uncertainty seat selection principle

[ILOVEPOKER929]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What the hell is wrong with this table?

I can se 1 moron, 1 potential fish and one unknown who is likely a fish as most regulars will be in your DB.

This is a bad table on US sites?

What the hell am I doing at party then... [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

OinkisRight. Oops forgot to log in my OinkisRight gimmick account. I need one of those.

Take the open seat for sure.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]


you guys are seriously awful at table selecting.

granted, this isn't a question of sitting with 5 players that are all in the 26/15/2 to 35/25/3 range, but still, this table sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Table selection is for pussies.

[/ QUOTE ]


i love the irony of this statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know this thread is dead, but since nobody else is catching on to the irony I'll actually give a real answer, so here it is:

If youre playing 10k-15k hands per month this table is terrible.

If youre playing 40k hands per month this table is doable.

Oink's statement, "But selecting by your standards will have me play 5 hands a month." Is just pure hyperbole, and patently false.

Frankly Im surprised at how many tags dont get table/seat selection. They dont seem to realize that once youve reached the requisite level of poker competence, table/seat selection will now be the predominant factor in their monetary success, not their skill level.

This is kind of paradoxical becuz when we dont have all the requisite skills, acquiring these skills such as, basic preflop strategy, hand reading, bluffing, inducing bluffs, check/raising, mixing up play, etc, will be more important than table/seat selecting, yet once we possess all these skills, table/seat selection then becomes more important then the "expert" skills we have.

I think most tags who dont pay attention to table/seat selection believe that their skill level is more important than table/seat selecting and this is simply a delusion.

[MacGuyV]

Good stuff ILP. It's not really something I think about but recently been working on abandoning ship earlier in bad spots. I was just playing w/ a bunch of Tags on my right & a 55/25 guy on my left & finally realized "wait wtf am i doing here"?

[vmacosta]

ILP,
If I have two tables open that are clearly good and I am used to 4-tabling or else I get bored, do you think it's +ev to add this table? It's actually a genuine question, though I already a have an answer in mind. Assume 10/20 - 15/30 limits and this is the 3rd best table available.

[TheHip41]

[ QUOTE ]
ILP,
If I have two tables open that are clearly good and I am used to 4-tabling or else I get bored, do you think it's +ev to add this table? It's actually a genuine question, though I already a have an answer in mind. Assume 10/20 - 15/30 limits and this is the 3rd best table available.

[/ QUOTE ]


ilp would never sit at this table

ever

[thepizzlefosho]

[ QUOTE ]
ILP,
If I have two tables open that are clearly good and I am used to 4-tabling or else I get bored, do you think it's +ev to add this table? It's actually a genuine question, though I already a have an answer in mind. Assume 10/20 - 15/30 limits and this is the 3rd best table available.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I'm not ILP, but imo it depends on whether you think you lose anything as you go from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 tables etc. I know that I play two tables better than I play 3, and I play 3 better than I play 4.

If I have two really good tables I would rather take my extra focus into taking really good notes and trying to work on reads then add a marginal table that is going to take away from my focus and possibly hurt my play on the two good tables.

That being said a lot of people can play 4 tables as well as they play 1, or they get bored and it affects their play if they are only playing 1 or 2. For those people they should fire up the third table and go for it. I will say that one of the biggest steps I made as a poker player was learning that I am better off playing two really good tables when I'm focused than trying to play 4 mediocre tables just to get in hands. I still have a long way to go before I know as much as most of the vets on this forum, but I feel like this is something that most of us would benefit from.

[yourface]

[ QUOTE ]
ILP,
If I have two tables open that are clearly good and I am used to 4-tabling or else I get bored, do you think it's +ev to add this table? It's actually a genuine question, though I already a have an answer in mind. Assume 10/20 - 15/30 limits and this is the 3rd best table available.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see how ILP would know better than you if you are +EV at that table

if you are unsure that you can turn a profit there, maybe add 1 table of minesweeper/porn to keep from getting bored

[vmacosta]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ILP,
If I have two tables open that are clearly good and I am used to 4-tabling or else I get bored, do you think it's +ev to add this table? It's actually a genuine question, though I already a have an answer in mind. Assume 10/20 - 15/30 limits and this is the 3rd best table available.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see how ILP would know better than you if you are +EV at that table

if you are unsure that you can turn a profit there, maybe add 1 table of minesweeper/porn to keep from getting bored

[/ QUOTE ]

do you have sql code for pt query for WR vs. # of tables? cuz without that i basically have no idea.

