Online poker games not as loose as they used to be?

J

JoeXRay

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Total posts
4
Chips
0
Hi Everyone,

I've been reading low limit books lately (by Jones and by Malmuth, Sklansky, and Miller) that describe low limit games as very loose, with 6 to 8 players typically seeing the flop. But playing on Party Poker, that hasn't been my experience. They seem to be playing very tight at limits as low as 10/20 cents! The other low limit tables, like $1/$2 seem to be just as tight. Is this just a case of everyone else reading the same books, and tightening up? I wonder if the tactics I learn by reading books aimed at very loose games will hold at these tight low limit tables.

Joe
 
Dorkus Malorkus

Dorkus Malorkus

HELLO INTERNET
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Total posts
12,422
Chips
0
There are always loose micro tables at Party - you most likely just need to hone your table selection skills a little.

Oh, and play 6-max if you want really loose opponents.
 
Last edited:
spore

spore

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 4, 2006
Total posts
491
Chips
0
are we talking No Limit or Limit Hold'em. The low limit tables I've played online (at limit tables), are very loose with 75-90% of player seeing the flop.
 
t1riel

t1riel

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 20, 2005
Total posts
6,919
Awards
1
Chips
16
JoeXRay said:
Hi Everyone,

I've been reading low limit books lately (by Jones and by Malmuth, Sklansky, and Miller) that describe low limit games as very loose, with 6 to 8 players typically seeing the flop. But playing on Party Poker, that hasn't been my experience. They seem to be playing very tight at limits as low as 10/20 cents! The other low limit tables, like $1/$2 seem to be just as tight. Is this just a case of everyone else reading the same books, and tightening up? I wonder if the tactics I learn by reading books aimed at very loose games will hold at these tight low limit tables.

Joe

If they are playing tight, that's the time to play aggressive and steal some blinds and pots.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
JoeXRay said:
Hi Everyone,

I've been reading low limit books lately (by Jones and by Malmuth, Sklansky, and Miller) that describe low limit games as very loose, with 6 to 8 players typically seeing the flop. But playing on Party Poker, that hasn't been my experience. They seem to be playing very tight at limits as low as 10/20 cents! The other low limit tables, like $1/$2 seem to be just as tight. Is this just a case of everyone else reading the same books, and tightening up? I wonder if the tactics I learn by reading books aimed at very loose games will hold at these tight low limit tables.

Joe
Not sure about "very tight" at limits as low as $.10/$.20, but it's true that you rarely see 6-8 people seeing a flop even at the very lowest limits. 4-5 is common, 8 isn't. The kind of games Ed Miller is referring to are more common live than online, I'm told, for what that's worth.

Still, those books will work wonders online as well. Trust me. The tactics you learn will hold, and hold well, because even if everyone reads the books, they don't play by them.
 
A

Allsopp

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Total posts
113
Chips
0
this is why the textbook tight aggressive style simply DOES NOT WORK.

you cant read a book and play well at poker. this comes from playing ALOT and losing ALOT in very many different circumstances.

people that tell you that the tight aggressive style is profitable in the long term in online poker may have a bankroll. but they are not financially lucrative players. they make grind out a very small profit but they will never earn enough to really withdraw anything or achieve anything.

good poker is all about switching gears and knowing when to pounce on the weak. cards aren't really that important. not very many hands actually go to a showdown.

read a book on tight aggressive play because this is common sense poker. then adapt it to your own winning style. following a premium hand chart wont win you anything. because premium hands very often dont win anything.
 
J

JoeXRay

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Total posts
4
Chips
0
Thanks Dorkus, I'll try the 6-max tables. I haven't been playing those.

As a little experiment, I just monitored two tables chosen at random (not a great method, I realize) at party poker. I'm looking at the $1/$2 limit games, and I pulled up a table called "Third Wish" and another table called "Mordialloc". Over 7 hands, I recorded how many people are seeing the flop. This is what I saw:

table 1 (Third Wish)
0
4
4
3
3
4
4


table 2 (Mordialloc)
0
0
2
3
3
0
2


I realize that this small sample doesn't mean a lot by itself, but it seems typical of the games I find. Maybe I just need to look harder for the looser games, or take t1riel's advice and be more aggressive in those situations.

Joe
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
Allsopp said:
this is why the textbook tight aggressive style simply DOES NOT WORK.

you cant read a book and play well at poker. this comes from playing ALOT and losing ALOT in very many different circumstances.

people that tell you that the tight aggressive style is profitable in the long term in online poker may have a bankroll. but they are not financially lucrative players. they make grind out a very small profit but they will never earn enough to really withdraw anything or achieve anything.

good poker is all about switching gears and knowing when to pounce on the weak. cards aren't really that important. not very many hands actually go to a showdown.

read a book on tight aggressive play because this is common sense poker. then adapt it to your own winning style. following a premium hand chart wont win you anything. because premium hands very often dont win anything.
I appreciate the sentiment that you're getting at, but I think you're overgeneralizing to the point of, if not being wrong, at least bending the truth to its maximum.

