Quote a Poker authority...

[Semaphore]

These are from an article by a Poker authority:

1. "To decide how tight or loose you should play the game, the primary consideration is the antes and blinds, relative to later bets. The higher the ante and blinds, the looser you play and vice versa."

2. "It is worth loosening up your starting hand requirements. Conversely, if playing with tight players, then when you start with weak hands and marginal hands, there is no point entering the pot, since you know that other players are most likely to be betting and calling only with big hands."

3. "Another consideration is how your opponents act in game play. A common belief is that when your opponents are loose in the game, you should be tight, and vice versa."

I'm trying to read hard into those lines and would like to see your insights on them...

As to Item 1 Is he talking about Stud or No-limit hold'em?

Item 2 and 3 seems like contradicting to me since on the one side, he said you should play loose if opponents play tight.

In general, what does it mean when table is tight, you should play "loose"? By stealing more, or by playing more marginal hands? What else?

[Mike Gallo]

As to Item 1 Is he talking about Stud or No-limit hold'em?

Mason discusses this in one of his Poker Essays books.

In 7 card stud, the higher the ante in relation to the bring in and bets on later streets the looser a player should play. In Poker Essays 3 Mason explains how higher limit 7 card stud has the proper balance of luck and skill. Others can elaborate why it is correct to play looser. You can figure it out for yourself.

In general, what does it mean when table is tight, you should play "loose"? By stealing more, or by playing more marginal hands?

Not playing marginal hands, but by stealing more.

[Jerrod Ankenman]

[ QUOTE ]
In Poker Essays 3 Mason explains how higher limit 7 card stud has the proper balance of luck and skill.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does he really say "proper"? I mean, I can see arguing that a game with higher antes is "more fun" or "worth playing" or "helpful for exposing nits and encouraging action"... but "proper" ? By what criterion? People play chess for money too.

[fraac]

I bet he does.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
In general, what does it mean when table is tight, you should play "loose"? By stealing more, or by playing more marginal hands? What else?

[/ QUOTE ]
There are a number of points to make regarding this statement.

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] It is extremely rare to find a table where the players are tighter than optimal. When people say a table is tight, they often mean relative to average, but the table may still be loose in absolute terms.

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Whether your opponents are tighter than optimal or looser than optimal, you should play slightly looser than optimal, but for different reasons.

When your opponents are looser than optimal, they are essentially paying extra blinds. By taking weak cards to battle, they are making some of your your marginal hands profitable, since you can get a share of the extra blind.

When your opponents are tighter than normal, they move you closer to the button, giving you an extra share of the blinds. They also tend to let you keep more of your blinds. However, after a tight player has limped in front of you, you may have to fold hands which are worth playing after a loose player has limped in.

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] If your opponents fold the blinds too often (rare in low stakes), you can profitably attack their blinds more frequently. Some people call that tendency tight, while others call it weak.

[Mike Gallo]

Does he really say "proper"? I mean, I can see arguing that a game with higher antes is "more fun" or "worth playing" or "helpful for exposing nits and encouraging action"... but "proper" ?

Hi Jerrod,

In the essay titled Which Game:Stud or Hold' Em Mason writes;

If you have the banktoll to play the big limit games stud is frequently the better choice.

To see why this is the case, you need to understand that poker requires a proper balace of luck and skill to be succesful. The better players need to be reasonable winners at the end of the year. This way they will return to start the games and keep them going. But there needs to be enough short term luck so that the weaker players will have some winning nights. This they will also want to return. Unfortunately, as you move up in limit, the experts get even better, but a "live" one is usually a live one. Thus the games risk having the balance of luck and skill being tipped too much in favor of skill, which could mean that they could choke themselves off.

It turns out that high limit stud actually has a device to assure that this doesnt happen. It is what we refer to as a higher proportinal ante. That is as you move up in limit at the the stud tables, the ante becomes proportionately larger relative to the betting. This serves as a way to handicap the better players and assure that skill does not totally dominate luck.

My apologies to Mason and the Mods if I should not have quoted as much of the essay as I did.

Mr Ackerman since I pointed this out to you, send me a pm for my address so I can get an autographed copy of your book [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[hra146]

"El Oh El donkaments" - Barry Greenstein