[yourface]

no idea about the sql thingy

I feel I play the best when I am at a 'sweet spot' # of tables where I am not rushing any decisions but also don't have any leeway to let my mind wander. would be interesting to see if my results would reflect this but yah I really don't see how to go about doing that. especially because that sweet spot # of tables is going to depend on how many/what type of players are sitting

[milesdyson]

i'd move to new seat, play a bit and see if the unknown comes back. if he doesn't (or does and is vpip<35), i leave in a couple orbits unless i start out running hot.

i play the same games as TheHip and table/seat select somewhat well, and there are times he leaves tables when i would stay in his seat. i know he isn't just quitting for the day because i'll see him at other tables. that said, this is pretty rare, but mainly it's because i don't see him online often and i haven't been playing much.

[ILOVEPOKER929]

[ QUOTE ]
ILP,
If I have two tables open that are clearly good and I am used to 4-tabling or else I get bored, do you think it's +ev to add this table? It's actually a genuine question, though I already a have an answer in mind. Assume 10/20 - 15/30 limits and this is the 3rd best table available.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vmacosta, I agree with yourface that you will know better than I will on whether this table is profitable for you or not.

It's interesting to note that if the table in question was very weak, say two 50/3/.5 type players we wouldnt even be having this discussion since we would all know that this table is very profitable for any competent player. In other words, the fact that efficacy even created this thread should imply that if we have an edge here, it is still relatively small.

That's what I mean when I say if someone has a goal of playing 10k hands per month then this table is terrible becuz there are so many tables that are better than this one. IE the less hands you play the more picky you should become.

Ok whatever but will you please just answer this question: Is this table better than playing no table at all? The truth is I dont think there's enough information to come to a reasonably accurate conclusion. First of all, seat 6 is sitting out, so we're basically playing 4 handed with Heis, a 50/32/1, and an unknown 30/15. Can we say for sure that the 50/32/1 is a bad player? I dont think so. I have played with so many 50/30's who played very well postflop that I no longer make any assumptions until I see them play. Some people may interpret this is as a cop-out becuz after all, a 50/30 player must be a long term loser right? but even if we assume this to be fact that still doesnt mean it will easy for us to take his money.

About the 30/15 player: His stats are close enough to a good player's stats that once again I would have to wait and see how he actually plays before I can make a reasonable judgement. My initial thoughts on this opponent would be that hes not a fish and that alone makes me not look forward to playing with him.

And then we have Heisen on our direct left(assuming we switch to the open seat). He's a professional, and by definition, thats not good for us.

So my conclusion is this: Its hard for me to say if we have an edge here or not, but if I had to guess I would say we have a small edge but Im really not sure.

Honestly though, I dont think Im the right person to ask about this issue as I dont have much experience with gauging small edges. TheHip is right, I would never play at this type of table. I only chase large edges when I play poker. The problem with my strategy is you cant play 40k+ hands per month. If you hustle you can play around 20K per month using my table/seat selection strategy and keep in mind, my table selection standards are even stricter than TheHip's.

There's basically two types of table/seat selecting strategies:

1) The lower variance higher profit per hand strategy(what I do)

2) The higher variance, lower profit per hand strategy.

It's important to point out that if youre trying to make as much money as possible then you should be using strategy 2) becuz you can get in a much higher volume of hands. You'll basically be like the Walmart of poker. Your profit margins(BB/100) will be thin, but your profits will be large due to your high turnover rate(hands played). Thats what I meant when I said if someone is playing 40k+ hands per month then this table is doable. When youre playing this many hands per month its important you chase all edges large and small, even perhaps negative edges if you have rakeback and bonuses backing you up.

I personally do not have the fire in me that I once had, so I choose strategy 1). I admire anyone who chooses strategy 2).