Having searched the Beginners and Strategy forum I have seen that most discussion on this subject has been very misguided in that it tends to lose itself under an umbrella of bankroll management. I hope this thread might become a definitive article of discussion on this subject. I also wish this to be aimed at players at ALL levels.
The most relative post on table selection is Fnords which I want to discuss and hopefully add more:
http://www.flopturnriver.com/essays_...selection.html
A few general questions before we discuss Fnord article to get the basics down.
We all now the sites show players seeing flop ,average pot while some show hands per hour. Players seeing flop above 30% is very good, average pot size well the bigger the better, right? and hands per hour which is based on site software, opponent availability and table size.
Thoughts you should ask yourself before letting the poker site make the decision for you:
VPIP
- The highest VPIP are the best tables and juiciest games. This tends to be true.
Pot Size
Pot size however can be manipulated easy enough by the following factors:
- Is it so large its unsustainable therefore can only fall apart?
- Are too many shortstacks affecting the perception of big pots must mean big stacks?
- Do you know exactly how the poker site calculates pot size :wink: ?
- How many players are at the table?
Moving on a bit, Im going to try touch on table potential and waiting lists.
I mentioned above has a table reached its PEAK. Generally tables with VPIP 30%+ and pot size of 1/3 buyin is unsustainable and will tend to fall apart stat wise. Why? This table will tend to have fish or maniacs in more numbers and they do not usually last very long in games. Money goes to the sharks, bad players bust and already the table has changed dramatically.Instead why not opt for table with 8 of 10 seating, have an option of where to sit (Fnord has gone into more depth on seating), why not find at table just above average pot size in case it may develop into a very juicy game.
Juicy game, we all want to be in that. Problem is can you get a seat at such a game, its very hard. Online you can tell if it is and simply join a waiting list. This will sound like common sense but i think its worth noting that if you see such a game and it has a waiting list of 4-5 players, think what does this mean :? !! 4-5 players MUST leave the table before you get a chair, who are these players on the waiting list? most are probably good players seeing what you are and are after the fish too, will the table really be so juicy by the time you get there, do you really expect the fish/maniacs to even last till you get there. Answer NO the table stats may still be similiar but the table dynamic wont, not even close.
My main point is to think for yourself. Dont just jump at the first free seat thats free and also look past the stats. Instead look for table with potential. Maybe you can provide what you classify a ''potentials''!!!!
I think thats most of the basics covered. Do you have any you consider apart from these, disagree, wish to expand. Again moving on.
Table selection does NOT end once you have sat at the table so you should not be content with your decision:
1 - Fnord mentioned that he always will newbie post unless he is 2 or less of the BB. Yes we hear that it is slighlt -EV to post in the CO but on terms of gaining information/getting into the action/looking like a fish, is it worth much more in absolute terms?
2 - Why not make a few raises at a new table priority? Fnord advocates getting into the thick of it. This seems to be going against the norm of creating an image, but at low stakes who is noticing. Even at medium stakes raising alot in the first orbit isnt nessesarily labeling you a maniac.
3 - Just get up and leave if its not what you expected. You have zero attachment to a table.
Fnord lists various factors which ill list for ease of reference, hope he doesnt mind :D :
NOTE: $ amounts refer to 50 NL with blinds of .25/.50
Signs I'm at a the right table:
* Multiple players limping in
* Position on a loose and aggressive player
* Players calling raises after trying to limp with weak hands
* Players showing weak hands outside of the blinds (Ace-little offsuit, unsuited connectors, etc.)
* Outragous raises on top quality hands (so I know when to fold.)
* Players limping or only raising to $1 with top quality hands
It's probably time to find another table when: * 1 or fewer players limp a couple times in a series of 8-10 hands. Getting down to just the blinds is a very bad sign.
* Maniac with position on me by 1 or 2 seats. Dealing with his (re)raises can be trying and the check + call counter to that is a pain. Also, I'm less likely to be the last to act when I'm in late position, but don't have the button.
* I can't pick out the weak players at the table
* Many of the weak players go all-in on a single hand suicide pact, then several leave.
* Multiple strong/tight players. Particularly filling seats left by weak players.
* No one is calling my pre-flop raises with weak hands. If I can regularly take the blinds with a $2 pre-flop raise, I'm probably at the wrong table.
* I have position on the short stacks.
While at lower stakes the practice of table selection isnt high priority and can distract from one focusing on their own game I hope you can take this away as reference and go focus on your game but just have some pointers in mind when you play. I do not claim to know it all about this topic and have simply grouped thoughts from many past threads but I do want to try get some discussion going.
DaGOAT
