Playing Against a Table Full of Chasers

I was at Brantford one day and experienced the following situation. In the 2-5 tables I was on my own and it started that most of the players were good. There was one calling station (played every flop and almost every hand to the showdown) who won a fair bit but in the end he busted out (as expected). He took me down with a bad beat or two but nothing serious. The problem came a little bit later when suddenly (it seemed) the table was full of college age guys that all knew each other. There were at least 5 or six of them. They all chased everything. It was rare that they saw cards they wouldn't play a flop with (raises, re-raises, it didn't matter). It got to the point where if I had straight, trips or anything off the flop they played it to the end. So for the most part I would come into the river with 3-4 of these guys calling me and chasing cards. And almost every time they would hit on the river and I would be beat. They played cards like 7,3 suited ( I know they were sooooooted) and win. It was mind numbing. One or two guys that do this I can beat, no problem but half the table? The odds were against me.

My question is, what do you do here? Quit and call it a day or keep playing. I haven't figured out how to beat 6 guys that chase everything. I won't even get into their etiquette. I played them for about 3 hours and eventually lost most of my money when one guy hit runner runner for flush over my two top pair. Perhaps I should have folded guessing the flush but I didn't.

Comments

  • My question is, what do you do here? Quit and call it a day or keep playing. I haven't figured out how to beat 6 guys that chase everything. I won't even get into their etiquette. I played them for about 3 hours and eventually lost most of my money when one guy hit runner runner for flush over my two top pair. Perhaps I should have folded guessing the flush but I didn't.

    Don't change.. When more people arrive at the river, your pot equity is smaller but its for a larger pot.. That translates into our little friend called variance. If 6 guys see the river with a 10% chance of winning, you are only a 40% fav to win.. but the pots a monster.. Thats not a bad thing, thats a GOOD thing..

    I'd be nice if we could just cashout our EV every night, but unfortunately, they only let us play with cash.
  • I play in a local game that has that texture ... all i know is that i don't win many pots but the ones i drag in are absolute monsters.

    I will lose a bunch of good pots along the way, but it won't take you many good hands along the way. I have sat and been stuck 200 in a small 2/5 game, and then swung to 200 plus in 3-4 hands because that's the nature of a table like that.

    For example AA is a dog to the entire table, if something like 7-8 people see the flop, but the pots that you'll win, when you win will be absolute monsters.
  • One problem that will occur here is schooling. These fish are drawing to terrible odds. However, add 4 or 5 of them, and they each may be giving each other pot odds on their draws. I personally would change tables, however if you feel you can adapt your reads on them (increase your implied odds) and you feel this is accurate, then you may be able to draw at some hands you regularly wouldnt have pot odds to.
  • Phippo44 wrote:
    One problem that will occur here is schooling. These fish are drawing to terrible odds. However, add 4 or 5 of them, and they each may be giving each other pot odds on their draws. I personally would change tables, however if you feel you can adapt your reads on them (increase your implied odds) and you feel this is accurate, then you may be able to draw at some hands you regularly wouldnt have pot odds to.

    Schooling just means that their drawing decisions are usually made correct because of the size of the pot. It doesnt mean that they will win more than their fair share of that pot nor does it mean they will win more often. Its just a theory that explains why all the chasers don't go broke immediately.

    Also, if you want to talk schooling, you have to talk about Mortons Law... It basically states that in a multiway pot, the biggest benefitor of every new bet added to the pot is actually the player with the best DRAW rather than the player with the current best hand.

    Anyway, Trust me, if you find a table where 7 players see the river all the time DON'T LEAVE. Get the waitress to bring over a pot of coffee or a jug of margaritas and enjoy beating the game for large sums of cash. Yes your swings are higher but who cares? We're all in it for the long term anyway.
  • I agree, but the fact their drawing decisions are now correct when, if only one was in the pot, they would be incorrect. No they wont win more than their fair share, that's correct, but they will win closer to their fair share as an aggregate (averaged) than individually they would have over the long term.
  • I think what is missing from this is the fact that my odds of winning are small against seven people. Yes the same person won't win every time but there are 6 of them and only 1 of me. I did take a pot or two but only when I chased a flush (and that was with a good hand). In the end I was beaten out. I watched a tremendous amount of hands played (most of which I folded) and my cards never would have won the pot. Someone else either had a higher flush or a boat that beat my nut flush.

    I think in the future I will duck out of these tables. I also have a feeling that when large pots were won they was going to be some sharing afterwards. These guys were all way too tight together. They talked about their hands while they were live. It was bad.

    At one point they guy told his friend not to call my bet becaue he had XX and would win.
  • I would love to play at a table like that, I would only play monster hands and raise at every chance.

    You may not be involved in many hands and get a few bad beats but when the chasers miss their flushes and straights they would be paying you large.
  • I think what is missing from this is the fact that my odds of winning are small against seven people.

