Leaving the Table

[EasyT]

This is a general question about leaving the table. Perhaps there is not ONE right answer.

I read here someone say that they they generally leave a table once they double up. Is this a common practice with practical backing, or just one guy's pattern. I can understand that if you're sitting at a $10 max buy in with $60, you'll become a target. I also realize that a table which let you get this far ahead is one I'm not anxious to walk away from.

Even on a 'good' table, is there a downside to staying one place too long? At Micro-limits where I play (.10 or .25 BBs), should I move at regular intervals, or just find a good table and take the time to get solid reads on the other players?

All thoughts welcome.

[dalecooper]

It only becomes a disadvantage if your style is easily readable... if you feel people are figuring you out and the same one or two guys are always in pots with you, bleeding you off, it's time to either switch gears or switch tables.

{This post has been removed}

What Rippy said, but if you think that the table is playing better poker than you and you are up, then I would consider quitting while you're winning.

[dalecooper]

What Rippy said, but if you think that the table is playing better poker than you and you are up, then I would consider quitting while you're winning.

Exactly. If you find yourself dropping slowly but surely, and you feel a couple guys at the table are doing the damage (and they're outplaying you, not just getting better cards) - that's a good point at which to change it up, or get out of the game. Table selection is important, and just because the table was good at first doesn't mean it always stays that way.

Rippy can be excluded from this analysis, because his "my penis in your crying face" hold 'em style is immune to any such remote possibilities.

[Sed]

Wasn't there a recent post on changes in table dynamics that might be useful?

- sed

[Sed]

...until I was totally exhausted and used my leverage to rape them for almost an entire day.

Uhm... that could be taken out of contex.

Anyway, how does playing a big stack compare between a MTT and a ring game...

- sed

[Zangief]

Wasn't there a recent post on changes in table dynamics that might be useful?

I would love it if someone would post a link to that.

I was the big stack at my table this past weekend and didn't really know what to do with it. I'm guessing you just want to make bets that are large in relation to their stacks but small in relation to your own. But how do you avoid overextending yourself?

[BigmacAg]

I think that it could be that some players do not know how to properly use a big stack, and so would rather cash out their winnings and start again with a normal stack like they are used to. That way they only need to learn how to play one way.

The other possibility is that they have preset limits to how much they are willing to win / lose and will walk no matter what once they reach that limit.

While I don't advocate either of these positions, I do know people who play like that.

[johnnyawe]

I dont understand why anyone would want to leave the table when they have stack leverage. Leave after you double up ? gimme a break...that defeats the entire purpose of trying to build a stack

when I won $3500 dollars at the Bike about a month ago....I played for 22 hours straight. This was a $100.00 max buy in table and my stacks were fuckin towers of POWER....why get up ? I played until I was totally exhausted and used my leverage to rape them for almost an entire day.

Rippy, I'll tell you exactly why you want to consider leaving with that $3500 stack. You go all-in pre-flop with AA, a guy with a $4000 stack calls with KK, he spikes his Kings and you lose everything. I have seen it happen on Party Poker. Not with $3500 but with 4x-8x the max buyin.

If you have leverage on EVERYONE at the table, then fine. Stick around. But if even one person has a simliar stack size, then you have got to give consideration to cashing out. If you do stay at the table, you risk losing everything unless you modify your play to be way more conservative when you're up against the other tall stack. And yes in some cases, if the game is good, it may be worth it to stay and do just that.

Everyone should chck out my very first post at FTR, which happens to deal with this topic.

[DrumzCT]

I love being the big stack (ok, who doesn't)

Raise Raise Raise

I make people pay big to see any cards. If I have a hand worth playing at all, it's worth raising big. That way if anyone wants to be in a hand with me, they pay big and i keep pushing. More often than not, if they miss the flop they fold. If theyre calling you down or re-raising, especially if they're re-raising then be careful and play accordingly.

Lower my starting hand requirements somewhat

suited connectors and such, even some gapped depending on position.
people get afraid of your raises so when you check or bet small, they let you go for fear of your wrath.
Great for drawing some monsters.

Bluff more

show some bluffs and also from your general raising and pushing around people will start to call you down thinking your full of crap even though your still playing quality hands, your just playing them hard.

