Regular versus regular

I was just watching Sniderstyle's vid and he talks about table selection and that although he might be better than the majority of regulars there, he still doesn't want to play at tables with just regulars and exploit them because the edge is just a very small percentage and you should just look for fish. Now it's obviously best to play somebody that absolutely has no clue but it still got me to think.

Now, I am a 25NL/50NL donkey myself so I am not here to judge obviously but I always thought that even between regulars there could be a pretty big difference and one could have a very significant edge even. Like if a 1000NL'er drops down to 200NL or maybe even 400NL, in my eyes he'd have less leaks than the lower limit regulars and therefor has a pretty significant edge even over the regulars there.

Also I think that Myth's first vid shows a very good example of probably a competent regular that just 8+ tables and focusses purely on fish and therefor could be exploited very well since he has a very standardized game.

Now my general question or maybe even discussion point is, on what point do regulars pretty much even each other out and probably have very little edge over each other and upto what point are still a reasonable amount of the regulars playing with leaks that can generate a very nice part of your winrate.

i'm a microstakes fish, but the obvious answer is that you've gotta specify what you mean by "very little edge" because the nature of poker is that there will always be ways to exploit your opponent by being more perceptive and more intelligent. as far as profitability goes though, it's obviously always going to be more profitable to go fishing than to penetrate some shark's scales.

On August 27 2008 15:07 Kilay wrote: Now my general question or maybe even discussion point is, on what point do regulars pretty much even each other out and probably have very little edge over each other and upto what point are still a reasonable amount of the regulars playing with leaks that can generate a very nice part of your winrate.

Obv, it depends! This is not a question anyone can answer but yourself. When you're playing against regs at your stakes obviously you will have a huge edge over some (they will be slightly better than fish), and others may have an edge over you (the elite players at your stake). It also depends on your skill level. When you first move up to a certain stake you may only have an edge over the fish, and be break even or -ev against most regs. But the longer you play on that stake, the more your game improves, and this dynamic changes.

Most importantly, you need to look at this situation as a "one hand at a time" deal. Your edge isn't a set number that never changes, if you're playing on tilt you might not have an edge against anyone! Don't worry so much about "what my edge is." Just try to play your best game as often as possible and pick the softest tables possible and your "edge" will take care of its self. I think that's the point this guy is trying to make in this video (though I haven't seen it): Why play against regs when you can play against fish? As long as you can play against fish, do it!

-fish always have more leaks, and far more profitable ones.. thats why they are fish
-reg's are usually ~the same skill, if X reg crushes all others he will move up in no time

On August 27 2008 15:16 failsafe wrote: i'm a microstakes fish, but the obvious answer is that you've gotta specify what you mean by "very little edge" because the nature of poker is that there will always be ways to exploit your opponent by being more perceptive and more intelligent. as far as profitability goes though, it's obviously always going to be more profitable to go fishing than to penetrate some shark's scales.

Well until people eventually learn how to play unexploitably they will be exploitable obviously. But they will eventually learn it and its not in "the nature of poker" to always have an edge.

option 1 - play against bad players with huge leaks

option 2 - play against competent players

which option gives you higher expectation?

i guess to answer your question, some regs are better than others in different areas but they tend not to spew their stacks in bad spots like fish do

On August 27 2008 15:48 Yugless wrote: option 1 - play against bad players with huge leaks option 2 - play against competent players which option gives you higher expectation?

Well, that's fairly obvious but also not really the thing I am thinking about, I am more thinking about from what point does a regular generally have an edge over most other regulars. I mean, at a certain point the regulars mostly even out and I can imagine that at the nosebleed stakes almost any regular is on about the same skill level and it's basically just marginally +EV and brings a lot of variance of playing each other.

On August 27 2008 15:36 MaidenFan wrote: Show nested quote + On August 27 2008 15:07 Kilay wrote: Now my general question or maybe even discussion point is, on what point do regulars pretty much even each other out and probably have very little edge over each other and upto what point are still a reasonable amount of the regulars playing with leaks that can generate a very nice part of your winrate. Obv, it depends! This is not a question anyone can answer but yourself. When you're playing against regs at your stakes obviously you will have a huge edge over some (they will be slightly better than fish), and others may have an edge over you (the elite players at your stake). It also depends on your skill level. When you first move up to a certain stake you may only have an edge over the fish, and be break even or -ev against most regs. But the longer you play on that stake, the more your game improves, and this dynamic changes. Most importantly, you need to look at this situation as a "one hand at a time" deal. Your edge isn't a set number that never changes, if you're playing on tilt you might not have an edge against anyone! Don't worry so much about "what my edge is." Just try to play your best game as often as possible and pick the softest tables possible and your "edge" will take care of its self. I think that's the point this guy is trying to make in this video (though I haven't seen it): Why play against regs when you can play against fish? As long as you can play against fish, do it!

Btw, I really like your reply and I think it really adds a good insight to the topic although I am quite curious of this trend stays at levels above, for example, the 1000NL...

FWIW if u wanna get better and move up stakes you'd better learn how to beat the regs.

regulars are the biggest fish, they can lose the most

at 100/200+ non-hu games there typically isn't a huge edge for anybody in terms of bb-winrate, but there is definitely a solid edge for some. at 25/50 the better regs are FAR better than the 1-2ptbb winners