PP .5/1 Table Selection

[krishanleong]

Hi all, my first post. I was wondering how you tell if a table is good or not. Initially I imagine most people choose a table at PP .5/1 by pot size, the larger the better. Is this a valid way to choose a table? I use poker tracker and have decent notes on some players. If I know that 4 at a table are tight (P$IP PF < 25%) should I just find a new table? If you see two or three rounds go by with an average of 3 people seeing the flop, it that enough to make you find a new table? People say table selection is one of the most important criteria in being a successful poker player. I haven't seen much advice on selecting. Thanks for your time.

[detruncate]

Hi there. Any table averaging 4-5 players to the flop is probably just fine. The specific table texture can vary, but you'll usually find one or two more or less decent players, several average/poor loose/passive players, a couple tight/passive players, and a LAG or two (from moderately aggressive to flat out maniac) at a table with 4-5 limpers. It's usually the same 6 players that put the majority of the money into the pot on a regular basis, so watching a few hands as you wait to post in the BB or CO should tell you what you need to know. If the core is there, you can adapt your game to the specifics. The average pot is less important and will ebb and flow over time. If it ever folds to the BB in an unraised pot or pre-flop raises are frequently chasing out all but one or two people, think about looking elsewhere.

[hksgda]

Hi,

I'm a newbie also and I have a question about table selection. Does the amount of cash the players have matter? I tend to pick tables where no more than 2 players have more than $30. (on a .5/1 table) is this something correct to do or it has no relevance whatsoever?

[SnakeRat]

I think it has a tiny bit of relevance.

Look and see how many people see the flop, and how many see the showdown.

If 3/4 people are seeing showdowns its a good .50/1 table.

[Recliner]

It depends. At a NL table having mounds of cash is usually a sign of a good player or someone who has been getting lucky and should be shown some caution until you figure out which it is. At limit I think most people usually sit down with the default buy in. I tend to think less of players with under $25 at a table (.5/1) and try to pick up on what types of players are the ones with more cash. The exception to this is when I see someone with over $80 because I tend to think some of these people either sit down with a large ammount of money to begin with or their entire bank roll.

[detruncate]

I paid a lot of attention to stack size at the beginning too. It's true that people who don't come in for the default amount are doing it for a specific reason, but that reason can vary a lot. The size of a person's stack really isn't very important, except that good players rarely let their funds flirt with not being able to max out every street if they catch a monster. In .5/1, for example, you won't find many thinking players with less than about $15. On the high end of things, there are all sorts of reasons for them to be sitting with a lot of money. They could be trying to intimidate people, they could be a maniac who is properly financed for the sort of variance they're used to seeing, they might find rebying demoralizing, they might be playing with their full roll, or maybe they've just won a few pots. Don't sweat it. There are very few solid players in the micros, and you'll get to know who most of them are before too long. Judge a player by their game, not their stack.

[solring]

I use stack size as my major qualifier before sitting down - I only sit down at a table with 2 or fewer people with $30, unless everyone else has less than $20.

The only caveat to this "rule" is if someone from my buddylist is sitting, I sit irregardless of the other stacks at the table.

FWIW - I always buy in for $30.