Strength

[thomastem]

I find that I make more profit in the second half of my seesion over the first half. This stat has held up last year and so far this year. I believe the answer is fairly simple. I learn my opponents and create a strong table image to maximize profits.

If the above point is true is it not a solid argument against table hopping for a higher flop % or 1 extra fish?

One may argue that if you stay at a table online 1 new person enters your table and you don't know them. I would say this is also an advantage as you know everyone at the table and he knows no one. You need info on 1 person he needs it on 9.

Just as positions have a positive or negative EV I believe that starting a new table has a negative EV as well. So I pose the question, "Is table jumping over-rated?

[tiltboy]

[ QUOTE ]
I find that I make more profit in the second half of my seesion over the first half.

[/ QUOTE ]
How do you define a session? If you end sessions after you have made a certain amount of profit then obviously the latter part of the session is going to look better than the first. Say you win a big pot, which puts you over your profit threshold, and you quit, ending the session. This kind of thing is always going to happen in the 2nd half of the session and would skew your view of what is happening.

Just something to think about. I don't discount the value of knowing your opponents or setting a table image but at the places I tend to play (UB and Party for the most part) there is so much table turnover/hopping I'm not sure these factors are as valuable as in say a live game.

[thomastem]

[/ QUOTE ]
How do you define a session?

[/ QUOTE ]

A session for me is a minnumum of 3 hours, typically 4. I have no max or stop at a certain profit. If I hit my max loss for the day before 3 hours I don't count as a session I call it "a bad day". It counts in my profit/loss for the month and the hours count in my hourly rate, just not a full session. I don't think "Bad Days" would hurt the stat we're talking about.

[lorinda]

If you always play the same times of day, it could just be that you play through prime time at the second half of your session.

I think differing people have differing likes and this effects results too.

Personally I cannot play more than a few minutes of limit without losing concentration and so do not play that discipline for long stints.

I can play no limit for much longer before my results tail off, and so I tend to play long no limit sessions and put a few small limit ones in to break up the session lengths.

Certainly the argument against table hopping in nl is that you want to keep the accumulated roll on the table, in limit, Ill leave questions like that to those who can play that format.

Lori

[jasonHoldEm]

I have much the same results for the most part, but in my case I belive it is simply starting out too loose and then tightening up (geting "in the zone" so to speak) after I've played a few hands.

I'm starting to play multiple tables more frequently now, and I think I might experiment with starting gradually (i.e. play one table for an orbit or two, then add a second, then a third) so that by the time i'm play 3 tables I'm already warmed up for the night.

Or I could just start playing better from the start. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

jHE

[ramjam]

[ QUOTE ]
I learn my opponents and create a strong table image to maximize profits.


[/ QUOTE ]

This may very well be true - and I express little doubt as to the first part. As to the second, I recall an earlier post from you suggesting that the table image you cultivated was that of a gibbering madman with a fixation for barnyard animals. Now, how is that "strong"? /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Copernicus]

There could be many reasons for your stronger showing 2d half. Do you use any tracking software? If so, break your data base into 1st half and 2d half and look for telltale clues.

Also, I thought the idea behind table hopping was that you leave when your table gets bad, and go to easier tables with fish. That implies that you know (and therefore are known) by several players at any table you are going to hop to, so you arent creating a fresh table image by hopping, and you arent starting from scratch in your knowledge of the table.

Indiscriminate hopping to tables where you know no one is counterproductive, unless cultivating a new image is more valuable than the knowledge lost.

[thomastem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I learn my opponents and create a strong table image to maximize profits.


[/ QUOTE ]

I recall an earlier post from you suggesting that the table image you cultivated was that of a gibbering madman with a fixation for barnyard animals. Now, how is that "strong"? /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Tourneys and sit n gos you are correct that's how I start them. The reason I do it here is because changing gears is important by the time they figure I'm not really an idiot it's about time to get a little more aggressive and steal some blinds. Even if it buys me 1 hand early it is one extra thing people that are locked into my table have to figure out.

At ring tables I kid around but I don't go for the idiot image.

[thomastem]

Excellent point Copernicus. I have looked at that short term a few times so it may not be completely scientific. There are 2 areas that changed....I can't give what they are away but I will try break it down long term. Out of curiosity is it common to start too tight and then maybe loosen up as I become comfortable with the table? If so how can I tell if this is bad play early or that I just recognize more situations or plays that I can take advantage of as I learn more?