Hey, I'm playing zoom nl25-50 and I recently got on a 35bi downswing and I started to wonder if this is the best way to approach poker. I would like to hear the opinions of some more advanced players what do you think is better for a beginner ?

Zoom or normal tables?

I'm thinking since zoom is somehow tougher you're forced to keep improving your game but the winrates and the edges are smaller and the swings bigger or grind normal tables where you table select and you're making more money but you're game evolves slower.

There are also other pros and cons but I would like to know from players who play higher what do you think is the best approach for your winnings/development/edge as a professional poker player?

I've haven't played Zoom because I'm an American but isn't it supposed to be really nitty? Seems like such a nitty game would be highly profitable because you could play so loose as long as you're decent post flop.

I'm ****ing done playing zone, just done. I'm heading back to normal tables where I can actually make plays based on villain tendencies. 41k hands in zone and only up 3 buy ins. It also establishes bad habits and locks you into level 1 thinking. In zone all you really care about is what you have, and what your odds are, and it's tough to think about the villain when they don't really even matter because you have no reads on them (at bovada anyways).

35 Buy-ins? That seems like... not normal for a winning player.

My guess is one-tabling zoom is optimal for development. You always have just one hand to think about, which means you can think hard about every situation, and you can also get in decent volume.

I think the pros of zoom is that you can focus on playing your A game. On regular tables you have to constantly changes tables, etc.

For imporvemente go with zoom, your winrate will be lower, but will be compensated for more volume.,

I personally play regular tables, because I prefer to play against more fish.

First thought: Regular tables you focus on exploiting tendencies
Zoom, Rush, Mass Multi Tabling etc. you focus on GTO plays (game theory optimal)

Furthermore

In zoom it's pretty easy to opponent select (kind of like table selecting) one simple way is to target people with awkward stack sizes. Mark them so that if they're stacks goes above 100bb's you know that at one point they did have an awkward stack.

not really

balancing ranges is equally important at zoom and regular tables imo, which is to say it's not important at all at micros


wut?

If anything stacks under 100bbs are usually fish/weaker players, but you can't assume anything from stacks over 100bbs.

Zoom is an awful way to learn/play beyond getting the basics down. So much of poker is about things that can't be used at a Zoom table.

In in the US so all I have is Bovada, but it's not really a useful tool for anyone that has a basic understanding of the game.

regular tables.

make notes, use them.

Lol if you see a player <100bb's you mark them (color them) so that IF they go >100bb's you know that they were playing with less than a full stack at before

OP I think for this question you're far better off posting in begginers questions forum if you want somewhat less biased answers. Some great posters in there as well.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/32...ers-questions/

+1 to this.
Reg tables are good. Can always find fish so the swings are smaller. Games focus around 1-3 fish and their stupidity. Zoom must be more systematic game.
Once you feel like you start to have an edge over the regs, you can try zoom.

This

And this