    And I think what the other posters are trying to tell you is that you're missing the fact that odds only matter in the context of payoff. If you have only (say) a 20% chance against these 6 guys (you oughta have better than your 1/7 share because you are playing better hands, higher draws, et cetera) then you will lose most of your pots but BBC is right, get some coffee, hire a masseuse, do whatever you need to keep playing these guys because when you hit you make up for the last 8 or 9 losses.

    "But," I hear you say "I told you that none of the hands I DID fold would have won anyhow." Fine, then you were getting cold-carded. Rub your rabbit's foot, ask for a deck change, subscribe to whatever superstition turns your crank, but that's got nothing to do with the players at the table and it's certainly not a reason to get up -- as though the cards at the next table like you more.

    "But," I hear you say "I told you that they were all comparing notes, discussing live hands, trading cards, and buying in with counterfeit money." Fine, then you need to get the dealer, or even the floor to come over and smack them. Discussing live hands is not cool, and any respectable card room will shut that crap down, but your dealer(s) might have decided to let it slide if no one complained, assuming this was a "friendly game" which probably means good tips as long as everybody's happy. This behaviour is common among BAD players, and again not a reason to want to leave.

    I've posted here before about players who decide their opponents are too bad, that they should go find some better players. Phrases like "My raises get respected," and "You can actually bet someone off a pot," and "AA actually hold up," get tossed around. I've never liked that talk - bad players are your bread and butter. People get bitter because they got cold carded and drawn out on too often within a session and they decide the game can't be beat. "BINGO" is a popular term, "This game isn't poker, just bingo with everyone calling down to see if they won." Well hell, if you show me a bingo game where I don't have to play bad cards, and where I can get more money in to the prize pool when I've got strong cards, and get out cheap when I don't, I'm all over that bingo action.
  • Perhaps I took the loss too hard and the other players began to really bother me. I let my emotions get the best of me this time. The nut flush loss to the full house did me in (I think the guy player 83o from UTG). I never saw it coming. My mistake. It's funny, on-line I can take these kind of players no problem. In a live game I just messed up.

    I think I'll try again but maybe I'll play NL games. Limit games aren't my strong suit.
  • Perhaps I took the loss too hard and the other players began to really bother me. I let my emotions get the best of me this time. The nut flush loss to the full house did me in (I think the guy player 83o from UTG). I never saw it coming. My mistake. It's funny, on-line I can take these kind of players no problem. In a live game I just messed up.

    I think I'll try again but maybe I'll play NL games. Limit games aren't my strong suit.

    Unless you start treating poker like a long term investment, you'll never survive.
  • You should want to play against bad players. You should crave it. I think we would all agree on that.

    I think the main difficulty with the schooling or "implicit collusion" as Lee Jones calls it (kind of confusing since the concept has nothing to do with cheating) is psychological. You must avoid going on tilt. As for the poker, you have a severe advantage, and with even merely competent play, you will destroy this kind of game if you keep your head on straight.

    You have to realize that when you are playing with multiple poor opponents, you will see some very strange looking beats. You will often see things like rivered 2-outers. More often than you might expect. Why? Because multiple players are chasing such draws. A single player drawing out on a 2-outer will rarely get there. If you have 5 opponents in on the turn with various weak draws (this is the implicit collusion), then one of them is likely to get there.

    Here we go with observer bias again. You typically only see the hand that actually made the dramatic suckout. Because you are almost never observing the hands that miss their crazy draws, you may begin to believe that you are seeing an "unfair" proportion of bad beats. It's not uncommon to have feelings that it is impossible to beat such a game (B&M), or that the game is rigged (online).

    Should you alter your play to account for this kind of schooling behaviour by your opponents? Probably not much. A straightforward game will still get you a lot of the money. Some minor changes would be to play more speculative hands if the pre-flop play is generally passive*, and to get away from made hands which are merely good with a dangerous looking board and multiple opponents. (e.g. 7 players in, fold Qd Jd on a flop of Qs 7s 6h)

    This kind of game brings to mind the Jesse May quote I had in my forum signature a while ago. At first it sounded like a joke to me, but when I really thought about it, I think it's some of the greatest poker insight I've ever read.

    "People think mastering the skill part is hard, but they're wrong. The trick to poker is mastering the luck."
    -Jesse May

    When your opponents are playing as badly as they typically are at (say) a Brantford 2-5 game, the skill part is easy. You almost automatically outclass your opponents in skill if you're the kind of person who has read this deeply into a post on a poker forum. How you deal the luck/variance/suckout aspects of this kind of game is the real challenge, and IMO is what determines to a large extent your profit/loss in these kinds of games.

