Hi guys

Be prepared for the following to sound extremely contradicting. Would any of you say that there is some validity to the argument that there are fishy winning players? Playing both online and live, I have come across tons of fishy regs, whom always seem to be building up quite a few BB/ buy ins. From playing against them, I've labelled these players as fishy, due to their poor bet sizing and pre-flop actions, which led me to believe they have never picked up a book about poker or have any mathematical insight towards the game. But they seem to be winning players (grain of salt).

This got me to thinking- are there different roads to success in this game? Most of the best players I have come across all seem to have a studious nature towards the game. They are constantly studying hand reading, bet-sizing, tells, equities, etc. However, would you say it's possible for the previous to be relatively unimportant compared to putting in many hours on the table? Would it be possible to ignore the mathematical/studious side of the game and still find success these days?

Lastly, regarding the first paragraph, is it fair to label players who seem to often be winning as fishy due to their bet sizing and pre&post flop actions?

Well ,labeling players have always been a part of the game (or players that study and enjoy poker).Success however for these (fishy) players are short lived. The real downswing to having this type of player at the same table as you. Is that it keeps a real player from preforming at their optimum level of play,or the simple fact that these players are getting nothing but lucky, and a real player would be placing their tournament life on the line if he/she tries and put this player out of weaken them quickly. Just swim in your pond and let these fish get caught.

It seems rather obvious that some fish are successful.
Just take an imaginary sample of 10 000 fish. Out of 10k there have to be some that are successful. Its statistically very improbable that they all go losing.
You can even extend this further. Take 10k successful fish. Even somee of them will continue winning for a while. So out of all those fish, there definitely are some that can be (very) successful.

However:
1) fish that win will most likely not keep winning. If they play enough hands, their poor play will cause them to lose in the end. This can take a while to manofest though.
2) If they do keep winning, your definities of fish might not be accurate. To me the definition of a fish is someone who doesn't (always) have the discipline to fold when he should. Improper bet sizing doesn't matter that much compared to engaging in a pot where you're unfavored.

So all in all: yes some fish are successful, but if they truly are fish, they won't be for long.

Hi Rorz1012 and welcome to Cardschat. I know getting beat by those crap hand players is tough and keeping yourself together is not an easy task. But I have met many players that target those tables and players, and that's how they make their money. I asked a players that I seen at those tables everyday, why did he keep playing at 10nl when he was a good enough player to play 25nl or even 50nl. And he said "why move up when I make good money off the fish at this level" Many players do this, and check each table for the most fish. I guess they make notes in order to know those players. As for me, I make no notes. I just don't have time, besides I can hold my own at my level, so I play with whoever's at my table. But don't get me wrong, I know a lot of players that I pretty much play with everyday. But I will play with whoever is at the table, and with them coming and going it's not easy to keep up with them all. One question. Would you like to play with all good players at the table, or with all crap hand players, as I call them, or with a mix of both? Well one thing is for sure, if you keep playing you are going to have to learn how to play them all. Just take your time, think through every hand, maybe fold more hands than you play. One more thing. You are not alone, Whatever you run into at the tables or anything else for that matter, we have been there and we understand and are here to help you anyway that we can. You post the questions and we will answer them GL to you

Is it possible that these are really good LAGs who've adapted well to the more well studied regs and are able to extract more information from their unexpected pre-flop play and bet sizing?

If you think about it, these "fish" are able to peg their more studied opponents on their ranges and what cards the latter have post flop from their awkward bet sizes. If they are successfully doing that then it appears that they know about ranges and standard bet sizing but excel in their exploitative play.

Originally Posted by Rorz1012

Hi guys

Be prepared for the following to sound extremely contradicting. Would any of you say that there is some validity to the argument that there are fishy winning players? Playing both online and live, I have come across tons of fishy regs, whom always seem to be building up quite a few BB/ buy ins. From playing against them, I've labelled these players as fishy, due to their poor bet sizing and pre-flop actions, which led me to believe they have never picked up a book about poker or have any mathematical insight towards the game. But they seem to be winning players (grain of salt).

This got me to thinking- are there different roads to success in this game? Most of the best players I have come across all seem to have a studious nature towards the game. They are constantly studying hand reading, bet-sizing, tells, equities, etc. However, would you say it's possible for the previous to be relatively unimportant compared to putting in many hours on the table? Would it be possible to ignore the mathematical/studious side of the game and still find success these days?

Lastly, regarding the first paragraph, is it fair to label players who seem to often be winning as fishy due to their bet sizing and pre&post flop actions?

Here is the simple answer. FISH don't win.

They may look like they are winning but in the long run they will lose. The problem is if you are not playing them heads up, they may win from you, and lose your money to somebody else. But in the long run they are roadkill.

If the fish does not sometimes win, then it leaves poker. To lose money is constantly uninteresting. And if you give the illusion of winning, the fish will play.

I am sure that their success is one-time and does not have a solid foundation. You can not win only hoping for luck. In the long run, they will still be a loser.

I think a true fish may win in the short term, but long term over thousands of hands they will end up loosing money. it also depends on who you label a fish.

The game does not belong to the smartest, rather those best able to adapt. Not every successful business person or poker player needs an MBA. They could be autodidactic and not need a sheepskin to be successful. Even a mechanic or home builder can use the skills from their trade to reach a high level of poker that others cannot relate to. Treat everyone that sits at the table as a potential foe until they walk away from the table.