Instead of going to the pub last night like I planned, I decided to stay in and get going on building my bank roll. I started too quick out of the blocks, making assumptions too quickly about players. Eagerness and poker are not usually the best of bed fellows. Luck was definitely not on my side either and before I knew it I was three buy-ins down (remembering that I only began with five). I steadied myself, gave myself a bit of a talking to and got back to some decent play. I was an astounding $1 in the black by the time I powered down.
A side effect of the session is that I went broke in two of my accounts and increased on the third. This leaves me in an awkward situation, as I didn’t want to deposit into any account unless that was balanced by a withdrawal from another. I’m starting with such a tiny bankroll (now $29 after last nights blazing glory) that I’m loathe to withdraw down too small in any one account. So I’m stuck with one account (iPoker) unless I deposit into some others. I think I should just bite the bullet and invest a little, otherwise I’m going to be stuck in the dark.
“The map is not the territory” ~ Alfred Korzybski, Philosopher & Scientist
Everyone who plays poker on the internet has an idea in their head as to what’s available. Many recreational players stick to just one site – the one they happened to sign up with first. As they get better they learn to pick the best tables from that site, the ones that they can beat. But the trouble is that just one site is frankly not enough if you’re going to get the best from what poker has to offer on the internet. The table selection just isn’t good enough.
On the smaller end of the scale, networks don’t offer enough of a player pool to choose from. The Microgamming network is a good example of this, where Ladbrokes poker languishes these days; you can wait all day for a decent table if all you can see is their list of cash tables.
With larger sites like PokerStars, I believe there are actually too many players, especially at the micro stakes cash tables. When a bad player gets hit a few times he will often disappear to another table, sparking mass table jumping from good players and bad players alike.
Bad players on smaller sites however, who don’t use any other network, feel like the don’t have anywhere to go and are more likely to stay at the same table losing until they go broke.
“If you can’t find a table you can beat, you’re not looking hard enough.” ~ Me
Table selection and player selection are crucial for cash poker players, and only checking out a small percentage of what’s on offer by sticking to one site, could be massively affecting your bottom line. The smarter and more aware players familiarise themselves with many networks and sites. And that’s what you should do. Yes Kid, you.
If you have at least one account with each of the major networks, and open them all up when you start your session, you can get a proper view of what’s there.
Good tables will occur far more frequently on large sites, simply because of the numbers, but they won’t last as long. Find a decent table on a smaller site and you might be able to stick there all night reaping the benefits.
I have to admit that I’m not good enough at this. So this afternoon’s task is to ensure that I’ve got as wide a view of the tables on offer as possible by making sure I’ve got an up to date account with some money in it on all the networks that I want to play on.