On Table Selection

[shadow29]

[ QUOTE ]
(In quotes to seperate the introduction from the body.) This guide turned about to be a bit more "basic" than I originally intended (and probably to the disappointment of some). But downtime at Party let me finish earlier than originally promised. So there's a positive and a negative. There are some specifics that I really can't get into (promise to a mentor of mine). But if you have any questions, please ask them and I'll do my best to answer them (and incorporate them into future editions). Also, if there's anything I left out, let me know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Many players, after studying their books religiously, posting hands in the forums, and responding to other hands still feel like their win rate is not up to 2+2 standards. Some continue playing at a less than optimal win rate, yet others get frustrated and back out of poker altogether. Frustrated players can usually avoid these tragedies by practicing meticulous table selection.

Picking the table with the highest average pot and an open seat generally will not yield a good table. Rather, looking at the players at the table, instead of the average pot, is best. (Furthermore, the average pot statistic listed is sometimes not accurate as it is calculated by averaging a span of hands, and tables online generally have high turnover rates.) A good table generally includes several loose passive opponents and several loose aggressive opponents. Loose passive players are excellent opponents because they will frequently pay off your big hands by calling all of your bets. Value betting against these opponents moreover provides much of your total table equity. Loose aggressive players act in almost the opposite way as loose passive opponents. However, both player types will add to your total equity in similar ways. Loose aggressive opponents frequently get out of line pre flop, allowing you to isolate and take advantage of their main leak, playing too many hands too aggressively.

Thus, when opening tables, look for players against whom you would like to play. Whether you use a HUD (like PlayerView or GameTime+) or exported PokerTracker notes, determining what kind of opponents are at a specific table is paramount to adding to your win rate. An important concept that is frequently overlooked is the presence of tight aggressive players. If your current table selection method is looking for openings at the highest average pot tables, doesn't it follow that the significant minority of tight aggressive players are doing the same thing? Furthermore, a large pot table is not always a bunch of loose aggressive players slugging it out. There are often tight aggressive players that are 3-betting to isolate and pumping draws. Thus, those high pot tables might have an unprofitable mix of tight aggressive opponents that are isolating the loose aggressive players. Start looking elsewhere for poor opponents; they're out there waiting for you to take their money.

After finding a good table with a couple loose passives, several loose aggressives, and no tight aggressives, your table selection process does not stop, however. Seat selection is probably just as important as table selection. If you have 3 100/100 opponents at the table, but you're not in a position in which you can control the table, you are totally ineffective. A concept that 2+2 books love to drill in to their books is that acting last is good. This cannot be emphasized too much. In general, you want to sit to the left of loose aggressive players so that you can have position on them and raise to isolate. On a similar note, you want to have tighter players on your left. Tighter players are less likely to cold call and less likely to cap the betting. Thus, if you 3-bet to isolate a maniac on your right, you can act last. Acting last and isolating weak and poor players gives you the best situation for being able to control the table, which is the ultimate goal.



Where is the optimal seat?



Where is the optimal seat?