choosing a table

[mt_fish]

Ok, I read the FAQ on choosing a table. I've tried watching 4-6 tables for 20 minutes, picking the juciest looking, waiting for a good seat, etc. It still seems to turn out random. Perhaps it's the high turnover?

What techniques do you use to choose a good table?

Thanks.

[bottomset]

I pick med ave pot sizes and go from there .. basically very little selection

at the micro level it really doesn't matter much

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, I read the FAQ on choosing a table. I've tried watching 4-6 tables for 20 minutes, picking the juciest looking, waiting for a good seat, etc. It still seems to turn out random. Perhaps it's the high turnover?

What techniques do you use to choose a good table?

Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, table makeup can change pretty rapidly... on .5/1 I usually look for $8 tables w/9 people.

I think the main concern is that if you're at a table that gets folded to the blinds a couple times in a row it may be time to move to another table.

The last thing you want is to get a hand like AA, raise it from early position and steal the blinds with it. That's what you're trying to avoid.

If you can get known tight players to your left, that's very good.

If you can get known loose players on your right, that's very good.

KO

[jrz1972]

I do pretty much what Otter does. I open up any random $8 or $9 table and sit down. If there is a known tightie on my right I will often leave before the button reaches me unless the table is good otherwise.

There really isn't much to table selection at .5/1.

[Saint_D]

I think you can pick good tables in 10 minutes or less. If you sit down "wait for big blind" and have PT you can know enough to make an educated guess by the time you get the blinds in most cases I think. It usually takes me 20 minutes to get 4 decent tables. Then I settle in. if one breaks up, I just let it go and play the other 3 if they are juicy.

[C-Dog]

I like to play a little shorthanded, so I usually just pick the highest average pot table with 3-4 people. Then after a round or two, the table usually fills up, and the action seems pretty good. Some people just never adjust there game when the other people come/go. If the table stays decent once it fills up, then I stay for a while.

C-Dog

[adsman]

I open up 4 tables and let them run for half an hour with gametime+ while I go and do other stuff. I then come back and pick the juiciest table and keep the others humming over in case the juicy one goes bad, (I only play 1 table at a time.)
I've been doing this for a couple of months and it has made a noticeable result to my winnings.

[waynethetrain]

I'm at the point where I am fairly convinced that the 2nd best approach to finding a good table at PP is to look for the tightest table you can find and play there. The turnover at PP is very high at times. Just because you sit down at a tight table does not mean it will stay that way for very long when we are talking about PP. I'd almost being willing to bet that a "non random" pool of fresh players generally replaces those that leave. So the recent stats mean very little.

By "non random" I mean that almost everyone that cares about table selection (all the tight aggressive 2+2 players for example) will avoid a tight table when they are searching for one and leave it if they are already on it. It's too tight for them. So the replacements will tend to be the loose passives/loose aggressives etc... you are actually looking for.

So you sit in on a tight table for a round or so and all of a sudden you find yourself on a great table that the rest of the 2+2 players won't find for a 30 minutes or more.

That's the 2nd best way. I can't reveal the best way yet. Maybe after the next bonus period.

[UncleSalty]

How do you get GT+ to work w/ observed tables? Mine only seems to be available after I sit down. Or are you using PV, not GT+?

[joeski19]

Well since you have to pick a player name in GT I just choose someone nickname who's already sitting at the table I'm observing. Although I don't know what would happen if they leave. I've only done it a few times, and that hasn't happened yet.

[adsman]

[ QUOTE ]
Well since you have to pick a player name in GT I just choose someone nickname who's already sitting at the table I'm observing. Although I don't know what would happen if they leave. I've only done it a few times, and that hasn't happened yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

What he said. I try and pick someone that I've already got stats on so I don't inadvertantly choose an incredible fish and thus miss his stats as I've got GT+ rigged to hide the stats of the chosen player. If they leave the stats drop off, so just choose another. This really has to be one of the best features of GT+. This is a handy link related to this stuff.
http://www.bet-the-pot.com/poker-tracker-part-one-page31.html

[UncleSalty]

Nice. Thanks guys.

[Rudi]

[ QUOTE ]
I like to play a little shorthanded, so I usually just pick the highest average pot table with 3-4 people. Then after a round or two, the table usually fills up, and the action seems pretty good. Some people just never adjust there game when the other people come/go. If the table stays decent once it fills up, then I stay for a while.

C-Dog

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with C-Dog. Any table with VPIP over 40% and pots averaging $9 is going to attract a huge Waiting List. Typically what happens is the table starts to tighten up once the loose players bust out. Soon the once good table has a VPIP near 25% and filled with 4 to 5 players who know what they are doing.

I find it better to join a 6-handed table and let it fill up. The first 100 hands or so are really loose.

Lately I've noticed several $1/$2 players multi-table on $0.5/$1 and playing their "regular" limit. Makes it tough to find good tables or any that stay good for long.