Poker Rooms,does it really matter?

Originally posted by ReStart37

My question is,if we play all day long vs mostly crazy fish,sure we will profit,but will we make it on higher limits?Because since we never played much with good players we will get owned at higher limits which will lead us to a downswing and constant tilt?I know it is suppose to take the money from the fish,because its easier,but isnt that a bit of an obstacle to our learning and even mental game(because win nice pots with them is so nice,we dont lose much)?On higher limits they wont be there,i think

So,to develop our game should we play where there are more fish,or should we go to thougher rooms?

To win in poker, we need to have an edge vs players at our tables. We use statistics software, spend lots of time reviewing hands, participating in forums, etc. with the intention of improving our game and somehow increase our "edge"... so more edge better results right?

That is why I believe that "table-selection" should be one of our top priority. Playing against weaker players or fishes should still be our main concern as regs because obviously we have higher edge. As long as we could still find fishes or weaker players at our limit, we should play with them.

If our concern is to improve our game, we should try to move up to the next higher limit rather than playing vs the regs in our current limit. I am not saying that we avoid the regs at our limit, because it is impossible. We still have to compete with them along with the fishes at our tables. At micros and low stakes, we need to focus on hunting fishes as long as we can, and then shift to hunting weaker regs as we reach a certain limit where fishes are scarce. Forcing ourselves to lock horns against good regs at our limit will just unnecessarily increase our variance. Unnecessary because it is avoidable but we choose it somehow.

To summarize my point, try to build your roll from fishes money and use it to move up to higher limits. If other sites are soft, then it is a good idea to transfer.

However, I play in PS only not because I think its soft but because I trust them and love their software, thats all. I have no idea how soft other sites so I could not comment on that.

Cheers

TBH the fact that so many regs want to play at Stars blows my mind. The competition is tough and you have to grind like a monkey to achieve a decent rakeback, while you get over 40% flat in many smaller and fishier rooms. I guess it's just a manifestation of some deep masochistic urges or something...

one word. Software.

Originally posted by fuzzyfish
TBH the fact that so many regs want to play at Stars blows my mind. The competition is tough and you have to grind like a monkey to achieve a decent rakeback, while you get over 40% flat in many smaller and fishier rooms. I guess it's just a manifestation of some deep masochistic urges or something...

Pokerstars may not give much rakeback, but there rake is much lower then most of the smaller rooms. Also it is much harder to get decent traffic in smaller rooms.

Originally posted by fuzzyfish
TBH the fact that so many regs want to play at Stars blows my mind. The competition is tough and you have to grind like a monkey to achieve a decent rakeback, while you get over 40% flat in many smaller and fishier rooms. I guess it's just a manifestation of some deep masochistic urges or something...

Can you just calculate EFFECTIVE rakeback and compare against stars and you will see.

You pay more rake and get larger RB at other sites but effective rake back is less than stars.

I somehow play at smaller site because with idea to support small site ♦ I mean not allow stars to have all monopoly ♦
BUt also the main reason is the strategy poits and rakeback.