How often do you guys jump tables when they become rock gardens

[mithong]

so lets say u find a choice .50/1 table with 11 dollar avg pots, and 35-40 percent VPIP but as ur playing, the game drops down in quality and becomes 20 VPIPdo you guys jump ship or tough it out

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
so lets say u find a choice .50/1 table with 11 dollar avg pots, and 35-40 percent VPIP but as ur playing, the game drops down in quality and becomes 20 VPIPdo you guys jump ship or tough it out

[/ QUOTE ]
What are you using to get to know the vpip of the table?

[mithong]

gametime?

[A_C_Slater]

I play at Paradise and they have flop seen percentages. I stay no matter how rock-like it becomes.

As Peter Rus once said "Fuk table selection. I want to be able to beat any style of play."

Plus it saves me the trouble of switching tables, waiting for the blinds to come around, etc.

[Webster]

I'll play an orbit and see if it is just an odd fluctuation. I'll also look at the table to see WHY it's like that. Perhaps 2 new guys are 0%.

If it stats under 25% for a couple orbits I'm gone. NORMALLY others see it and the good guys leave to be replaced by fish though.



Grinders Warehouse BLOG Edition (http://www.grinderswarehouse.com)

[johnc]

I don't multitable very much but I'm always scouting a couple of tables in case the one I'm at takes a dump. If VP$IP gets around ~30, I've got other choices and 9 times outs 10 I leave.

[FlyingStart]

Do you know how gametime calculates this?

Because if it's the tables average over all your session it doesn't count for much. Tables will vary enough during one sessions. The last orbit or something would be better. PokerStars list tables with Players/flop, but I don't know how they calculate it

[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
I play at Paradise and they have flop seen percentages. I stay no matter how rock-like it becomes.

As Peter Rus once said "Fuk table selection. I want to be able to beat any style of play."

Plus it saves me the trouble of switching tables, waiting for the blinds to come around, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate this advice. Go where the money is. Put your ego in the backseat.

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I play at Paradise and they have flop seen percentages. I stay no matter how rock-like it becomes.

As Peter Rus once said "Fuk table selection. I want to be able to beat any style of play."

Plus it saves me the trouble of switching tables, waiting for the blinds to come around, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate this advice. Go where the money is. Put your ego in the backseat.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not about ego. It's about learning everything. What if you're playing in B&M and every table is full of rocks and you don't feel like leaving? You have to learn to play in these games sometime. What if you play high limits one day where the games are tighter? It's all just practice.

[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not about ego. It's about learning everything. What if you're playing in B&M and every table is full of rocks and you don't feel like leaving? You have to learn to play in these games sometime. What if you play high limits one day where the games are tighter? It's all just practice.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I'll play in higher limits someday I will cut my teeth at those limits.

Furthermore, why would you not want to leave a rockish B&M game? This is silly.

I understand your method of reasoning here, but it's plain and simple:

Making money is better than learning something that makes less money when both are at the same stakes

[A_C_Slater]

Okay. But what if every poker table at the limit that you play is full of rocks? Do you just quit poker? At Paradise 2/4 during midday there is usually 4 or 5 tables running and they are all under 30% flops seen percentage. And at my local B&M there are only two 5-10 tables and sometimes they are both full of rocks.

[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay. But what if every poker table at the limit that you play is full of rocks? Do you just quit poker? At Paradise 2/4 during midday there is usually 4 or 5 tables running and they are all under 30% flops seen percentage. And at my local B&M there are only two 5-10 tables and sometimes they are both full of rocks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why the hell do you play at Paradise 2/4 during mid-day?

This is where game selection comes in, Slater. Party and PS both have great 2-4 games (greater than 35%), but you have to be on the site at the right times.

Just don't tell me there aren't any good 2/4 games online. That's garbage.

[KingOtter]

[ QUOTE ]
so lets say u find a choice .50/1 table with 11 dollar avg pots, and 35-40 percent VPIP but as ur playing, the game drops down in quality and becomes 20 VPIPdo you guys jump ship or tough it out

[/ QUOTE ]

If there are still one or two 40+ VPIP players at the table I stay and make sure I try to isolate them.

If I'm in a bad position to do that, I leave and find another table where I have better position.

