The Play vs. The Players

At low limits, I'm starting to conclude that the latter is as (or more) important than the former. As a roughly breakeven player of $1-3, $1-5 and $2 4 stud, online and in casinos, I believe that in games where most of the players are good to competent I am a small loser. In games where some of the players are spectacularly bad -- loose and oblivious -- I am a small winner.


I think this is more important at low limits than at higher ones because the rake is much higher vs. the pot sizes. In extreme cases, like $1-3 or $2-4 he, you are losing 10%. In essence you have to be 10% better than the table on average to have a winning expecation long term. So a predictable, weak tight or loose passive player can be a tough opponent for me in these games, simply because I may be slightly ahead of that player's thinking, but not enough to overcome the rake. Throw in a couple of really good players and my average edge plummets. In higher games, the rake is much less as a percentage, meaning you need a lesser edge over the other players to beat it.

with different players in a public cardroom or casino,the play in the lower limit games is more important than the players.

The main reason is that U are playing MOSTLY with recreational players.

In the higher limit games,the players become more important than your play--although both your play and the players U are playing against are important.

It is true that U have a better reduced rake % relative to the pot size in higher limit games,but U will encounter much better caliber of players,on the average,then U will in the lower limit games.

Hence,a solid low-limit player will usually have such a high edge against the field that he will still be able to be a consistent winner even with the large rake relative to the pot size.

Since U might not have a player's edge in the higher limit games,the small relative size of the rake will still not be enough for U to be a consistent winner.


Happy pokering,

Sitting Bull

Just some of the reasons why Game Selection is so important.


CJ

Yeah, CJ, I agree. Usually, I try to walk around and look at the games at Mohegan or Foxwoods. But since I only play occaisonally (once a month or less) it's tough to tell which might be "good" in just a few minutes of observation. Also, if there's a wait, I tend to take the first seat that comes up, then if I don't like the game I'll ask to move. It seems like it's easier to move between limits -- ie. from $1-5 to $1-3 than within limits. And the floor is generally not particularly eager to help.


Sadly, I disagree with what Larry says. I find many players who are not terrible in these games. Many have a lot less poker knowledge but they play every day in the same game, with many of the same people and while they may be losers for life, they don't give up enough edge in playing knowledge to make up for my lack of regular play and the rake. Add in good players, many of whom have read as much or more as me and played much more. There are often one or two of these in a game and they are negative EV pre-rake for me. Any tips on game selection, particularly at Mohegan and Foxwoods, are appreciated. btw, Pat, I'm planning on trying $5-10 at Foxwoods with the last of my online winnings.

MRB,


I know I have told you this, but you should be able to beat any of those $1-5 games easily.


Let me know when you are going up there again to play. Perhaps we can meet. Assuming I can get some time away from work.


CJ

Nice of you to say that, but it has definitely not been the case. I've consistently lost in those games. My wins have come at $1-3 and $1-5 no ante and $2-4, .25 ante online. I do feel the very high ante structure of the $1-5 at Foxwoods/Mohegan rewards looser play, which isn't my natural style. But I also feel that low limit games, especially this one where the cost of sitting is quite high, will have higher variance. The reason is that players generally make more calling errors vs. folding errors at low limits, so you are often playing against a "field". This means you will win less hands, but take down bigger pots when you do win. I will be playing a short $1-5 session, probably at Foxwoods, tomorrow (Thursday), probably

between around 4:30 and 8.

the ante in your 1-5 game?

U said that u can beat the 1-5 no ante game. Y don't U just play those games that u can beat? Build up your bankroll to then play 5-10 .50 ante.


If the ante in 1-5 is .50,I do not believe I can beat this game either. I would prefer to play in a 5-10 or 10-20 game with .50 and 1.00 antes respectfully.


Happy pokering,

Sitting bull

I hear you Bull, and I'm thinking of doing just that. But CJ says he beats these games like a rented mule. And I believe him.


Larry, am I correct in thinking that you are tossing small pair, small kicker/low-three flushes with a couple of dead cards unless you are late in and can just limp with two or three others? Am I correct in thinking you are extremely lineup conscious? Am I correct in thinking you try to read the players and pick up tells? When do you raise? When do you checkraise? When do you call along? In short, what are YOUR keys to winning at low limits?

MRB,


well unfortunately there is no way in hell I will be able to make it up there tomorrow. Monday's are usually the best time for me to make it up there. ( or Sunday's to ) Let me know if you go up during those days.


CJ

Will do. My trips are often on the way to Cape Cod where my family has a vacation home. That's the case this time. But I do go every now and then with another friend, also a "serious" low limit player. We'll probably do a trip in early October and might be playing during the day on a Sunday.