I Am Done With Zoom Games (NL2)

The speed and convenience of fast tables are not enough to convince me these are worth playing. They also just feel so impersonal. I know this sounds kind of lovey dovey, but at a standard table I feel like I develop a kind of relationship with the other players, and it feels so important given that playing online can feel so isolating already. I'm sure people find throwables annoying, but I like them, even when someone is throwing a bucket of ice.

It also helps that my winrate at standard tables absolutely blows my zoom winrate out of the water - I chalk it up to being able to extract the fishs' stacks instead of them disappearing after every hand. Does anyone else experience this phenomenon with fast tables?

I wonder if zoom is trying to emulate multi-tabling but have the advantage of not being caught in several good hands at once?

Bricxjo said:

I wonder if zoom is trying to emulate multi-tabling but have the advantage of not being caught in several good hands at once?

Click to expand...

I suppose so, but it really doesn't stop one from multi-tabling zoom games either. It just doesn't feel fun, except unless you're a grinder I guess.

What I like about the zoom tables is that you never stop playing ... What I don't like is that you can never read a player properly, since they are constantly changing. Good hands.

i'm realy hate zoom... for me the worst game... no read, i dont feel like a real poker game...

You need to get used to your opponents to understand and beat them. Zoom won't let you do that.

Kaleiduo said:

The speed and convenience of fast tables are not enough to convince me these are worth playing. They also just feel so impersonal. I know this sounds kind of lovey dovey, but at a standard table I feel like I develop a kind of relationship with the other players, and it feels so important given that playing online can feel so isolating already. I'm sure people find throwables annoying, but I like them, even when someone is throwing a bucket of ice.

It also helps that my winrate at standard tables absolutely blows my zoom winrate out of the water - I chalk it up to being able to extract the fishs' stacks instead of them disappearing after every hand. Does anyone else experience this phenomenon with fast tables?

Click to expand...

I get you, and I do think that the normal cash game tables have more fish/weak players on them as well. Now "Zoom" (as it's called on pokerstars) does have a few advantages tho, you can pick the hands you play & so move on quickly to play many hands eventually. Also I like the feature that when you push all-in (except on river ofc) you still have the chance to cash-out according to the odds, I have to say you have to be smart with that though cuz I already burned myself with it lol, KK vs a donkey who needed to push all the way with AQ preflop, but ye I wanted the pot so without thinking I just choose to resume the hand, offcourse he gets an ace and I lose my 20-25$ stack :/ so you should use that feature to build more safety into your play and so reduce variance.

Lieutenant_OH7 said:

I get you, and I do think that the normal cash game tables have more fish/weak players on them as well. Now "Zoom" (as it's called on pokerstars) does have a few advantages tho, you can pick the hands you play & so move on quickly to play many hands eventually. Also I like the feature that when you push all-in (except on river ofc) you still have the chance to cash-out according to the odds, I have to say you have to be smart with that though cuz I already burned myself with it lol, KK vs a donkey who needed to push all the way with AQ preflop, but ye I wanted the pot so without thinking I just choose to resume the hand, offcourse he gets an ace and I lose my 20-25$ stack :/ so you should use that feature to build more safety into your play.

Click to expand...

For that feature zoom on pokerstars is good however the ps software is trash and will start lagging already when you open a 2nd table (regardless of pc specs), also the rewards or bonus u get on pokerstars is 2nd to none. Another thing that I expierenced but that might be personal is that I tend to play more loose in zoom, on partypoker for example, the zoom there works very quick..

I don't like zoom tables, I only play them when I'm impatient
I prefer the regular tables too, mostly because I can read my opponents better than when I'm playing zoom.

