Is It Possible To Win A Tight Hold 'em Game, Theoretically?

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Example:
MP1 posts. 3 folds, check, two folds, I raise in the CO with 98o, 4 folds. I net $2.50 = 1.25 BB.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see myself raising with 98o in the CO. I see myself folding. Why would you raise in that situation?

[/ QUOTE ]
98o is not a good hand. I did not expect to have the best hand. This was a semi-bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here is an example from NL, where position is even more powerful:


This was a relatively tight table, as you can see from the pot sizes of previous hands. When the player in front of me posted 1.5 BB and checked, I thought it was a good time for a semi-bluff.

Everyone folded, so I won 3 big blinds. (Note that an ordinary blind steal wins only 1.5 big blinds.) If they hadn't all folded, I would have regretted my raise, but not by 5 big blinds unless there was a reraise. I would have made a continuation bet on any flop, which I expect would be profitable, and if someone plays back at me, there is a small chance I flopped a monster or a profitable draw.

This was a tight table, but I finished at $383, net +$203.

[gambledrum]

I've often wondered if playing too many tables is bad for your win rate. I say this, because you're not able to concentrate on the tendencies of specific players when you're playing four tables, as much as when you're playing one table.
Ed Miller states in SSH:
"Every cent of your long-term profit playing poker come from exploiting your opponents' errors and predictable tendencies."
I'm wondering if I'm missing those "predictable tendencies" by playing four to five tables at once. I'm playing fairly "generically." Unless I spot consistent patterns at a particular table (a maniac who always raises, lots of calling stations, large frequency of cold calling, etc.), I tend to play "by the book." It's more difficult for me to spot tendencies when I'm playing at multiple tables, as opposed to one table. But, can that really be a big win/rate issue?

[ QUOTE ]
But, what about ultra-tight games, with tricky players?

[/ QUOTE ]

With all the poker available right now, why are you wasting you time in an ultra-tight game with 'ticky players'? Move on to something more profitable.

If you HAVE to play with ultra-tight players, just adjust your bluffing frequency. Bluff more often. If your players are better than you, using gaming theory to dictate when you should bluff. (See Skalnsky's 'Theory of Poker' for more on bluffing and gaming theory).

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
Is It Possible To Win A Tight Hold 'em Game, Theoretically?

[/ QUOTE ]


Yes.


Next question ...


Adam