I do want to learn to play better against better players, but not right now... right now I need bankroll.

You do have to make sure GT+ (if that's what you're using) is not factoring YOU into the table, or weighting the average based upon number of hands known.

KO

[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
I do want to learn to play better against better players, but not right now... right now I need bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is this infatuation with learning to beat better players?

Last time I checked, poker was about making money, not beating good players. If there are games full of idiots and games full of rockish TAGs, then you should be joining the idiot game PRONTO.

The objective when you get above 1-2 and 2-4 is to find the best games possible. To hell with trying to beat better players. That will work itself out.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I do want to learn to play better against better players, but not right now... right now I need bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is this infatuation with learning to beat better players?

Last time I checked, poker was about making money, not beating good players. If there are games full of idiots and games full of rockish TAGs, then you should be joining the idiot game PRONTO.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can makes *LOTS* more money playing $5/10 than you can at $.50/1. But if you want to have a chance, you've got to go through a learning process.

Poker is about making money *LONG TERM*. Showing immediate profit by beating up on the "wussy" games is -EV if you intend to move up and play higher stakes games for more money.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
Because if it's the tables average over all your session it doesn't count for much. Tables will vary enough during one sessions.

[/ QUOTE ]
GT doesn't display the stats for the actual table, but for the players at the table at the moment. This sucks because if you have 3000 hands on 1 players and only ~100 for the rest the table stats will be the stats for the player you have 3000 hands on. I don't even display the table stats when plaing, I check the players individually and when there's less than 3 loose players I leave. This is depending on what limit you play, though.

[ QUOTE ]
PokerStars list tables with Players/flop, but I don't know how they calculate it

[/ QUOTE ]
I would guess they're checking the average over the last 50 hands or so...

[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
You can makes *LOTS* more money playing $5/10 than you can at $.50/1. But if you want to have a chance, you've got to go through a learning process.

Poker is about making money *LONG TERM*. Showing immediate profit by beating up on the "wussy" games is -EV if you intend to move up and play higher stakes games for more money.

[/ QUOTE ]

We agree on the above point.

What I'm trying to say is that you should definitely move up in stakes when you have ~300BB of that stakes. I've always preached that.

But, when you're playing your current stakes, you should actively seek the best games.

Example: Let's say I'm playing 1/2. When I get approx $1200 I should move up to 2/4.

However, my *learning process* should be when I'm starting out in 2/4, NOT playing in tougher 1/2 games.

You should never actively go out of your way to find tougher games at your current stakes. At the same time, you should never be afraid to move up in stakes.

[A_C_Slater]

Another thing that must be kept in mind is that after you've been sitting at the table for a while then the table VPIP should drop down as well. If I sit at a 2/4 table and I'm seeing 19% of the flops after 150 hands it's going to make that 33% table I sat down at drop below 30%. So really when you keep switching tables sometimes you're just running away from yourself.

[Duerig]

At 1/2 I have started to consider relative position much more important. It's hard sometimes to find good tables, but if I can get a few weak players to my right, I'll stay in the game.

[ClaytonN]

[ QUOTE ]
Another thing that must be kept in mind is that after you've been sitting at the table for a while then the table VPIP should drop down as well. If I sit at a 2/4 table and I'm seeing 19% of the flops after 150 hands it's going to make that 33% table I sat down at drop below 30%. So really when you keep switching tables sometimes you're just running away from yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

^^ this is a good point. The table average is always going to go down when a 2+2'er joins.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can makes *LOTS* more money playing $5/10 than you can at $.50/1. But if you want to have a chance, you've got to go through a learning process.

Poker is about making money *LONG TERM*. Showing immediate profit by beating up on the "wussy" games is -EV if you intend to move up and play higher stakes games for more money.

[/ QUOTE ]

We agree on the above point.

What I'm trying to say is that you should definitely move up in stakes when you have ~300BB of that stakes. I've always preached that.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a little misleading, I think. Bankroll is an important consideration, but it is not the only one. There's value to having longevity to your winnings (at least 10k hands, for example). There's also the non-profit considerations to be taken when playing poker. Most everyone here is playing for entertainment (which is not mutually exclusive with profit).

[ QUOTE ]
But, when you're playing your current stakes, you should actively seek the best games.

Example: Let's say I'm playing 1/2. When I get approx $1200 I should move up to 2/4.