Sets you up for a good take down when you get a monster

As always Im still learning so please point out any areas where you disagree. Constructive criticism is greatly appreciated! It's why Im here

Mike Caro asks why you would leave a table if you are up $17,000... You are up, granted you may be a target, but still you have quite a chip stack and you can take down little ones easily

[johnnyawe]

I love being the big stack (ok, who doesn't)

Raise Raise Raise

I make people pay big to see any cards. If I have a hand worth playing at all, it's worth raising big. That way if anyone wants to be in a hand with me, they pay big and i keep pushing. More often than not, if they miss the flop they fold. If theyre calling you down or re-raising, especially if they're re-raising then be careful and play accordingly.

Lower my starting hand requirements somewhat

suited connectors and such, even some gapped depending on position.
people get afraid of your raises so when you check or bet small, they let you go for fear of your wrath.
Great for drawing some monsters.

Bluff more

show some bluffs and also from your general raising and pushing around people will start to call you down thinking your full of crap even though your still playing quality hands, your just playing them hard.

I am sorry but that makes no sense because you can do all of those with an average size stack.

[DrumzCT]

Your right, re-reading it I didn't explain it that well.
I tend to rush posts when Im at work.

For the connectors and such I mentioned Ill call raises and play em in an earlier postion where I wouldn't normally.

raising I raise more often and much bigger amounts than I would regularly.

...and what I said about bluffing doesn't make sense in this context now that I read it over.


I think Ill leave the posting for lunch when I have time.

Your right, I did pretty much describe and aggressive player which has nothing to do with stack. I guess I just meant I turn things up in general all around, play more hands out of postition than I normally would.

[johnnyawe]

I still have to disagree with you Drumz.. Imean, why would it be profitable to play suited connectors and one-gappers out of position when you have a tall stack, but unprofitiable to play them when you have an average stack?

[dalecooper]

IMO the main advantage of a really big stack is the fear it inspires in other players. You can & will put them all in at any time - they should respect that. It gives you more semi-bluffing and total bluffing opportunities. So for that reason you can afford to play a few more hands that you'd normally let go. But I don't think you're really playing more hands for pure value - the expectation on any given hand is basically the same, unless you're using your stack for leverage. Limping hands like suited connectors and small pairs should be played exactly the same way as normal, unless you're going to raise with them and treat them as a stronger hand.

[DrumzCT]

If you can afford to see some flops than why not.
Im not saying fo crazy.

I was in a 5+1 sit n go last night where i was in first, ahead of 2nd place by about 2000 chips. People were limping in so i called with 68os and flopped the nut straight. won a big pot.

also, everyone limped in and i called with A4 suited. Hit an ace on the flop but somone bet, then a reraise so i just folded and it didnt cost me much of my stack at all.

If the preflop action is all limps, than why not see a few more flops and see if you catch someothing. Im not saying go crazy but I beleive having the lead gives you a bit more freedom.

[dalecooper]

If you can afford to see some flops than why not.
Im not saying fo crazy.
....
If the preflop action is all limps, than why not see a few more flops and see if you catch someothing. Im not saying go crazy but I beleive having the lead gives you a bit more freedom.

In a tournament this makes some measure of sense, but in a ring game there's no point to seeing more flops. Every flop is exactly as profitable or unprofitable if you are playing the same cards. Playing 89 suited with $50 is exactly as profitable as playing it with $500... the only difference being if you use your leverage to bluff, or if you hit a really good hand (the straight or flush) against a player who also has a really big stack and will pay you off. I don't think having more money at the table is by itself a good reason to see more flops. If your bankroll is big enough to absorb multiple buy-ins, you really don't need to consider stack size when deciding whether or not to enter a hand.

Again, tourneys exempted. There are other considerations besides raw profit in tournaments of any type.

[DrumzCT]

I do play almost eclusively sit n gos and mtt.
However, after losing one sng today after being the big stack, i tightened it back up alittle. My stack stayed big and was much steadier.
I sat back and let everyone else knock each other out and only played really good starting hands that i knew a reraise wouldnt get me to fold.

I took 2nd, ran into cowboys heads up.

dale and Johny's advice worked very well and my game was much more consistent.

Thanks guys

[johnnyawe]

Drumz, if you were talking about a tournament situation then all bets are off. It is an entirely different scenario, and your comment about "affording" to see some flops makes sense.

But in a cash game, that makes no sense whatsoever.

[DrumzCT]

Sorry, shoulda specified.