|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 11/20/2008 2:00:18 PM PACIFIC |
 Saturation point?, MozMan, 22. Nov 2003 17:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hey- Have any of you math geniuses ever figured out what the saturation point of fish is for a given table? Here's what I mean: We like to sit down with a fish who will play any two cards, very passively, all the way to the river. He puts bad beats on us, but in the long haul, we take a lot of money from him. But when there are multiple fish at the table, it becomes increasingly difficult to win any hands; directly proportionate to the number of bad players of this type. At some point, the game is no longer profitable, because so many players will call down that it becomes more likely that one of them will catch perfectly, and they start trading all of the chips all night. So what is the saturation point? How many bad players does it take to make the game un-profitable? -Moz "Looks like we caught us another customer, Eddie." | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Saturation point?, PairTheBoard, 22. Nov 2003 18:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| If it's a 10 player game then the saturation point is at the 10th player. When the 10th player becomes a fish the game is no longer profitable for you. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Saturation point?, Phish, 23. Nov 2003 21:13 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Nov 2003 18:13 PairTheBoard wrote: > If it's a 10 player game then the saturation point is at the 10th player. When the > 10th player becomes a fish the game is no longer profitable for you. I agree. Funny when I hear people complaining how they can't beat a game cause their opponents play too bad. Maybe they just don't realize that they're the biggest fish at the table. There is a proper winning strategy for any game with at least one true fish. Failure to find that proper strategy, and instead just continuing to play the same old way, may make you the biggest fish. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Saturation point?, Lou Krieger, 29. Nov 2003 16:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Nov 2003 17:33 MozMan wrote: "Have any of you math geniuses ever figured out what the saturation point of fish is for a given table? Here's what I mean: We like to sit down with a fish who will play any two cards, very passively, all the way to the river. How many bad players does it take to make the game un-profitable?" Adding weak, passive players who call far too often to the game does not make the game worse; it simply increases the variance. In the final analysis, if you can't beat a table full of passive calling station, you have to wonder who you can beat? In the long run -- and that might be a very long time in coming -- you figure to make a lot more money from a table full of calling stations that you would from a table with 3 calling stations and 6 good players. ______ Lou Krieger Raise your game with Lou Krieger, author of "Poker For Dummies" and five other books about poker, at Royal Vegas Poker http://www.royalvegaspoker.com/lou | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Saturation point?, Brian462, 29. Nov 2003 20:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think the number would be much larger than 10 so you don't have to worry about your game being too fishy. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|