No. These days, the rule I am working off is "don't be the largest bettor at the table".Originally Posted by Half Smoke
So I am looking for a table that has at least 1, preferably 2 (often together) players betting $600-$800 ($1000 even better) range regularly. When I find that, I can spread to $800 and my max bet which I only bet 5-7% of the time, is roughly the same as their bets every round. The rest of the rounds I am well below them. THAT is what provides the cover.
And if I can find a table where someone is betting even larger, (like $1500-$2000 regularly), then I can spread up to $1200. Most of the time my max is $800 though. That is my ideal target because it stays below the key $1000 threshold. The conditions for a $1200 max bet level for me are mostly only found on a really busy big event type Saturday night.
And sometimes like tonight (Friday night into Saturday) if it is not as crowded as I would like and I can't find as many tables with someone betting what I need and want, I will knock my Max down to $600 or even $500. I can almost always find tables with someone betting that amount on a weekend night. That doesn't result in the kind of EV I am looking for, but better than nothing and adds up. And if I have to settle for that smaller amount, it probably isn't quite as crowded and possibly I can get a game that moves a little faster than a full table, which will make up for some of that lost EV. I can also make up lost EV by Max betting slightly earlier.
This strategy seems to be working because I am getting far fewer backoffs now that I used to. It is not really an apples-to-apples comparison since I also play a lot less volume than I used to. It is a trade off.....larger average Max bet, but less rounds.
Reply With Quote