Something I have been thinking about

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't tell if you're joking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey! You stole my line from joker's screenplay! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I'm joking. Online though, I like to buy in for 40-50 bets. Just saves me the hassle and [joking]fun[/joking] of reloading.

[/ QUOTE ]
I buy in for 50 bets too, so I guess I could see someone buying in for 200, although that seems absurd.

[AllIn3High]

[ QUOTE ]
Well I pulled out the bibles of poker psychology (Inside the Poker Mind & The Psychology of Poker) for anything related to the discussion. (I mean I was really tempted to invest all my thought into how to play AA at a donkfest like all the cool kids but figured I could get to that later).

What I got out of it.

So you are playing a solid game and not hitting so your image becomes that of a tight semi-aggressive player that can be pushed off hands. Or you suffer from "AK syndrome" where they always put you on AK and bet any flop not including an A or K just calling down if you continue to be aggressive. Bad news when the non-retarted players pick up on it and decide to use it. It means more bluffs and more aggression with their marginal hands.

If you can figure out who has pegged you this way (I believe you referred to them as "asstards", usually the 30-40vpip semi-thinkers) use your new image to your advantage. These changes should be player specific.

1) I think you have to tighten up a bit and bluff less against them
2) Use more passive lines with marginal hands (invite more bluffs, more check raising with strong hands. Let them know the c/r means business.
3) Slowplay big hands getting the bets in on the later streets
4) Use 2) and 3) to set up similar lines when you want to pull off some timely bluffs once your image improves

[ QUOTE ]
When you are starting to actively second guess what should be routine decsions against bad (especially passive) or otherwise predictable players... it may be best to find a new table.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this. I think it may be important to redefine what a "good game" is. I always thought of it in terms of vpip/pfr av. pot size and position on poor players. A game where you have been targeted as an easy mark by the weaker players you prey upon is no longer a "good game" regardless of their stats/tendencies and position.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very good post.

[xwillience]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You are at a good table, maybe even a great table.


[/ QUOTE ]

And you would want to leave why? It either great and you need to stay or its not and you need to leave.

[/ QUOTE ]


this is they way i look at... i dont put stop-wins/losses into use.. i leave when the game changes for the worse or my head isnt in the game anymore... if your loosing and you feel like you cant win.. its in your head and you need to leave. if you play consistently you will win, either you play your shitty cards now or you play them later... my opinion at least

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
Well I pulled out the bibles of poker psychology (Inside the Poker Mind & The Psychology of Poker) for anything related to the discussion. (I mean I was really tempted to invest all my thought into how to play AA at a donkfest like all the cool kids but figured I could get to that later).

What I got out of it.

So you are playing a solid game and not hitting so your image becomes that of a tight semi-aggressive player that can be pushed off hands. Or you suffer from "AK syndrome" where they always put you on AK and bet any flop not including an A or K just calling down if you continue to be aggressive. Bad news when the non-retarted players pick up on it and decide to use it. It means more bluffs and more aggression with their marginal hands.

If you can figure out who has pegged you this way (I believe you referred to them as "asstards", usually the 30-40vpip semi-thinkers) use your new image to your advantage. These changes should be player specific.

1) I think you have to tighten up a bit and bluff less against them
2) Use more passive lines with marginal hands (invite more bluffs, more check raising with strong hands. Let them know the c/r means business.
3) Slowplay big hands getting the bets in on the later streets
4) Use 2) and 3) to set up similar lines when you want to pull off some timely bluffs once your image improves

[ QUOTE ]
When you are starting to actively second guess what should be routine decsions against bad (especially passive) or otherwise predictable players... it may be best to find a new table.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this. I think it may be important to redefine what a "good game" is. I always thought of it in terms of vpip/pfr av. pot size and position on poor players. A game where you have been targeted as an easy mark by the weaker players you prey upon is no longer a "good game" regardless of their stats/tendencies and position.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice breakdown Doc. Thanks.

[mowz]

[ QUOTE ]

1) I think you have to tighten up a bit and bluff less against them
2) Use more passive lines with marginal hands (invite more bluffs, more check raising with strong hands. Let them know the c/r means business.
3) Slowplay big hands getting the bets in on the later streets
4) Use 2) and 3) to set up similar lines when you want to pull off some timely bluffs once your image improves

A game where you have been targeted as an easy mark by the weaker players you prey upon is no longer a "good game" regardless of their stats/tendencies and position.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is key. If you are going to stick around because of pride, recognize that the table has changed and that you will need to play a different game. If people are looking you up, steal less and show down real hands. Be tricky right back at them, but when you are, make it a real hand. That said, there is nothing wrong with finding another great table.

[DocMartin]

Another thought and question.