I agree that no book in the world will help you without experience.

I agree that not pouncing on the weak opposition and choosing your times to make moves means that you're missing opportunities to make a solid profit.

I, and this is where we may disagree, do think that reading books is the most efficient step on the way to becoming a real winner. Reading a book like Small Stakes Hold 'em isn't going to automatically make you a winner, because it's not enough that you read it - you have to actually play by it. Many of the ideas in this book won't be absorbed until you've played thousands of hands and get the experience necessary to digest them. The same goes for all books, or at least all that I've read.

I'm not sure at what point you actually need to play non-ABC poker to be able to win at all, then again, I'm not a high stakes player. The highest limits I've played with more than just one session at so far is $5/$10. But if you qualify ABC-poker as ignoring who you're playing against and simply just raising according to a hands chart, then I agree with you - reads, even if they're just poker tracker percentages, are invaluable, and should be taken into account. But good books should point this out, and do.

And, as a sidenote, it's the premium hands I make most of my money off of. High pocket pairs and AK/AQ are the big winners in my database.

But, again, we may be using different definitions. I'm cashing out regularly, and although I'm far from a highroller, I'm pretty happy about my winrate so far. But I don't have any aspirations to become a professional - I'm happy with a few dollars here and there to buy some new toys with occasionally.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
JoeXRay said:
table 1 (Third Wish)
0
4
4
3
3
4
4
Was this a full table? Because if this was a 6-max table, it's a pretty loose table. If it's a full ring, it's tighter than I expected it to be. It was awhile since I logged on to Party, but don't they have a column in their lobby that states how many percent of the players see the flop? "Plrs/flop" it's called at pokerstars and I usually pick the table with the highest number there if I can't immediately find any of my old, ehm, friends.
 
T

thechern

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 26, 2006
Total posts
131
Chips
0
spore said:
are we talking No Limit or Limit Hold'em. The low limit tables I've played online (at limit tables), are very loose with 75-90% of player seeing the flop.


the low limit tables are almost impossible toforce people to fold/bluff because pre flop on 10/20c its like 30 c to see a flop and thats with a raise. I always try to raise preflop limit games and it never works i end up with 4 or 5 callers who either hit or check then you can bet big and force them out of the hand.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
thechern said:
I always try to raise preflop limit games and it never works i end up with 4 or 5 callers
I'm not sure why this is a problem. If you have a good hand, you don't want them to fold. The extremely-ultra-ohmygod-important point here is that your aim is not to win many pots, your aim is to win a lot of money. If five people call your raise, you will not win as often as if only one of them called, but you will earn a lot more the times you do win the pot.

People calling raises is not a problem. It's the mother of all opportunities.
 
J

JoeXRay

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Total posts
4
Chips
0
F Paulsson said:
Was this a full table? Because if this was a 6-max table, it's a pretty loose table. If it's a full ring, it's tighter than I expected it to be. It was awhile since I logged on to Party, but don't they have a column in their lobby that states how many percent of the players see the flop? "Plrs/flop" it's called at PokerStars and I usually pick the table with the highest number there if I can't immediately find any of my old, ehm, friends.

Yeah, these were 10 player tables, and they were full. I've seen the players per flop at PokerStars, but partypoker doesn't have that option (as far as I can tell). They tell you # of players, average pot size, and hands per hour.

By the way, I think you're right that lots of people will read a book, but few will study it, and fewer still will apply it.

Joe
 
A

Allsopp

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 19, 2006
Total posts
113
Chips
0
F Paulsson said:
I appreciate the sentiment that you're getting at, but I think you're overgeneralizing to the point of, if not being wrong, at least bending the truth to its maximum.

I agree that no book in the world will help you without experience.

I agree that not pouncing on the weak opposition and choosing your times to make moves means that you're missing opportunities to make a solid profit.

I, and this is where we may disagree, do think that reading books is the most efficient step on the way to becoming a real winner. Reading a book like Small Stakes Hold 'em isn't going to automatically make you a winner, because it's not enough that you read it - you have to actually play by it. Many of the ideas in this book won't be absorbed until you've played thousands of hands and get the experience necessary to digest them. The same goes for all books, or at least all that I've read.

I'm not sure at what point you actually need to play non-ABC poker to be able to win at all, then again, I'm not a high stakes player. The highest limits I've played with more than just one session at so far is $5/$10. But if you qualify ABC-poker as ignoring who you're playing against and simply just raising according to a hands chart, then I agree with you - reads, even if they're just poker tracker percentages, are invaluable, and should be taken into account. But good books should point this out, and do.

