PDA

View Full Version : Should we redefine the term "fish"?


Dead
04-16-2005, 05:16 PM
Should we redefine the term fish? One common definition of it is a very loose player who is too passive postflop. A calling station. Fish supposedly bluff only rarely.

I have found that at the Stars .25/.50 game, in which lots of players are fish, there is an extraordinary amount of bluffing.

I have heard some in this micro say that if you are check-raised with TP on the river, that you should fold it. I disagree with this vehemently, at least if you are playing the Stars .25/.50 game. I have found that WPT fish at this limit will bluff with almost anything. They will bluff with busted gutshots, 5 high, you name it. They do an intense amount of bluff check-raising, probably because they saw Gus Hansen or someone do it on their favorite WPT episode.

I find that you can make a profit calling these check-raises, because very often, they don't mean sh*t.

Just my opinion.

Ianco15
04-16-2005, 05:22 PM
I define fish as someone who plays poker unprofitably. They could be passive or aggressive. As long as they lose consistently, I consider them a fish.

cold_cash
04-16-2005, 05:23 PM
I don't like the term, so I don't use it.

If I was against someone like you described I would just say "a live one who is capable of throwing a bluff in now and then".

Dead
04-16-2005, 05:23 PM
But a rock is not a fish. A fish has to be loose. And rocks lose consistently as well.

Dead
04-16-2005, 05:24 PM
It's not meant as a pejorative term.

If it wasn't for fish, then I wouldn't be able to make any money. So, thanks fish!

A_C_Slater
04-16-2005, 05:27 PM
Actually rocks are marginally profitable players. Maybe .5BB/100.

Dead
04-16-2005, 05:40 PM
Maybe at the microlimits. They'd get crushed at bigger games.

BriPlay
04-16-2005, 06:11 PM
I agree. very much so.
Brian

tiltaholic
04-16-2005, 06:17 PM
rocks don't always lose.

and the yankees suck.

Rambino
04-16-2005, 06:24 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I define fish as someone who plays poker unprofitably. They could be passive or aggressive. As long as they lose consistently, I consider them a fish.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my definition as well. I mark all losers as "fish" right away, and then later worry about more categorization...

Dead
04-16-2005, 06:27 PM
[ QUOTE ]
rocks don't always lose.

and the yankees suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

So does Yahtzee.

DavidC
04-16-2005, 06:38 PM
No!

Fish means "bad player", which could mean LAG.

If you want to refer to a LP-P without using the term "LP-P" or "LPP" or "LP" (the lazy man's version), use the term "fish icon".

Respectfully,
Dave.

KingOtter
04-16-2005, 06:43 PM
Oh dear me, not another discussion as to the meaning of the word 'fish', including whether or not to use it at all.

Until Merriam Webster includes a poker definition in their dictionary, the term 'fish' is completely subjective as a slang term for whatever kind of poker player you want it to mean. Just know that when you use it, almost nobody will think of the same definition that you do.

KO

tijean
04-16-2005, 10:04 PM
I prefer the term 'friend'. As in: my friend bluffed the turn with bottom pair; or my friend called me down with 9-high.

Here's how I break it down by stats:

VP$IP >25% / PFR <5%
These are my friends. I know this because they want to give me money. So I am nice to them as much as possible, and take the money they want to give me.

>25% / >5%
These people want to be my friends, but sometimes they try too hard (some of them really try too hard). Sometimes they are mean to me and take my money, but I know they don't really mean it. I try to be nice to them, but sometimes they make it difficult.

<25% / <5%
These people are not yet sure if they want to be my friends. Sometimes it seems like they are trying to be mean to me on purpose. All I can do is be nice to them when I can, and hope they see how much more fun the game would be if they were my friends. I'm really a nice guy.

<25% / >5%
These people are not my friends. They want to be mean to me all the time, even after I have been nice to them. How rude! And they think my friends should be their friends. They don't understand the game at all. I'm trying to be nice to all my friends, and they come along and ruin it. If they want to be mean to somebody, they should just go play backgammon.

Saint_D
04-16-2005, 10:30 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If they want to be mean to somebody, they should just go play backgammon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Best...post...evar.

Dead
04-17-2005, 02:56 AM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If they want to be mean to somebody, they should just go play backgammon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Best...post...evar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Definitely up there. I'm off to make some new friends.