Moving from table to table always posting one off the button

[bigbetpoker123]

What do you guys think about moving from table to table every round and always posting one off the button?

Assuming a 10 player max 10-20 game you would pay $10 for 7 hands (approx $1.43 a hand) rather than the normal $15 for 10 hands ($1.50 per hand). Obviously the edge would be even greater in a 15-30 game ($2.14 a hand vs the usual $2.50 per hand)

This does not even take into account the value of posting with position rather than the normal scenario of posting your blind monies at the worst 2 spots on the table. Anyway that someone can assign some sort of value to this additional position edge?

Assuming you always multi table online and play pretty by the book with no knowledge of your opponents, is the increase in EV from paying less per hand worth the trouble? What about the increase in EV from less paid per hand + the increased EV from posting monies in better positions- are the two combined worth the trouble?

BBP

[PokerFink]

I don't think it's worth the trouble. Losing hands/hour is one thing, but the aggravation and annoyance is -EV.

Interesting idea though.

[Zetack]

I think you're likely to lose anywhere from 25-50 percent of your hands per hour. Maybe even more, the point being you only want to hop on full tables. If you have any kind of decent win rate the hit you take for seeing so many fewer hands will kill your win per hour although spending less in blind money should increase your actual BB/100.

When you factor in leaving juicy tables as soon as you sit at them, spending plenty of time on lousy tables (so as not to drop your hands per hour even further you probably want to jump on the first 9 handed tables you can find) and I think its a massively -ev move.


Your BB per hundred might go up (although I wonder what affect never playing more than seven hands on a juicy table would have), but your hands per hour will plummet way too far.

Having thought about it more, I think losing 25 percent of your hands per hour is too low...its gotta cut it hands seen per hour at least by half and likely much more.

--Zetack

[Piers]

Depend whether you are loosing player or not.

If you are a loosing player its a good idea, as the less the time you spend playing poker the better your expected results.

[dansalmo]

The following things make this a loosing proposition:

Missing the most valuable button position.

After posting, and then checking, the button and the blinds know you have crap and are still to act after you pre-flop. This never happens to the blinds.

You are not guaranteed to have all 7 players before you take their blinds, one or more can leave at any time.

When you play the BB, sometimes it is folded to you.

If chopping blinds is allowed, then you sometimes do not have to pay either or both blinds.

The above reasons are enough to make me NEVER post. I ALWAYS take the big blind when I am new to a game.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]

The above reasons are enough to make me NEVER post. I ALWAYS take the big blind when I am new to a game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now this seems contrary to me as well. If you don't post when you would be in the Co, then you are waiting a whole orbit to play, missing hands all the while. Plus the combination of a cheaper round of hands, and position for your "free" play, makes deliberately not posting in the Co and waiting for the BB a bad idea--unless you have some some other reason which tips the scale like you want to observe the table, you don't feel comfortable yet, Your sugar Mamma hasn't brought over the money for your chips....


--Zetack

[housenuts]

i'll usually post from the CO or CO-1 which i see being referred to as the hijack seat. if i come in any earlier than that i'll wait for BB.

[memphis57]

Nobody mentioned reads! I'm always real cautious for the first orbit or two, trying to get a feel for the opposition. I don't get into my full game until 5-6 orbits in. Giving up reads and preliminary image-building would be massively EV, I think.

As far as where to come in, I'll post up if I expect to get 3 or more hands before the blind. This is slightly more expensive than optimal, but I think waiting for the blind makes you look too serious. Fish don't read much but I think they do notice things like that (why is that guy not playing?). Of course, I'm talking .50/1 here, at higher limits I would probably be more selective.

Also, I think we need a poll on this second point, when do you post up versus wait for BB.

[housenuts]

[ QUOTE ]
Nobody mentioned reads!

[/ QUOTE ]

that's because of this assumption made by the OP
[ QUOTE ]
Assuming you always multi table online and play pretty by the book with no knowledge of your opponents

[/ QUOTE ]

although that's a bad assumption to make. of course with reads (or lack thereof from employing this tactic) it would be very -EV

[memphis57]

Ooops, missed the assumption. Yeah, I guess I'm still working on reading comprehension, LOL /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Reef]

[ QUOTE ]
Depend whether you are loosing player or not.

If you are a loosing player its a good idea, as the less the time you spend playing poker the better your expected results.

[/ QUOTE ]

good call.

IMO The idea is good in theory, but horrible when actually applied.

[Cerril]

It's pretty well covered but you're looking at making $0.07 per hand at a 10/20 game all other things being equal. When you figure that a 1BB/100 winrate nets $0.20 a hand, cutting your playtime by just a third essentially kills your edge. If you're a 2 bet per hundred player, then even losing a sixth of your hands destroys the edge.

Obviously the stress of constantly moving is going to hurt your winrate too, you'll never be on the button and you'll always be a poster in the CO (inspiring more aggression from players in LMP who you'd rather be passive).

But it's not a winning strategy even if you had some sort of automated table-switching program set up to drop one table and find another the moment you finished your UTG hand, -and- even if you always joined on the CO without having to sit out hands.

Game selection is a pretty big part of even decent play at the high end (even at 3/6 and higher, really). The ability to stick with a soft table and leave a tough one is pretty vital, and you give that up too.

And of course, the real nail in the coffin is that at 10/20 and up you're heavily reliant on reads and taking advantage of the specific mistakes in your opponents' games. While artificial methods (datamining) can make up for some of this, you'll barely have time to absorb the results when you sit down, slowing your decisionmaking by at least a third even if you continue to make ideal decisions. But you still won't formulate reads against newcomers.

[dansalmo]

The time lost playing those few hands does not make up for the disadvantages I have listed, and only applies if I sit down at the CO.

Sometimes if I notice the seat is going to open, I will tell the dealer I will take the BB and then I do not have to wait at all. If I waited for the CO, then that is 3 more hands I would have to wait.

With a time game people do not always leave when the BB comes, also with seat changes etc. I usually only have to wait 3 or 4 hands on average to take the big blind. It is very rare that I have to wait a whole orbit.

[bigbetpoker123]

Thank you for your insights, and I certainly agree with most of them. I by no means am convinced that this strategy is +EV, but it certainly is better used in a game (like 15-30) where the small blind is more than half the big blind.

Also, I certainly agree that missing hands is a -EV part of the equation. That being said, I think it is oversimplifying the problem by just considering it 3 missed hands at a certain figure per missed hand. In your bb/100 it is certainly not equally divided amongst positions. You are obviously making more from the button, and less (or losing) from the small and big blinds. Those are the three hands that you would miss. A more accurate measure would reflect the -EV of missing those three in particular. I do not have tracking software for my play, would someone be willing to share their data from those 3 positions?

Also, you would obviously see a decreased EV from the cutoff seeing that you would be posting from there. How much I do not know.