Or just had a horrible masseuse. If you get a Swedish massage with either a handjob or BJ in the end you will be very happy. I would not have sex with them though since AID's is so rampant in that country. Keep in mind though, I have never been to Thailand so my idea that the girls are hot and the massages are awesome/cheap is based on anecdotal evidence.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
