% of players taking the flop (most profitable?)

[justdanutz]

Unlike in 'normal' casinos, when playing poker online we get to see the % of players taking the flop before choosing a table to sit down and play at.

I have been choosing tables with around a 40-45% average. I figure the lower percentage, the tighter the table is playing. If I go into a room with a higher 50% or more, there seems to be more 'sucking out' against big cards.

Does anyone have any advice/suggestions on the percentage range that would be the most profitable?

[Kevin K.]

There really isn't a good answer based solely on % of players to the flop. You need to couple with that other factors to find a good table.

There's nothing wrong with a 50%+ table if they are all a bunch of passive calling stations. Worrying about getting sucked out on is pointless. The larger pots that you take down more than make up for the bad beats in the long run.

You can also find sub 30% tables full of weak-tight players where you can steal a ton of pots.

There's so much more to the texture of a good table that it's impossible to nail it down to a specific players to flop %.

[RiverDood]

I'm finding that loose is nice -- but that at the lower limits at least, passive is what pays off the most.

Look for tables with a low average pot, relative to the number of players. If preflop raising is scarce, you'll get to play your borderline blinds just fine. Your preflop and turn raises aren't likely to be reraised, and may fold some people out. You can be the table bully.

Loose aggressive tables can pay very nicely if you can live with the variance and stay at the table long enough to let everything sort out. But when Mr. TwoOuter clips you on the river for a 15BB pot and then logs out, it can really take the fun out of the session.

As for your specific percentages, 40-45 is a very nice game. (I'm assuming this is a 10-seat table; obviously numbers go up for smaller tables.) A passive 55 is even better. An aggressive 55 requires a big bankroll and a strong stomach. But it can pay, too. You just need to regard almost everything as a drawing hand.

[AaronBrown]

In addition to Kevin K. and RiverDood's excellent reply, I'd add that you have to watch out for changes. Flop percentages can change because (a) other people are looking for the same type of games you are and (b) people tend to correct their play.

[SteveM]

I'm surprised by the previous responses. I play mostly $.50/$1.00 and try to sit down at the tables with the highest % seeing the flop that I can. I start salivating when I find tables in the 60-70% range. How can people playing bad cards possibly be bad for you? Sure, the variance will be a little higher due to the occasional suckouts, but geez... Would you rather your AA that flopped a set won you 5 BB or 30 BB? If the variance really upsets you, I've found that it is much easier to handle when multi-tabling. The suckouts at one table are quickly buried by the "I can't believe they called with THAT!!!"s at the other tables.

Just stay disciplined and don't let yourself get sucked into the loose playing that seems to be working for everyone else - 'cuz in the long run we know it doesn't.

[michiganfan9]

Totally agree with riverdood

[OrangeKing]

Yep - passive is even more important than loose, which is shown whenever someone posts about the cumulative BB/100 for each of the groups - all the agressive groups, even the loose ones, tend to do better than the passives.

But if the % seeing the flop is the only thing you have to evaluate the game by, the higher the better! The optimal number would be 100%. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[JunkHead]

I'll take high % seeing the flop with middling pot size, please. The suckouts cost less, variance is lower, but still plenty-o-money to be had due to passive play. I want to be the only aggressive player at the table.

JunkHead

[justdanutz]

thanks, for the responses and interesting insights.. i think a passive game with a high % sounds to be the best solution. also multi-tabling to reduce the variance was a great tip.

[brick]

[ QUOTE ]
The optimal number would be 100%.

[/ QUOTE ]