Switching table because you're killing the fish

[stinkypete]

so what you're saying is that you're afraid that this terrible player is more capable of adjusting to table conditions than you are.

this is unlikely, unless you suck.

[djoyce003]

if it was B&M i'd adhere to the you can shear a sheep many times, but only skin him once. However, in the online area with thousands of donks, i'm happy to take every last cent they have. I took three buy-ins from a LAG last night, and he probably thinks I am lucky and he should beat me...i expect to see him again soon, even though he's terrible and pays off way too many raises and value bets.

[Budget Boy]

It's been my experience that if anything bad players play even worse if you pound on them for a while, not better. Actually, I have never personally played with anyone good player or bad, that sucked it up and started playing better once they were losing.
I know sometimes I think "how much more could I possible beat these jokers out of?" The answer is more. Much, much, more.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I suck...this is entirely possible and should not be disregarded.

Is there any merit to changing tables after you have been beating up on 1 or 2 soft spots at a table? After sucking enough money from their seemingly endless supply and relentlessly isolating these players, do you think they wise up enough to fight back? Do you think they tighten up against you and become much tougher players because they feel you are singling them out?

I'm curious what people think. Is it possible that very profitable opponents become marginally profitable or even unprofitable from too much isolation and from losing too much to a single player. Is it possible that after we've burnt this bad player image into our heads that when these players start to play better against us we don't give them credit and play wrecklessly against them?

I'd like to hear some thoughts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I only play on tables where I can not spot the fish.

--Zetack

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
I just seem to notice that if I'm killing a guy for quite a while and he still manages to hang on a bit through others or reloads, that he begins to tighten up against me.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the game changes and you are no longer a favorite, then quit. Maybe it's you who changes, though. Reverse tilt maybe?

[Bosox]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I suck...this is entirely possible and should not be disregarded.

Is there any merit to changing tables after you have been beating up on 1 or 2 soft spots at a table? After sucking enough money from their seemingly endless supply and relentlessly isolating these players, do you think they wise up enough to fight back? Do you think they tighten up against you and become much tougher players because they feel you are singling them out?

I'm curious what people think. Is it possible that very profitable opponents become marginally profitable or even unprofitable from too much isolation and from losing too much to a single player. Is it possible that after we've burnt this bad player image into our heads that when these players start to play better against us we don't give them credit and play wrecklessly against them?

I'd like to hear some thoughts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I only play on tables where I can not spot the fish.

--Zetack

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL
1. fishing is the best way to make money at online poker. table selection is probably THE most important way to see high profits.
2. If you don't beat the fish, someone else will. they have short life expectancy, esp at high limits
3. if you think the fish has figured out how to beat you, either he's not really a fish or you are. ADAPT.
sox