im against the idea personally,but if they were introduced it i dont have to play them. but then i dont think the "nits" would either. i dont know why people dont just raise 3x bb if thet want bigger pots?
Don't tight players prefer loose tables though? That was my point..... What they lose in ante's they shud make back playing nitty against 4/5 LAG players? Posted by DOHHHHHHH
No cos there range is so so narrow they aren't gonna pick up enough pots if they continue with their narrow opening range
if your on multi tabling and playing a large volume getting anted every hand is gonna soon add up
on a 25p/50p table it will be 10p per hand...essentially doubling the blinds
im against the idea personally,but if they were introduced it i dont have to play them. but then i dont think the "nits" would either. i dont know why people dont just raise 3x bb if thet want bigger pots? Posted by DAVEYZZ
No its not the same thing. Nits can fold to a 3x raise unless they have a hand they like, whereas they can't refuse to ante if they're in play. By increasing the amount in the middle to be won there is a greater incentive to widen your opening range, and it also means that if you fold too much preflop you'll find your stack dwindling quickly.
Ok well ofc they wud have to adapt slightly. Im convinced good tight players would do well providing they pick tables occupied by loose players. I wud tighten up deffo if the table is going nuts. Speculate to accumulate. Theres always gonna be spots to get the antes back. Posted by DOHHHHHHH
Do you think any half decent LAG is going to pay off a nit every time they have a hand?
yea i get ya,yb.i still dont like the idea but i think my main gripe was the notion that it will stop the "nits" as if the style of play is a bad thing,and also that it would"improve the enjoyment for everyone"
i was a bit confused when initially reading the thread which basically consisted of: "i want ante tables because i enjoy playing on them" "i dont want other people to have ante tables because i dont enjoy playing on them"
were not suggesting that all of sky cash is revamped with antes in them (OTOH pls do this!) i mean if people want to play tight then obv non ante tables will be alot more profitable for them and it doesnt make sense for them to play w/ antes which is fine. its just alot more fun and you get into more tough spots with marginal hands which will eventually make you a better player.
i dont think anyone has said that playing a very nitty style of poker is a bad thing, but it certainly isnt the most profitable way of playing, especially at 6max.
plus it might empty your regular tables of that maniac who is always after your BB!
if sky were to take this seriously auto top up is definately needed for it
In Response to Re: Introduction of Ante's in NLH Cash Games! : I trust I'm excluded from that? You wrote me a PM, I answered it promptly, & then you repeated the PM, word for word, in a Forum Post, so I replied to that, too. You asked a question, I answered it! With due respect, it's a Forum, & if you post views & opinions, & invite replies, you will get exactly that. It's highly unlikely that all of them will agree with you though, is it? It'd be kinda nice if we could keep the thread civil, too, & DaveyZZ has every right to voice an opinion, just as you & I have. Posted by Tikay10
DaveyZZ post was directed personally at me, which i felt was disrespectfully, hence my strong reply to him. Of course I dont have a problem with anybody voicing they're opinions... Thats what i would like to know, as long as they're opinions are on the actual subject.
In Response to Introduction of Ante's in NLH Cash Games! : oops didnt mean to offend...but the comment of players nitting it up,made me think you were being negative about a certain style of play?. i just dont see the need of changing the rules of cash nlh to include ante's if you want bigger pots/more action there are plenty of players playing at £1-£2 who are always willing to accommodate... cheers,dave Posted by DAVEYZZ
In this instance what i mean by players 'nitting it up' is that there has been a steady increase of rock/super tight players at these stakes...
which can be a bit of a 'boring' grind.... Then the idea sparked in my head if there was more money in the pot it would make some of these so called 'nits' come and play more poker. Give them more 'incentive' to enter pots... The more I thought about it the better the concept seemed.
I see your point when you say 'why not just play higher' but a cash game with ante's would a create a totally new dynamic to just moving up a couple of levels.
Most people wont be surprised to know that i agree with Tikay, in not wanting antes in cash, but if there is a call for this then i believe it should only be on 10 seater tables and not on 6 max tables. I would be interested in hearing the views of some of the big multi-tablers, as i would imagine it would curtail the number of tables you play at any one time(more action=less optimum play). I do think the introduction of straddling would bring the online game up to the live game, where it is part of the game. Finally, Wisa, if you require more action why not try multi tabling yourself, as this might deflect the bordem factor a bit. Also remember, all players put their hard earned money on the tables and are entitled to play which ever style of play the choose. Interesting thread.
Comments
i play ante games on other sites now and then and they are fun
and to this can we have a deepstack compulsary straddle FR table plzzz tyvm
but then i dont think the "nits" would either.
i dont know why people dont just raise 3x bb if thet want bigger pots?
if your on multi tabling and playing a large volume getting anted every hand is gonna soon add up
on a 25p/50p table it will be 10p per hand...essentially doubling the blinds
"i want ante tables because i enjoy playing on them"
"i dont want other people to have ante tables because i dont enjoy playing on them"
were not suggesting that all of sky cash is revamped with antes in them (OTOH pls do this!)
i mean if people want to play tight then obv non ante tables will be alot more profitable for them and it doesnt make sense for them to play w/ antes which is fine.
its just alot more fun and you get into more tough spots with marginal hands which will eventually make you a better player.
i dont think anyone has said that playing a very nitty style of poker is a bad thing, but it certainly isnt the most profitable way of playing, especially at 6max.
plus it might empty your regular tables of that maniac who is always after your BB!
if sky were to take this seriously auto top up is definately needed for it
which can be a bit of a 'boring' grind.... Then the idea sparked in my head if there was more money in the pot it would make some of these so called 'nits' come and play more poker. Give them more 'incentive' to enter pots... The more I thought about it the better the concept seemed.
I see your point when you say 'why not just play higher' but a cash game with ante's would a create a totally new dynamic to just moving up a couple of levels.
Most people wont be surprised to know that i agree with Tikay, in not wanting antes in cash, but if there is a call for this then i believe it should only be on 10 seater tables and not on 6 max tables.
I would be interested in hearing the views of some of the big multi-tablers, as i would imagine it would curtail the number of tables you play at any one time(more action=less optimum play).
I do think the introduction of straddling would bring the online game up to the live game, where it is part of the game.
Finally, Wisa, if you require more action why not try multi tabling yourself, as this might deflect the bordem factor a bit. Also remember, all players put their hard earned money on the tables and are entitled to play which ever style of play the choose.
Interesting thread.
col