[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
In chapter 1 of his book, THE THEORY OF POKER, Mr. Sklansky discusses the significance of knowing "whether your a favorite in the game or an underdog".

What are the general criterion for making this decision? How about specific criterion?

Many thanks in advance.

[/ QUOTE ]

0) In general, you should be a favorite in almost any microlimit game if you've done any amount of study.
1) How does the table play overall? It is very tight? Very aggressive? These are types of conditions that can (if you can't adjust) make you a dog. Very loose or very passive games are the softest of all.
2) Are players making intelligent plays (from what you can tell)? Are there lots of cold-callers? Are there people limping from the cutoff instead of raising? Are they chasing with junk? What sorts of hands are they showing down?
3) Are there players that you know are TAGs and are possibly better than you at the table? Is there one who has position on you? That's bad. Across the table is fine because there are generally enough fish swimming around that you're not going to have to fight over them.
4) Are you playing within your bankroll? This usually doesn't really apply to microlimits, but if you're playing at stakes where you're concerned about breaking your bankroll, this will cause you to play less well (too conservative) and that makes you an underdog (or at least less of a favorite).