Loose Games -EV?

[xniNja]

I'm finally going to sleep after a 1200 hand session in which I netted 10.86 BB/100 while responding to various posts on 2+2. The interesting thing is that I noticed last week about 10K hands into my PT stats (I had just started a new database for the limit/site) that I was doing much (300-400%)better at tables where the avg. flop seen was ~24% or below. Since then, I have been specifically targetting "tight" games, and averaging 8 BB/100 (up from my overall of 5.9)
When I think about it, in live play I generally do better when my opponents play better as well. Sure there's the occasional moron who caps your nut flush/house/whatever..and you win a monster pot, but overall I don't really buy the Sklansky-esque idea that you want bad players drawing against you- I think in loose games their combined sucking power can become favorite to a solid player even over a fairly long time. What do you guys think?

[Rudbaeck]

I know you are wrong. That said psychological shortcomings seem to prevent many otherwise decent poker players from doing well in really fishy games.

10k hands is a wet fart in space. Don't draw conclusions on such thin evidence.

Yes, if 8 players are drawing against you the field is probably a favorite over you. But that doesn't matter, it's not about pots won but about money won.

[xniNja]

I realize it's a small sample, and I am beating the "fishy" games, but it does seem as if the more solid game is more consistant money. I'm not debating in the VLR you should win more from the 8 people who draw out on you, but in practical or perhaps psychological terms, for me it seems to be the difference between 2, 10 or 20 bad beats a session, which would reduce my win-rate and could admittedly affect my game. I think I'd just rather win a small pot than lose a big pot.

[Guthrie]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'd just rather win a small pot than lose a big pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think this is the road to ruin.

[Xhad]

You are right that tight games bring more consistent money, but wrong that they bring more money period. Calling stations increase your variance quite a bit, but they also increase your profit by a lot. Provided you have a decent bankroll you should take the fishy game every time.

[poker-penguin]

I think you're a weak tight table coach.

Learn to play poker, increase your sample size at least 10X, then come back and if you still believe this rubbish, we'll all flame you some more.

[xniNja]

Ha. This sample is only at 14K, like I said new site/limit. Over 88K recorded I'm averaging 5.9 BB, I've probably put in another 100K un-recorded making around 4-5 BB/hr and then another 200K or so of live hands. Observation based overall.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying I don't want anyone to draw against me.. I'm saying I'd rather be in games where less people are drawing- I should have titled the post "Very Loose Games" but I suppose you all would contend very loose games are +EV and miss the point I'm making about consistancy vs. the very long run.

[Rudbaeck]

Weak-tight opponents do allow for lower standard deviation, that is true.

But you're backpedaling hard on your initial post, where you claimed that Sklansky was wrong about calling stations being the most profitable opponents to have. (Which isn't true, a maniac is the most profitable long term opponent.)

I play 2k hands a day, so maybe my view on the long term is somewhat biased. If I for some strange reason had to be fairly certain that I'd make money on a single session I'd choose weak-tight opponents. Otherwise I don't particularly sweat it if I have two weeks of breakeven poker. My long term results are good.

I might side with your modified position if a 30k hands long losing streak took me 110 working days (b&M) as opposed to 15 (online).

[Zygote]

lol. you are very wrong. thats like saying a casino is going to lose in roullette because they have so many people sucking out on them all the time. Read yao and ed miller's books, among others, to get an understanding of EV when applied to limit hold em.

[Pocket77s]

A Question, if you are looking for a table to sit down on PP or whatever site, how would the avg pot size relate to how loose/tight the game is? e.g. avg $19-$23 10 handed tight? $23-$26 middle $26 and up loose? What would you say?