Sniping at mixed ring games. Good way to make $$$?

HORSE, some say, is quickly becoming or already is the most prestigious event or form of poker, due to requiring great proficiency in all 5 games. But face it, at low limits, most people have a weakness or 2 at something.

Say you fancy yourself a good Razz or Omaha HL player. Instead of hitting a cash table in your specialty (with good competition), wouldn't it make more sense to snipe, sort of a hit and run? Like sit down at a HORSE table at the switch to your game, and then leave? Have a few tables up at a time, and lay in wait. This idea can be extended to 8-game, which includes PLO and 7-2 triple draw (where people have no idea what they're doing).

So...does anyone do this (or now intend to)?

Good idea...bad etiquete.
Sniping is no diffrent then ratholling imo....

sindri_93 said:

Good idea...bad etiquete.
Sniping is no diffrent then ratholling imo....

Click to expand...

Ratholling, what is that? I would agree, bad etiquette. I've never done it. It's just that the whole idea just occurred to me, and wondered if it was common practice. The whole idea would now make me nervous to sit at a horse cash game. So while it's bad etiquette, there are a lot of people out there who simply want to make as much money as possible, the ends justifying the means, within reason (they can rationalize they are not stealing or even breaking any rules). Was just looking for any thoughts or imput, so thanks!

Divebitch said:

Ratholling, what is that? I would agree, bad etiquette. I've never done it. It's just that the whole idea just occurred to me, and wondered if it was common practice. The whole idea would now make me nervous to sit at a horse cash game. So while it's bad etiquette, there are a lot of people out there who simply want to make as much money as possible, the ends justifying the means, within reason (they can rationalize they are not stealing or even breaking any rules). Was just looking for any thoughts or imput, so thanks!

Click to expand...

Ratholling is sitting in a game,winning money then leaving the game and returning with a smaller stack.
In the olden days that aperantly got your legs broken

Just seems like it'd be a pain in the ass...

i wouldn't do it i would rather be able to protect my hand in nl or pl games git rid of the garbage.
even in trny i like horse everymuch cause i execelleat all the games that are involed. i even like the 8 games. gl with what u decide.

It would probably only work in the bring-in games, like RAZZ and Stud. If you jumped in for Omaha, for instance, you'd have to wait for the big blind or post early. Since you'd only be staying until the game changes, that might eat into your profit.

I wouldn't worry too much about the etiquette of it, since online there's almost always someone to fill that seat.

Either way, you'd probably want to watch the table for a while first, because you wouldn't have much of a chance to get to know the players before the game switched.

Sounds like an interesting idea that would be very difficult to pull off.

PokerVic said:

It would probably only work in the bring-in games, like RAZZ and Stud. If you jumped in for Omaha, for instance, you'd have to wait for the big blind or post early. Since you'd only be staying until the game changes, that might eat into your profit.

I wouldn't worry too much about the etiquette of it, since online there's almost always someone to fill that seat.

Either way, you'd probably want to watch the table for a while first, because you wouldn't have much of a chance to get to know the players before the game switched.

Sounds like an interesting idea that would be very difficult to pull off.

Click to expand...

Some excellent points. I don't mind posting early. Actually, I don't mind the blinds at all if the cards are decent. Then the button is around the corner. I love the blinds preflop, and think first to act postflop when you hit can also be powerful. I prefer it over UTG thru mid position. But yeah, I can see cutting into the profits when you have a typical crappy hand. Really, I hadn't thought it through. Just something that popped into my head this morning.

Guess the idea would be watching a couple tables at a time while playing one. Typically a player's 'basic' style carries from one game to the next. Sure, you don't know how weak they are in your game, unless you spend way too much time observing. So must agree with c9h13no3, seems like a PITA.

Interesting yeah. My idea would be to play for higher stakes than usual if I was certain it could be profitable.

Dive...Hi there...In my opinion it would be way better to improve your own game in all 5 (or 8) games and then go for an even bigger ride. I have been practicing my 8-game these past few days and getting much better at triple draw and Razz where as 3 days ago I didnt have a clue as to how I would play either one of these.

Today I entered my first SnG 18 player $1 and came in 4th place. This is a weak return for so much time invested but I have a biggger amount of hands under my belt in these games. I feel good about the 4th place fininsh. Leading into the final table I was first or second for the whole game. Then I entered final in 4th and pretty much ended there.

Will try that again tomorrow.

Look on PS for the 8 Game FR. Usually happens once a day or at least every other from what I have seen. Times vary though

People do it in high stakes HORSE for the razz rotation all the time. Check out the 200/400 HORSE on PS sometime, especially on the weekends. People tend to be bad at razz, quite frankly, even the higher stakes HORSE players. It definitely seems profitable.

I suppose it could work if you care to spend your time waiting for marginal openings at irregular points in a game, instead of playing. Even if you found a few tables to watch with that strategy in mind, finding multiple or consistent openings during the segment you want to dominate could be quite if-fy.