I only play zoom for fun , jumping from one hand to the other , different tables , less exploitation by regs or better players . If played correctly , with right 3bets and amount of bets in these 3bets , if shove ranges are good , you'll be profitable , or at least you won't lose money . The good with zoom , the same as with spins , is that you generate rake fast , for the rakeback . But with spins , flash edition , it's better for this cause

If only you could keep your stack for more time while you sit out , a whole day , or a lot more up to a stck of 5 buy ins , or 500 blinds , or 400 blind only maximum Why not , go and return wheever you want , the tables are different , the players are different , the stacks are no the same , don't see the problem

antonis32123 said:

I only play zoom for fun , jumping from one hand to the other , different tables , less exploitation by regs or better players . If played correctly , with right 3bets and amount of bets in these 3bets , if shove ranges are good , you'll be profitable , or at least you won't lose money . The good with zoom , the same as with spins , is that you generate rake fast , for the rakeback . But with spins , flash edition , it's better for this cause

If only you could keep your stack for more time while you sit out , a whole day , or a lot more up to a stck of 5 buy ins , or 500 blinds , or 400 blind only maximum Why not , go and return wheever you want , the tables are different , the players are different , the stacks are no the same , don't see the problem

Click to expand...

I think you're right. I started playing zoom again for short 10 min sessions on mobile, tightening my range, 4-betting a little more, more delayed c-bets, strategic river bluffs, and it's been working out better. Been winning a lot more stacks this way.

Even 2 years ago I would have fully supported you but over time a lot of things start to stop like something new you start to like it more at the moment this format of the game is very exciting for me and I'm quite good at playing it.

Kaleiduo said:

It also helps that my winrate at standard tables absolutely blows my zoom winrate out of the water - I chalk it up to being able to extract the fishs' stacks instead of them disappearing after every hand. Does anyone else experience this phenomenon with fast tables?

Click to expand...

This is 100% normal and can attributed mainly to the fact, that normal tables play so much looser than Zoom tables. You can just look at the players per flop numbers in the lobby. There is a huge difference between Zoom and regular tables, especially since PokerStars limited players to a maximum of 4 normal tables.

The issue with Zoom is, that it appeals a lot to grinders, but it actually does not appeal all that much to beginners. For them the fast action might be to much, and they might also enjoy it less to face new opponents in every hand.

And even when beginners do occationally find their way to a Zoom table, then the format help them correct their biggest mistake, which is playing to many hands. If I run the filter "facing limps" in my PT4 database, this happened way more often on regular tables than Zoom tables.

The obvious reason is, that if people on a normal table look down on a somewhat playable hand like K4s, they might be tempted to limp and try to see a cheap flop to avoid getting bored. In Zoom however they can just fold and be dealt a new hand right away.

Bricxjo said:

I wonder if zoom is trying to emulate multi-tabling but have the advantage of not being caught in several good hands at once?

Click to expand...

This is the one legitimate advantage, I find with Zoom games. Playing one Zoom table give you about the same volume as playing three regular tables, but you are never forced to devide your attention between multible tables. This surely lead to less errors in individual hands, but on the downside it is also much more difficult to get any kind of read on your opponents. If for instance someone open to an unusually large size, you will have no idea, if this is his normal size, or if he does it, because he have aces or kings.

After the introduction of ante in zoom, it became quite difficult to play plus, especially if you often do not get good hands, in addition, players on micro limits became even more aggressive and preflop all-in increased, turning the zoom into a coinflip.

Kaleiduo said:

The speed and convenience of fast tables are not enough to convince me these are worth playing. They also just feel so impersonal. I know this sounds kind of lovey dovey, but at a standard table I feel like I develop a kind of relationship with the other players, and it feels so important given that playing online can feel so isolating already. I'm sure people find throwables annoying, but I like them, even when someone is throwing a bucket of ice.

It also helps that my winrate at standard tables absolutely blows my zoom winrate out of the water - I chalk it up to being able to extract the fishs' stacks instead of them disappearing after every hand. Does anyone else experience this phenomenon with fast tables?

Click to expand...

I don't like to play at zoom tables, I prefer normal or standard tables, it is better to know each rival and take advantage of each one according to their game. That is the relationship you feel with each player. You can even play a part by throwing them, eggs, cakes, trophies, ..., and have a different time.

I find zoom exhausting. Even more than multi-tabling. I only force myself to play a freeroll once a week because the value is quite good, but I don't like it one bit.