Is this why I'm not doing as good?

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
Cardzy the emotion that might be involved is just from the desire to become a better player and not from bad beats etc.
I think we are both after the same thing. A strategy that works better against that Fish other than the "They will pay you off when they miss" strategy. Well actually I'm referring to a table full of fish rather than just any one fish. One fish can hurt you every now and then but with a table full of them you can sustain some big losses very quickly when they all are catching.
My previous response was to try and inspire some debate as to the best strategy to handle such a situation. The ideas I mentioned my be sound or they may be ludicrous. I'm sure others have experimented with ways to gain a better edge over a very loose table. I would love to hear some tried and succeeded/failed attempts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Buy SSH by Ed Miller. The topic you are wondering about (how to beat a table full of bad players) is perfectly explained over the course of 300 pages. The question you guys are asking cannot be summed up in a single post.

[afk]

[ QUOTE ]
Well actually I'm referring to a table full of fish rather than just any one fish. One fish can hurt you every now and then but with a table full of them you can sustain some big losses very quickly when they all are catching.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you've read it, but this is exactly what SSH and this micro forum are all about. Most of the players here (including myself) would love a table full of 9 players who see the flop 40% of the time, never raise preflop and are only aggressive when they've got a hand.

All the strategy information you seek is right here in front of you, and I can testify that it works. Very well. As can many other posters on this forum.

edit: I just want to add that I'm genuinely trying to help by adding my opinion. I don't want it to seem like I'm coming off as a jerk [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[scrapperdog]

Carmine i think most ppl would agree that playing unsuited connectors is a bad idea.

[Hack]

[ QUOTE ]
Carmine i think most ppl would agree that playing unsuited connectors is a bad idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except 10J from Co, button, and blinds in a loose game. It makes four straights and all are the nuts. I think it merits putting one bet into the pot.

Others may disagree.

[Carmine]

[ QUOTE ]

edit: I just want to add that I'm genuinely trying to help by adding my opinion. I don't want it to seem like I'm coming off as a jerk [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Your not being a jerk at all. I appreciate all opionions, advice, etc.

[bennyk]

[ QUOTE ]
You can't worry about you BB/100 yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree with this more. Someone else will say something about sample size, but just remember that even with 10k hands at a level, ONE bad session can move your BB/100 a significant amount. I am personally very familiar with this.

All things the same, your Win @ SD stat can give you a LITTLE information about whether you're getting especially unlucky. Again, over 10k hands, I have had single bad sessions move this stat 1%. Sick. You know this, but think about hands you feel you should have won, and make sure you didn't miss anything. I get a lot of info looking at these hands I lose, and making sure I didn't mess up (or figuring how I did).

If you are multi-tabling, consider dropping down to 1 or 2 tables.

Keep up the good work,
bk

[Cardzy]

Thanks for all the replies everyone. I really appreciate the convo and ideas. Carmine, as I said, I meant no offense at all about your post. I do agree SSH covers the exact issue you are referring to with a table full of loose players as that is basically what it was written for and is the best book out there for the strategy to beat those games. At one point or another we have all been frustrated at not being able to beat the loosest of loose games and constantly being sucked out on, meanwhile feeling like we are spewing chips out our ass for no reason by raising.

Most games at $1/$2 that I have been playing in at Empire/Party have a mix and are much tighter than any of the .50/$1 I played usually. Over half the table is normally very tight players, then one or two LAGs (some are LAG preflop and passive post and some are total LAGs) and then a couple of fish with maybe a SLA thrown in. At these tables I am running into more issues with the occasional fish in the pot. It just seems (and I may be wrong and would have to throughly go through my pokertracker database to find out for sure) that I am losing more money to fish than I am making from them since I moved to $1/$2. This is the reason I have been considering the strategy change.

From everything everyone is saying, I should continue to play aggressively in spots such as the hand posted and it will pay off in the long run. I guess it is possible that I have just ran into a lot of "lucky" fish lately and therefore came to the conclusion that they are playing differently then they did at .50/$1. I hope that is the case.

4,000 hands is insignificant anyway, but with the recent move up in limits and the trend I have seen with this type of player it definitely brought it to my attention that I may need a strategy change.

So for now I just pay more attention to each hand I'm in with a fish than I have been (as before I mostly ran on auto-pilot as I could almost always just assume they were chasing or dominated and was right most of the time) and keep my aggression as it is. We will see how it turns out and where I stand around 10,000 hands (another number that is still insignificant but better anyway.)

Thanks again. Please continue to post your thoughts as I am constantly learning from everyone.

[droolie]

The one suggestion I can make is to check through when you're last to act on the river -vs- a passive player you are afraid has you beaten. Other than that you can't assume that passivity is a sign of strength -vs- any opponent.