|
Lodogg
|
12-22-2005, 11:33 PM
Post subject: Flops Played Percentage
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Stealing your C-bet
Posts: 199
|
|
Anyone know more details about this?
I am around 26-28%
Too loose? I am thinking that I should be around 20-22%
What is a good percentage to be at?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
Pelion
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,206
|
|
It depends
If you are in a very passive game then its ok to see more flops and look for monsters. (edit: probably not more than you already are)
If you are in an aggressive game you need way more.
If you are a begginer i would suggest starting somewhere around the 20% mark. It depends more on what the cards/ players and situations are than the percentage.
You need to look on the frontpage at starting hand selection.
|
|
gabe: Ive dropped almost 100k in the past 35 days.
bigspenda73: But how much did you win?
|
|
edudlive
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 100NL 6max
Posts: 623
|
|
26-32% for me in 6max
|
|
(16:02:25) Fleece: u think ur liked now?
(16:02:31) Fleece: that u got real life friends
(16:02:48) Fleece: enjoy ur real life friends
(16:03:08) Fleece: ur e-friends dont wanna knwo about u anymore
|
|
Symbolic
|
|
12-23-2005, 05:11 AM
Post subject: All depends.
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 61
|
|
it all depends. I know thats the great answer to everything poker, but its true.
There are successful poker players with 20% pre flop and 40% preflop. Just more marginal situations to be played the higher up the chain you go. The bigger question to ask yourself is, Am I playing the majority of my hands in position, with the lead?
I personally play about 50-60% in 6 handed, until the table sees me as crazy, then drop down to around 30%. 10 handed, I'm in a full table right now at 40%, very passive table, and I'm doing fine on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{This post has been removed}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{This post has been removed}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{This post has been removed}
|
|
|
|
Pelion
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,206
|
|
I assumed this was full ring.
.Ripptyde - the point is if this guy is asking this question he is probably too new to the game to be seeing 60% of flops. That works for you because you have the post flop skill (and luck pulling cards outta your ass on the river  ) to make it work. For someone new to the game it would be financial suicide and i suspect they would get into alot of trouble with hands like KJ coming up against AK or KQ and being dominated.
|
|
gabe: Ive dropped almost 100k in the past 35 days.
bigspenda73: But how much did you win?
|
|
|
|
|
|
{This post has been removed}
|
|
|
|
Les_Worm
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,697
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
well on the other end of the spectrum I think the WRONG thing for him to do is play super tight in the ring. He is going to have to practice his post flop skills or he has no business in the ring in the first place. Personally I prefer 6 max because it allows me to mix it up and execute 'raise and rep' style continuation bets...which is far less profitable in full ring. All I am really saying is that teaching him to play 'super tight' in the ring is the wrong way to go about it...he needs to practice post flop play...period
|
Actually Rip he can go ahead and play super tight and still be profitable at poker. Obviously there is more than one way to play this game. You have someone like Dan Harrington who plays very few hands and also someone like Gus Hansen who plays many. They are both profitable and poker has a place for both of these players. Playing loose sets you up for when you have a monster and someone calls you thinking you are bluffing. Playing tight allows you to bluff and not get called when you have nothing because you are known to always have the goods. I've played both ways and I prefer to play tight. I actually moved back to full ring and as long as you get in the right games, neither playing style is any better than the other.
|
The artist formerly known as Knish
Only mediocre players are always at their best.
Phil Ivey Owns You
|
|
Pelion
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,206
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ripptyde
well on the other end of the spectrum I think the WRONG thing for him to do is play super tight in the ring. He is going to have to practice his post flop skills or he has no business in the ring in the first place. Personally I prefer 6 max because it allows me to mix it up and execute 'raise and rep' style continuation bets...which is far less profitable in full ring. All I am really saying is that teaching him to play 'super tight' in the ring is the wrong way to go about it...he needs to practice post flop play...period
|
I agree with this but i am not suggesting playing supertight forever. I am suggesting playing tight until you understand why certain hands are best avoided in certain situations (e.g. JQ against a raiser). Once you have the experience and the bankroll to experiment then why not get a little LAGgy. Before you have that experience it probably isnt the best way to get to grips with the basics.
|
|
gabe: Ive dropped almost 100k in the past 35 days.
bigspenda73: But how much did you win?
|
|
Miffed22001
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
Posts: 8,181
|
|
There is nothing wrong with being tight in both ful ring and 6 max and seeing something like 20% flops. Despite the others, playing tight does make money. But, if you get labelled you may not get much action on your bigger hands.
Especialy in 6 max, where the best hand may be a little worse than full ring simply because of he fewer number of hands out there, it is probably a better stratgey to see more flops where u can. In full ring you want to be trying to limp, or get into pots in lp with decent drawing hands.
I beleive the stats show that 20% is tight, 25% is an atainable target to make profit with while only the best players can turn good profit seeing iver 30% of flops.
Despite that, as mentioned above, if u can get into a lot of pots for cheap with good drawing hands in position then do so. But where u cant be selective about who and where u play more flops from.
|
|
|
|
Les_Worm
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,697
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Miffed22001
There is nothing wrong with being tight in both ful ring and 6 max and seeing something like 20% flops. Despite the others, playing tight does make money. But, if you get labelled you may not get much action on your bigger hands.
|
There are way too many games online and way too many people not keeping records to worry about being labeled. If you aren't getting action on your table, find a new one.
|
The artist formerly known as Knish
Only mediocre players are always at their best.
Phil Ivey Owns You
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,333
|
|
If naked aggression worked on stronger players, would Rippy play bigger?
|
|
|
|
Miffed22001
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Marry Me Cheryl!!!
Posts: 8,181
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fnord
If naked aggression worked on stronger players, would Rippy play bigger?
|
Unlikely (no offence rippy by the way!)
stronger players recognise strenght and aggression for what they are, and arent just afraid of the size of a bet.
|
|
|
|
Les_Worm
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: May 2004
Location: MI
Posts: 1,697
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fnord
If naked aggression worked on stronger players, would Rippy play bigger?
|
Interesting question. Obviously there are stronger players at higher levels but there are also still plenty of weak players with more money. I don't think naked aggression is what is holding Rip back from becoming a monster.
|
The artist formerly known as Knish
Only mediocre players are always at their best.
Phil Ivey Owns You
|
|
Telepath
|
|
12-25-2005, 05:05 PM
Post subject: Re: Flops Played Percentage
|
#17 (permalink)
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 105
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lodogg
Anyone know more details about this?
I am around 26-28%
Too loose? I am thinking that I should be around 20-22%
What is a good percentage to be at?
|
A person playing 26-28% in my games is a super rock.
If anything I'd say you're too tight. I am usually at 35-40% and my image is solid conservative.
T.
|
|
No limit Hold'Em - hours of boredom followed by moments of sheer terror.
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