    ScottyZ

    *It is a major error to play speculative drawing hands through jammed pre-flop rounds, even if your opponents are horrible.
  • One important aspect is missing here from the analyses of benefits of playing in these 'soft' games: what psychological impact will this have on you, and how will this affect your play?

    Unless you sit a bot in there, somehow, I think a lot of people will tilt to some degree for at least some period of time, loosen up and play the chasing game. If you can handle it, by all means buy in for 2x the usual amount (maybe 60-120 x big bet, so 300-600 for a 2/5) and enjoy the variance. If you can't handle this, go sit in a different game.

    People remember: No matter how 'good' or 'soft' a game is, if the nature of a cash game is negatively impacting your play from a mental or psychological perspective - GET OUT. Learn how to play in these situations, and come back another time. Read some books. Discuss the issues with other players away from the tables. Think about why things were happening that did. Learn the poker and learn yourself Understand the proper way to approach the particular game and then come back after doing all this. It is a complex ongoing process, and is one neverending feedback loop, but it isnt rocket science.
  • Wow, I must say that the insight in this forum is far beyond my expectations. I wish I could have had one of you whispering in my ear last week. I am going to take this advice and venture back to the limit games (maybe go 5-10, what I should have done).
    Thank you all for your comments.

    One comment further, when there was only the one calling station/chaser, it was a lot of fun to beat him down. Sure he won a pot but in the end I hammered him a few times for a lot more money. I just got lost when there were too many. I needed to focus more and taken a dinner break. I went on tilt and lost my focus. A mistake I hope I learned from.
  • (maybe go 5-10, what I should have done).

    HUH?? Did you even read the thread? You are going to move up limits?
  • think I'll try again but maybe I'll play NL games. Limit games aren't my strong suit.

    Fair enough, if you really think your NL game is much stronger than your limit game. I think a lot of people just assume that they can now protect their big hands with big bets, but the problem is your swings can be much larger as well. What happens now, when you raise big with your AA and someone calls with 5-3o and flop comes K-5-3? In limit, you lose a few bets. In NL you're going to probably lose your entire stack (while cursing at the retardedly bad play of your opponent). Now you reload and are instantly on tilt... While it's probably true that you can protect your big hands better and should suffer bad beats less OFTEN, you will suffer some HUGE swings when they do happen...
  • Quote:


    I've posted here before about players who decide their opponents are too bad, that they should go find some better players. Phrases like "My raises get respected," and "You can actually bet someone off a pot," and "AA actually hold up," get tossed around. I've never liked that talk - bad players are your bread and butter. People get bitter because they got cold carded and drawn out on too often within a session and they decide the game can't be beat. "BINGO" is a popular term, "This game isn't poker, just bingo with everyone calling down to see if they won." Well hell, if you show me a bingo game where I don't have to play bad cards, and where I can get more money in to the prize pool when I've got strong cards, and get out cheap when I don't, I'm all over that bingo action.[/QUOTE]

    All i can say is AMEN brother...
  • HUH?? Did you even read the thread? You are going to move up limits?

    Yeah, I read the thread. I only went 2-5 since the waiting list was shorter. I was going to do 5-10 in the first place. You'll get the same type of players there as well.
    I think a lot of people just assume that they can now protect their big hands with big bets, but the problem is your swings can be much larger as well.

    True, but it is a matter of when you do the big bet. In my experience with NL it is about the right timing. Timing your bets in Limit doesn't work nearly as well.
  • Timing your bets in Limit doesn't work nearly as well.
    While this is true, and while I understand your point, I should mention that there is one type of instance in LHE in which timing your bets can be crucial. That is when somebody ahead of you bets, and you decide to raise, to make it two cold to the players behind you, as opposed to just one bet. I have been driven out of quite a few pots by savvy players who know how and when to do this, and I've been trying to do a lot more of it myself when I feel the time is right.
  • all_aces wrote:
    While this is true, and while I understand your point, I should mention that there is one type of instance in LHE in which timing your bets can be crucial. That is when somebody ahead of you bets, and you decide to raise, to make it two cold to the players behind you, as opposed to just one bet. I have been driven out of quite a few pots by savvy players who know how and when to do this, and I've been trying to do a lot more of it myself when I feel the time is right.

    Totally agree. I've been learning from some of the better players at Brantford (not many -- but there are some good ones) that the turn is a great place for this bet. The hand I had yesterday was J7o in the big blind. The flop is AJ4 rainbow with four players. It's checked around. The turn comes a 9 with two spades. I check to see if someone is springing to life -- no one does and the button bets. I raise as I feel I'm good and I don't want to see any more cards. Fold, fold and the button calls. River is a K with the third spade. We both check and I take down the pot. Button had Q9o. Since I was likely going to call at least two bets to see the showdown, I thought it was far better to "spend" those bets all at once. As it turns out, I chased the flush draw out in MP and it won me the pot.

    Cheers
    Magi
Sign In or Register to comment.