table image?

I read in all strategy guides how it's important to take note of the table image at the moment but I'm not sure what that actually mean. Does it mean the ratio between loose and tight player on the table? Like if at the moment there's 3 players being rocks, 4 fairly loose players, 1 maniac and 2 calling stations, that would mean the table is kinda loose. How does this apply to my strategy?

Isn't it the same to know how each player at your table is playing at the moment? My interrogation is what's the need to have a general idea of the table when I play versus, let's say, only 1, 2 or 3 players when I'm in a hand?

Dunno if I made myself clear but I'm sure some of you can clarify things here

table image (atleast in my understanding) is other players perception of YOU not your perception of them. although recognising their table image is important, using your table image to your advantage is equally if not more crucial to your game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ivory

table image (atleast in my understanding) is other players perception of YOU not your perception of them. although recognising their table image is important, using your table image to your advantage is equally if not more crucial to your game.

---

I know that but in Rada's strategy guide, he (she?) is talking about table image, your opponent's image and your own image, it seems to be 3 different things.

i guess when he's talking table image he means loose/aggressive/passive as a whole.
then you take into consideration how people perceive you and then how you perceive the other players, which you already done in the first part although now your doing it on a selective basis on who is in the hand with you, whilst 9/10 might be weak tighties you could be heads up with the maniac.

edit: after re-reading your post i appear to have quoted you word for word

i think taking into consideration table image as a whole is only necessary when your first selecting which table to sit at

Table image is mostly described as an opponents perception of you, but also means your more general perception of the table. I think maybe an example would help...

I was at a rare full ring table the other day where it was possible to limp small connectors and weaker hands like J9s from early position because the table image was very TIGHT-PASSIVE. This had nothing to do with specific players, because most of the time those specific players did not act yet. One or two other people at the table were tight-aggressive. I didn't worry about them because often they would limp or fold without a really good hand preflop.

At a table with an LOOSE-AGGRESSIVE image, it would be a good idea to fold JQs or even KJs from early position because you can be certain it will be a raising pot with position on your dog. Ignore the gap theory with position on raisers because your implied odds are higher on a LOOSE-AGGRESSIVE table, and your hand has a good chance of being ahead. It's easier to committ people as well.

At a table with a LOOSE-PASSIVE image, you only raise super premium hands preflop, since isolation is usually futile (table of calling stations), and you also get more pot equity postflop if you flop hard. You get payed off. DON'T BLUFF.

So what would you do on a TIGHT-AGGRESSIVE table? Become LOOSE-AGGRESSIVE. Use the gap theory. Steal and represent, and then when you start turning them into LOOSE-PASSIVES, you become TIGHT-AGGRESSIVE to get payed off.

My descriptions are probably lacking. I'm just trying to give an idea.

A general table image for the most part is your perception of how you should play certain starting hands. Postflop is when you get into specific reads on opponent image, though exceptions do exist.

PS: In case you don't know, the gap theory is the gap that exists between hands you raise with and hands you call with. You would open raise KTs from mid position, but you wouldn't call that raise with KJo in the cutoff.