Table selection

Didn't play last night, just watched another session of Aussie Millions and poker after dark. However, I am pretty excited about logging another leg of the micro-limit adventures tonight. Friday nights and Saturday nights are the easiest in my opinion because all the loose recreational players like myself hit the tables. By 11 pm or later, most of us are smashed tired and playing piss poor poker!

One thing I have been considering is buying the pokertracker software. I already have poker-spy thanks to a deposit bonus extra from Absolute. But I don't find it all that useful anymore. Back to pokertracker - Every other posts seems to refer to this software as the greatest or some of the software's data/functionality to support their point. I don't really like the idea of laying out over $100 (getting it for both the hold em and omaha=$100 and $25 (I think) for the pokerace HUD add on) considering that is my typical bankroll deposit for a site. The reason I keep coming back to it is that table selection is a key to having a more enjoyable and profitable poker session.

It is no fun to play a table of tight nits that fold 90% of the hands and they only action you get is from the rock with a monster hand. I like to play a lot of hands but not when I keep getting creamed by the nuts or I only win the blinds - nobody likes to lose. Thus, you want loose tables that you get lots of action (more exciting) and can win at more often (also more exciting).

Here is a good post/blog entry for the law school drop out (no longer an active blog, but much more useful and exciting archived posts) that should help define a "good" table.

So first step is building up a robust PT database full of statistics on your opponents. Even when I'm busy with schoolwork and other responsibilities that don't let me play poker, I make sure that my computer is actively datamining hands from many different sites so that when I finally do get around to playing, my database is as complete as I can make it. So what to do once you've got your PT database chalk full of statistics? Maybe I can best illustrate by giving an example of my typical table selection process. I login to the poker software, and open up as many tables as I can -- let's say I'm feeling like playing some full-ring limit games: I'll open up as many 20/40 and 30/60 tables as I can find. I've got PAHUD configured to show me the table's average VPIP and PFR statistics...(as many exotic stats as PT can tell you about your opponents, I really think that VPIP and PFR account for 98% of what the typical player needs to know to get a good read on the players at his table.) If the table's average VPIP is under 26, I'll close the table without a second thought. If it's over 30, I'll nearly always take a seat or get on the waiting list; that's a pretty damn good table. If it's between 26 and 29, I'll take a closer look at the individual players at the table. Think about the following things: just how many fish are seated? Is the higher-than-normal table VPIP a result of a bunch of rocks and one gigantic fish with a 90VPIP, or rather is it 5 or 6 slightly-loose players with VPIPs of 28 to 35? More importantly, where are the open seats at the table? I typically require at least 3 fish at any table in order to consider it play-worthy, but I'll accept just two (or even one) if I can sit to the immediate left of a super-LAG. How big are the chip stacks of the fish? If they're down pretty low, that may be an indication that they won't be around anymore by the time your name comes up off the waiting list. Are the fish at the table passive or extremely aggressive? A 45/7 fish is a completely different animal than a 50/33. If the 50/33 is one of only 1 or 2 fish at the table, I'll typically only sit if I can get a seat to his left, whereas it's easier to exploit a the weaknesses of a 45/7 regardless of position. Those VPIP numbers will obviously differ at a short-handed table...at a 5 or 6-handed table, I typically look for average table VPIPs of above 38, although as before I'll accept a 35-37 if I can get good position on a LAG.