And, as a sidenote, it's the premium hands I make most of my money off of. High pocket pairs and AK/AQ are the big winners in my database.

But, again, we may be using different definitions. I'm cashing out regularly, and although I'm far from a highroller, I'm pretty happy about my winrate so far. But I don't have any aspirations to become a professional - I'm happy with a few dollars here and there to buy some new toys with occasionally.

of course your going to win more hands with premium hands. because you play them more than 7 2 offsuit. thats common sense. you'll also lose alot more with them too.

what i am saying is at most levels 70% of the table is playing textbook tight aggressive common sense poker. thats why it doesn't really work unless you get a nice run of hands frequently. its important to switch gears all the time.

if you watch the pro's, how many of them actually play tight aggressive down to the finest detail? i dont see many at all.

if you stick to textbook tight aggressive poker your basically playing a game of luck rather than skill, because anyone can follow a hand chart and many do. but what if the cards dont come? or when they do, what if you lose with them? you generally lose big.

with a textbook tight aggressive style you cant turn out a decent profit everyday and turning out a decent profit EVERYDAY is what makes a good poker player. because they can consistently produce results.

how often have you sat in a tournament and not seen a premium hand in a 100 hands and you just blind and wittle out.

i read books and followed them to the wire. i am glad i did because i learnt how to play common sense poker. however they also made me naive as i believed i would become a successful player, playing tight aggressive. this isn't the case with many many many online players now all playing the same tactic.

my advice is, learn common sense poker and then exploit it.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
Allsopp said:
if you stick to textbook tight aggressive poker your basically playing a game of luck rather than skill, because anyone can follow a hand chart and many do. but what if the cards dont come? or when they do, what if you lose with them? you generally lose big.
What books are you referring to, specifically?

Edit: And, one more point: Looking to the pros for optimum play is a bogus assertment. JoeXRay isn't playing the same opposition as the pros. The style that a pro will play at his cash game table is very, very far from optimum at a low limit table.
 
Last edited:
starfall

starfall

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 7, 2005
Total posts
574
Chips
0
At Party, you can guess which tables are the loosest from looking at the average pot size, however this can equally mean that you've got some ultra-aggressive players at the table, which would instead mean that every pot gets raised pre-flop, which is fine if you can handle the swings and play against that kind of player, but probably not ideal for a beginner ABC player.
This is one of the reasons that I haven't played at Party that much, despite it having a reputation for fish - it is missing the key indicator of a good, loose table - the % seeing the flop - from their lobby stats.
Almost every other site has this information, and it's invaluable. If you want to play basically ABC poker (with or without a few enhancements from your own experience), then you ideally want a loose full ring game, and therefore you want to be able to identify those tables quickly and easily, which you can't at Party, but you can at Stars, Pacific, Paradise, SportingOdds, 32red, you name the site apart from Party, really.

Some other things to note. The loosest players tend to be at the lowest stakes for the site. This means on Stars the very loose games are 0.02/0.04. On some others it's 0.50/1.00, because those are the lowest stakes they do. For getting some cheap experience, then, Stars is good, while the 0.50/1.00 tables at other sites may be more profitable for you because they may well be looser.

The looseness of sites will also vary depending on their active promotions, etc. When a site has just launched and people have money won from freerolls and the like during beta, then they'll be playing very loose because they won't care much about the money. Equally, when a site is doing a lot of advertising in non-poker media (e.g. lads mags or TV or on public transport), then they'll get more non-serious poker players joining up, and those players will tend to more often be the loose-passive type. Sites like SportingOdds will get players who have won money from a bet on the horses or the like, who fancy a 'flutter' on the poker tables, so you may find looser players on those sites often...

Time of day also affects things. If you log on at times when drunk people will be coming home and logging on, then you'll get looser, more aggressive games, while at some hours (e.g. during working hours), you'll get tighter games.

There's a lot more to it than just games getting tighter... there's various things you can look for to find looser games. I've seen an Omaha H/L ring game with 7 players where 96% were seeing the flop at $0.50/1 stakes... (and yes, it was a profitable table :) )
 
J

JoeXRay

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Total posts
4
Chips
0
Thanks David,

Yeah, I've seen that other sites have the %-people-seeing-the-flop statistic, and that looks really helpful. If Party isn't going to have that, they should at least have a %-people-who-are-drunk statistic.... :)

I'll pay more attention to time of day, and see if I can find a trend. Depositing money into online casinos is such a pain, I'd like to try to stick it out with Party for now, unless it just becomes unbearable.

Thanks for the advice!

Joe
 
Top 10 Games
Top