8 replies to this topic

[rescue123]

Hello everyone,One quick question for you guys out there that can help me. My question is all about table control in NL ring games.My style of play is pretty simple, people call me erratic but hey it works for me and I make pretty decent $$ with that style of play. But my biggest problem right now is when I first sit at a table. I want control of that table because it suites my style alot better and of course makes it easier to play.Now here is what I want to know.1. What are some good ways to gain control of a table without affecting my wild table image.2. How long does it take on average to take over control.3. Are there certain types of players I should avoid When I attempt a take over???thanks.By the way awesome site :-)

[akishore]

my style is similar, but i ONLY do it when my opponents are weak (readable) and/or the game is tight. if the game is loose, or if my opponents are tricky and samrt, you need to back down and let the table run itself and just take advantage of the good opportunies.i'll try to answer the questions.1. What are some good ways to gain control of a table without affecting my wild table image.i don't completely understand the question.how do you take control of a table without seeming wild? keep being aggressive but be serious the whole time, and muck all your cards except the strong ones. this way, you don't look wild and people will respect your bets and raises when they realize he's being serious with the goods and is probably just on a rush right now.if instead you mean, how do i control a table AND have a wild image, it's simple; just show a lot of crazy bluffs along with strong/monster hands, put in the occasional live straddle, call down with ace/king-high one time and be disappointed when it's no good.2. How long does it take on average to take over control.this is totally variable. it takes me on average maybe 2-5 rounds, so between 10-30 minutes.3. Are there certain types of players I should avoid When I attempt a take over???calling stations / sheriffs and, to a lesser extent, maniacs.good luck,aseem

[DCWildcat]

To me, erraticism and control of a table don't really go hand-in-hand. Usually taking control is mostly a byproduct of an intimidating table image at the lower stakes, so try to cultivate that. You need more time at the higher stakes tables to gain respect. A lot more time.

[akishore]

DCWildcat said:

To me, erraticism and control of a table don't really go hand-in-hand. Usually taking control is mostly a byproduct of an intimidating table image at the lower stakes, so try to cultivate that. You need more time at the higher stakes tables to gain respect. A lot more time.

amen, brother.playing scared at the $100 NL tables has taught me to be fiercely aggressive at the $20 NL ones.aseem

[TheIceman05]

Strong players respect skillful play and aggression. If you're looking to project a strong and powerful table image, don't be indecisive, and don't lose any big pots early. Don't get caught bluffing. Don't get your hand caught in the cookie jar. Don't get snapped off by bottom pair. Don't get into pissing matches.Play aggressive poker, but to garner respect you're going to need to show the goods first, then start taking advantage of that respect by smacking people in the face with your dick. I guess I'm not sure what you want. Do you want to be the maniac who everyone tries to pick off? If so, be a maniac, but be hypersensitive to traps, weak-leads, and someone putting a move on you. Do you want to be a maniac whom people avoid? Coming over the top of a check-raise, and calling an all in when you're relatively certain that someone's putting a move on you will INSTANTLY give you serious SERIOUS control over a table. My best friend is a very strong NL player, and he's hyper aggressive. But he's good enough to understand when something's fishy, and make some kind of sick call with AQ unimproved on the river. At that point, everyone at the table just CAN'T **** with him anymore, because he's full of shit a lot, but you can't just take a pot away.I'm babblingIce

[highstackpoker]

I know a lot of people on this site don't like 2+2 and associates a whole lot, but I for one do. In one of the books written by Mason Malmuth, he writes an essay called: "whats important" I think you should go read that. What your asking really isn't important and doesn't really affect your win rate at all, which is of course the bottom line.

[JaysonWeber]

highstackpoker said:

I know a lot of people on this site don't like 2+2 and associates a whole lot, but I for one do.  In one of the books written by Mason Malmuth, he writes an essay called: "whats important"  I think you should go read that.  What your asking really isn't important and doesn't really affect your win rate at all, which is of course the bottom line.

We don't have anything Against 2+2... I enjoy the Forum and Read the books..Just playful banter, oh and David knows how to backpedal better than most Politicians..

[DCWildcat]

There have been some good ideas so far. After those, your second best option is to imitate Bill Fillmaff.At low stakes tables, tell them you play "this one game called deuce to seven triple draw." Or Kansas City Lowball. Anything with a cool sounding name (that they don't understand or have only vaguely heard about, esp. in a cursory glance of Super System). That alone should garner you plenty of respect.

[akishore]

DCWildcat said:

There have been some good ideas so far. After those, your second best option is to imitate Bill Fillmaff.At low stakes tables, tell them you play "this one game called deuce to seven triple draw." Or Kansas City Lowball. Anything with a cool sounding name (that they don't understand or have only vaguely heard about, esp. in a cursory glance of Super System). That alone should garner you plenty of respect.

lmao!aseem