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

[gambledrum]

Can a good player expect to win when playing ultra-tight tables?

I'm a micro-small stakes hold 'em player. I decided a few months to start playing online, basically to play more hands per hour. I play anywhere from 0.25-50 to 1-2, for the most part. I've noticed an immense difference between B&M low stakes (in South Florida were restricted to 1-2 hold 'em) and online low stakes. Basically, the online players I'm running into tend to be much tighter than the B&M rooms. I'm currently playing at Royal Vegas Poker. Three to five players to the flop is the rule. Many times the blinds are folded by a raise. Keep in mind, I'm talking about 0.50-1 hold 'em. This is a complete contrast from playing 1-2 in the B&M rooms, where 7-9 players are the norm, and you almost never see blinds folding, even after multiple raises. So, there's a large difference between the pot sizes I've seen online and in person.

Miller states in SSH:
"If your opponents all played "perfect" poker, you could not possibly win in the long run. He goes on to say, "In fact, if you play in a casino or any place that takes a collection or rake, you would be doomed to lose as surely as if you played craps, roulette, or keno." Furthermore, he says, "Be glad your opponents refuse to fold; if they didn't, you might just go broke."

I often heard that you can expect to make 2 big bets per 100 hands, if you’re a good player. I’ve also heard that you could expect to make much more in ultra-loose games. But, what about ultra-tight games, with tricky players? Does the 2BB/100 hands scenario hold up? What is the proper sample size of hands to test your win rate on?

Essentially, I wondering if you can theoretically win a very tight game. Or, is it essential for the game to be somewhat loose to make money? Maybe I’m playing at the wrong website. Average pot sizes for a ten person 0.25-0.50 table are $2-3, at Royal Vegas Poker. But, when I check other sites, the average pot size tends to be larger ($3-4).

Basically, the way I see it, I’m having a harder time making money online because the pot sizes are small. When I hit, the pot isn’t nearly as big a B&M room, but when I miss, drawing odds are terrible.

Any insight?

[TripleH68]

People playing 'tight' poker is MUCH different than people playing 'perfect' poker.

You can beat these games and you make the majority of your $$ postflop.

[NLfool]

in general you should play the opposite of how your opponents play. Since many play loose you should play tight. A tight ring game is fairly easy to beat with position, may not be as profitable, you'll make less BB/100 but your variance will be much lower and most long time players will gladly sacrifice some earnings for less variance. I know, since the Party split or restructure I've experience the most insane swings.

[csuf_gambler]

[ QUOTE ]
in general you should play the opposite of how your opponents play.

[/ QUOTE ]

terrible.

[2+2 wannabe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in general you should play the opposite of how your opponents play.

[/ QUOTE ]

terrible.

[/ QUOTE ]

come on - why don't you want to play qto against a 10/2/2 pf raiser [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[halis123456789]

playing the opposite of your opponents is actually correct AS LONG AS THEY FAIL TO ADJUST to what you are doing. if you're in there raising with any marginal hand when you have position and they just give you the pot PF or for one bet on the flop, then they can't win against you playing like that. in order for a tight player to take advantage of what you are doing, they would have to lower their 3-betting standards, etc. to force you to make a hand.

if the players are ultra tight, and you are ultra loose, you are going to crush the game unless they start adjusting.

[gambledrum]

That didn't seem to ring right with me either.
Why do some people suggest that? Is there ever any merit to that type of thinking?
They might be thinking something like...
"If players are raising with AK, then I should play 64 to win when they miss the flop and a bunch of low cards hit the board."

[MicroBob]

There's almost no reason why you shouldn't be able to win at .25/.50 on ANY site.

kinda tight players who are sorta tricky post-flop are almost guaranteed to not be THAT freaking good at .25/.50. Some might be pretty decent....but not all of them....not even close.


[ QUOTE ]

Basically, the way I see it, I’m having a harder time making money online because the pot sizes are small. When I hit, the pot isn’t nearly as big a B&M room, but when I miss, drawing odds are terrible.

Any insight?


[/ QUOTE ]



You are not playing as many of your hands 'correctly' as you think you are.
Consider the possibility that it is YOUR play that you need to work on.
You are playing in games that should be crushable...yet you aren't crushing them.



The reason you aren't winning isn't because a winning player can ONLY win at loose games with terrible players.
The reason is that you are misplaying hands against mediocre to slightly not-so-horrid players and you don't even realize it.


Consider reasing and posting the micro-limits forum here. Much good advice to be had to improve your game.



note - I have never played on royal-vegas...but I refuse to believe that their .25/.50 games are very tough at all and couldn't easily be beaten for 2BB/100.

[RiverDood]

Sounds like you've got two different questions going on here.

1. Is the Royal Vegas .50/$1 game beatable? Sounds like it is. It's definitely tighter than the ultraloose games at B&M casinos, but by online standards, it is not supertight at all. 3-5 players seeing the flop means that at least one or two of them shouldn't be there. . . . If there's a lot of preflop raising, marginal hands shouldn't be limped from early positions (J9s; 33, etc.) About half the players at the table will realize this, and the other half won't. . . . Your job is to punish the limpers with well-aimed raises, reraises and c/rs that isolate their skinny draws heads up wherever possible, or force them to fold well before the river . . . . You also want to stop limping with stuff that only works well in the cheap, multiway pots that are common in loose passive games.

2. Can a truly ultra-tight game be beaten? Yes. Steal blinds. In an extreme case, if everyone else only plays AA, KK, QQ and AKs, you can pick up the blinds constantly by raising with weaker hands. But that's not really a scenario worth examining until much higher limits.

[gambledrum]

Are you basically saying that you should almost always open raise in a short-handed game, as opposed to calling, in an effort to fold blinds?
At the Royal Vegas Poker 0.50-1.00 game I'm generally not raising with KQs, KJs, ATs in early to middle position. But, in the B&M looser games I raised with those hands in early to middle position most of the time.