However, my *learning process* should be when I'm starting out in 2/4, NOT playing in tougher 1/2 games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not exactly... If you think you're getting ready to move up, there's nothing wrong with ending up in a slightly tougher game at your current stakes. There's a broad range of games at every level, and if you can face tougher competition without risking as much bankroll (especially if you're considering making a move in stakes), there's no harm in doing it cheaply.

And, again, bankroll is not the only consideration when you're looking at the stakes you should play.

[ QUOTE ]
You should never actively go out of your way to find tougher games at your current stakes. At the same time, you should never be afraid to move up in stakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very debatable, even from a purely EV perspective.

Suppose you're currently playing $1/2 and you're thinking about moving up to $2/4 (and you're adaquately bankrolled for it). You find a $1/2 game and a $2/4 which are identical. Which should you choose?

For psychological reasons, the $1/2 game is better, as the risk aversion of playing the higher stakes affects how most people play, especially early in their transition. This is a way of taking smaller steps as you move toward your goal.

For bankroll reasons, the $1/2 game might be better, especially if you're not ready. Losing .25 BB/100 at a $1/2 game is better for your bankroll than losing the same .25 BB/100 at a $2/4 game.

With respect to moving up in stakes, I guess I agree that "fear" shouldn't be a factor, but certainly skill is a factor. Not moving up because you don't think you're good enough isn't necessarily "fear"; sometimes it's an honest assessment of one's ability. I recall reading stories about players who insisted on playing the tougher $40/80 games for minimal profit who could have been beating up on the $20/40 games for more than what they were making at the higher stakes.

[istewart]

At $.5/1 you need at least 1/2 guys who have earned themselves fish icons over a few hundred hands.

Or a guy who is 100/1 over 20 hands /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[scotty34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can makes *LOTS* more money playing $5/10 than you can at $.50/1. But if you want to have a chance, you've got to go through a learning process.

Poker is about making money *LONG TERM*. Showing immediate profit by beating up on the "wussy" games is -EV if you intend to move up and play higher stakes games for more money.

[/ QUOTE ]

We agree on the above point.

What I'm trying to say is that you should definitely move up in stakes when you have ~300BB of that stakes. I've always preached that.

But, when you're playing your current stakes, you should actively seek the best games.

Example: Let's say I'm playing 1/2. When I get approx $1200 I should move up to 2/4.

However, my *learning process* should be when I'm starting out in 2/4, NOT playing in tougher 1/2 games.

You should never actively go out of your way to find tougher games at your current stakes. At the same time, you should never be afraid to move up in stakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to disagree on move up when you reach ~300BB bankroll. Move up once you are confident that you are beating your current limit, and you are comfortable moving up to the next limit. My bankroll is ~$6000 now, but I certainly am not moving up to 10/20 yet. I want to make sure I can beat the players at 3/6 first, and then beat the players at 5/10. Maybe around August I will be up at 10/20. I think bankroll is only one of the requirements to move up, and probably one of the less important ones.

[Reqtech]

You can have GT+ not take your stats into account for table averages.

That being said, the table VP$IP is just an indicator of how hard I need to look at other players' stats. The averages are calculated by taking all of the hands of the players sitting. Tt can be skewed if you have a couple of players with very high/low VP$IPs, since they could have over half of the played hands taken into account on the table.

After 20 hands, I'll start paying closer attention to the stats of other players and start deciding whether I'm ready to jump ship. The overall table average is just a portion of the decision. Relative positions to rocks, lags, and loose-passives play a much bigger role in the final decision to stay or leave

[grjr]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Another thing that must be kept in mind is that after you've been sitting at the table for a while then the table VPIP should drop down as well. If I sit at a 2/4 table and I'm seeing 19% of the flops after 150 hands it's going to make that 33% table I sat down at drop below 30%. So really when you keep switching tables sometimes you're just running away from yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

^^ this is a good point. The table average is almost always going to go down when a 2+2'er joins.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[FlopMe]

I jump ship. I'm building a bankroll at .5/1 not preparing myself for 15/30. If the table doesn't have at least 4 players above 30% VP$IP I am gone. However, I will stay at the table if there's only 3 players above 30% VP$IP and they are all sitting to my immediate right.