When I was first taking beatings at 5/10 this mantra helped me. "people are not taking shots at me, people are not taking shots at me, people are not taking shots at me...." (I forget who posted it but thanks)

But sometimes, some players really do take shots at me (not as frequently as I first suspected). Hell, sometimes I take shots at TAGs who auto bet the flop and turn after a PFR who have backed down to aggession unwilling to showdown A or K high heads-up (likely easier for me than the 40/10 asstards who typically attempt it).

The question. Is it better to make those adjustments (assuming they are reasonable in the first place) or to just find a better table?

I'm thinking adjusting is better for long term improvement. Certainly in live play, but it is just so easy to find another table online.

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
Another thought and question.

When I was first taking beatings at 5/10 this mantra helped me. "people are not taking shots at me, people are not taking shots at me, people are not taking shots at me...." (I forget who posted it but thanks)

But sometimes, some players really do take shots at me (not as frequently as I first suspected). Hell, sometimes I take shots at TAGs who auto bet the flop and turn after a PFR who have backed down to aggession unwilling to showdown A or K high heads-up (likely easier for me than the 40/10 asstards who typically attempt it).

The question. Is it better to make those adjustments (assuming they are reasonable in the first place) or to just find a better table?

I'm thinking adjusting is better for long term improvement. Certainly in live play, but it is just so easy to find another table online.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doc,

Depending on the texture of the board, I do this too. I think it is both profiable and necessary. I think you have done this to me.

I agree it is a big on-line world. But it is still small enough at the 5/10, 10/20 level... where I see a lot of the same faces. So I think used within reason you are on the right track with your thought.

[DocMartin]

Speaking of adjustments vs shot-takers. I'm not proud but I have actually tried limping AT-AK a few times where I would normally raise after a couple of suspected shot-takers have entered the pot before me (or who always call in the BB).

Plus side: Easier to get away from without feeling pwned, potential to make more money on them since they put you on a weaker hand thinking you always raise with big Aces.

minus side: may be more people in the pot to outdraw you, loss of fold equity, less money in the pot with the best hand.

I think the "-" outweigh the "+" but there were a few times I was willing to try anything. Tilt?

[ZootMurph]

[ QUOTE ]
This may be better suited to the psych forum, but you guys are better poker players than the regulars there, and I consider this more of a strategy related poker issue than an emotional one.

First off I am not in a downswing. I am in a Upswing that has featured a extended series of -80BB, +90BB,-40BB, 60BB...etc sessions. I play about 6000 hands a week and play 6 out of seven days.

Now for my question. You are at a good table, maybe even a great table. One you are happy to find and ordinarily not consider leaving. You end up getting run down a few times after buying in for 30BB, you go down 20BB, rebuy for 10 more... and nothing seems to click.

What I am considering doing is instead of solidering on at this good table, I am considering leaving, shortly after the first rebuy.

The reason is, most of my off nights have featured, getting my ass handed to be for -30BB to -50BB on a single table. I really can only remember a couple times when I have come storming back and taken my vengence on the asstards who thumped me in the first place.

I mean is table image at an otherwise good table important enough by itself to make you leave?

[/ QUOTE ]

When I'm in this situation, I often think of the debate about whether rushes are real or not. My belief is that rushes are real, and if I'm at a table where my luck seems to be bad, no matter how good the table is, I leave and move to another. I usually play four tables, and I'm happy to leave a table that is running me down. I used to stay at these tables as well, and found that I would lose more or not gain any back about 80% of the time. That number is big enough to convince me that rushes, and the reverse, are real and I'm more convinced than ever to get away from those situations when possible. Finally, since I've made it my M.O. to leave 'bad luck' tables, my BB/100 is up 0.4 (from 1.5 BB/100 over ~120k hands to 1.9 BB/100 over ~80k hands). Of course, this improvement COULD be from my game improving as well...

Now, as far as leaving a table for other reasons, there are three things I look at when deciding (other than the usual emotional/physical reasons like being tired, on tilt, etc.):

1) How I am playing at the table - I have found that for some reason I occasionally play very poorly at a table while I'm playing well at the other three, and I can't come up with an explanation.
2) The strength of the opposition. If I find a table is really tough or tight, I will get off the table.
3) As already mentioned, the luck or rush factor. If I'm on a bad run at a table, I will definitely leave.

As for table image, I don't think that has anything to do with me leaving a table. As I think everyone here does, we try to adjust our play to utilize our table image most effectively. So, whatever image you have to others, you can use that to your advantage. The 'hard luck' guy is just another table image to utilize where possible.

[jskills]

I wish I would have read this yesterday. It could have helped me leave this massive fishpond badbeat jackpot table where I managed to drop two buy-ins.

Table image does count ...