I'm not positive, but I believe it was Doyle Brunson who said during an interview about his high stakes HORSE play (no pun intended) that there is almost always 1 of the 5 games that a player is less proficient at and recommended just backing down during that segment of the rotation.

Ratholing is also called shortstacking - fwiw.

kmixer said:

Dive...Hi there...In my opinion it would be way better to improve your own game in all 5 (or 8) games

Click to expand...

Well, possibly easier said than done. Would be nice.

skoldpadda said:

People do it in high stakes HORSE for the razz rotation all the time. It definitely seems profitable.

Click to expand...

I knew I couldn't be the 1st person who thought of this. Thanks.

nevadanick said:

I suppose it could work if you care to spend your time waiting for marginal openings at irregular points in a game, instead of playing. Even if you found a few tables to watch with that strategy in mind, finding multiple or consistent openings during the segment you want to dominate could be quite if-fy.

I'm not positive, but I believe it was Doyle Brunson who said during an interview about his high stakes HORSE play (no pun intended) that there is almost always 1 of the 5 games that a player is less proficient at and recommended just backing down during that segment of the rotation.

Ratholing is also called shortstacking - fwiw.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it did seem like a pain. Was just thinking that if you wanted to make a go of it, you'd watch a few tables at a time. Would have to be a site with a lot of action. Hmmm, your definition of ratholing is different. Far as private games, used to the friendly kind. No one 'hit and ran' unless they were really tired or gave advanced warning. God point of the 1 of 5 games. Was just thinking if you really excelled at 1 game, kinda like skoldpadda here. But yeah, I'll often sit out the holdem (cuz they play like it's NL, and not sure how to deal with these), and the stud to some extent.

Maybe sitting out could work, but I find that games like Razz are easy to beat at lower levels anyways that it is quite a waste of time. I would consider it more profitable if there were players that you knew had major weaknesses in a specific game and you would target that.

And yea my worst game is holdem but I play it sqeaky tight cause that way I might just win something on that rotation.

flint said:

Maybe sitting out could work, but I find that games like Razz are easy to beat at lower levels anyways that it is quite a waste of time. I would consider it more profitable if there were players that you knew had major weaknesses in a specific game and you would target that.

And yea my worst game is holdem but I play it sqeaky tight cause that way I might just win something on that rotation.

Click to expand...

Well, as I said somewhere, my thinking was to snipe your specialty at higher stakes. But to tell you the truth, and dont know for certain, but I'd suspect that even at the lower levels, players at a specific game like razz or PLO are more proficient and skilled than their same stakes counterpart at NLHE.

I'd think targeting a weakness is next to impossible in practice unless you're talking about HU. Doubt there is software for this on specific games people play, but no idea. Thanks for the input.

I'm guessing you are referring to online??if so..

I think online sniping or tqable hoping is done all the time...seems bad manners but very few ring tables seem that stable online anyhow,

popo12 said:

I think online sniping or tqable hoping is done all the time...seems bad manners but very few ring tables seem that stable online anyhow,

Click to expand...

It certainly is bad manners, and will often get the other players at the table very p/o'd. If that doesn't bother you (or that's the reason you're sniping in the first place), then I guess you can try it. It really does violate the spirit of a mixed game tho.

I can't see the value here, if you can make money sniping, why not just stay and play? Profit is profit.

SGspecial said:

It certainly is bad manners, and will often get the other players at the table very p/o'd. If that doesn't bother you (or that's the reason you're sniping in the first place), then I guess you can try it. It really does violate the spirit of a mixed game tho.

Click to expand...

There's no getting around the fact it's sneaky or conniving. But I didn't really know if it was 'bad manners' online, since as someone mentioned, there's always someone there to take your place. Just looking for any feedback, to see if this was common practice, good or bad idea and forwhat reasons.

LeanAndMean said:

I can't see the value here, if you can make money sniping, why not just stay and play? Profit is profit.

Click to expand...

Maybe my point was unclear. This practice would apply only to those who are expert in one particular area such as Razz or Omaha HL, so it would not necessarily be profitable for them in all 5 games.

Ever hear during HORSE, people bemoaning that they suck at Omaha or hate Razz? Many have weakness(es) somewhere whether they voice them or not.

Thanks to all for the input.

I would have to disagree about this being bad etiquette. I dont do this let me say that first. The fact that you are rarely playing with the same people if you are on a big site is 1 aspect. The other is as said the seat is gonna fill anyway. Live you may be playing the same people alot so jumping in and out would be rude, not to mention do it long enough they may not want to play with you at all. You would never want to risk getting kicked out of a potentially profitable game by doing this. Online someone always waiting to take your place. That being said if your at a small site playing 4-5 handed and your in and out in and out, you risk the game stopping or breaking up. Not sure what sites even have HORSE ring besides pstars and Tilt. The Merge sites i think might, but i dont think there are ever players there. Definitely agree about RAZZ being most peoples weakest links, which is strange since to me its the easiest to figure out the math/correct play etc.