Zoom vs Regular - Micro Stakes Pot Limit and No Limit

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy Online No-Limit Hold’em Cash

Zoom vs Regular

Post Reply Subscribe

...

10-12-2013 , 09:42 AM

Woster

centurion

Join Date: Aug 2013 Posts: 171

Hey folks,

Up till now i've played zoom exclusively from 2NL up to 10NL now, and as it seems. Because of friend I tried regular tables and I find it fascinating how the game is actually much, much softer than zoom.

So my questions:

a) Anybody else with more experience even on higher limits feels the same?
I could be on small sample and I am somewhat table selecting. But overall regs seem to be playing back a lot, lot less than on zoom in marginal situations, dont abuse position as much etc.
From my experience, 5NL zoom is tougher than 10NL regular

b) If You agree, what is your reasoning behind it?
- Less hands played? fish play rather regular tables? Hand selection is way tighter on zoom ?(Probably my favourite reason) People are bored on regular so they bluff more?

c) If you do not agree, why?

d) If you do have a sample for comparison or experience, could you mention the winrate differences? (hours/100)

Quote

10-12-2013 , 10:14 AM

msm1089

newbie

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 28

I don't have a great sample size, having been playing zoom only just over 2 weeks, ~10k hands so far. But FWIW, I am finding I win more and have more winning sessions in zoom. The fact that you can play 4x as many hands means if you are making good decisions you have more earning potential. I actually find players on zoom are tighter than regular games and less likely to play back.

For me it is way better being able to get a new hand instantly

Quote

10-12-2013 , 10:54 AM

W3ll_D0ne

journeyman

Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 305

NL50 -> regular tables softer indeed...

Sample not big enough tho...

In B4 luckbox ^^

Quote

10-12-2013 , 11:25 AM

hnsmht

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 384

Zoom is full of 1k hands per hour grinders. In a way i think the tight opening ranges and even tighter continuation ranges are abusable too. As for winrate i think its well established that regular tables yield higher wr because the field is generally less solid and hence easier to get your value bets called

Quote

10-12-2013 , 05:35 PM

ronrabbit

old hand

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,662

Zoom has a really different dynamic, because you are for the most part at least semi-readless on villans things like good positional play, well timed aggression, bet sizing and other basic poker skills become hugely important, where as at a normal table you can have pretty poor basic poker skills but an ability to incredibly quickly define a villans stlye and skill set and you can get by just fine.

Quote

10-12-2013 , 10:06 PM

T.Rastad

centurion

Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 158

I've read before that zoom is about one stake tougher than regular tables. And I think it's not very far from the truth.
I like it because it's max 4 decisions at a time + ~4x more hands/h. So more time thinking + faster to the long run= better player= more +EV in the long run imo.

Quote

10-13-2013 , 12:07 AM

sexdotcom

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 3,867

Regular table is softer than Zoom due to the ability to table select. At the very least we should avoid having good regs on our left. But I prefer Zoom because I can play more hands, more time to make decicions, easier to maintain focus and short stackers are less of a problem. Lower wr but higher hourly.

Quote

Post Reply Subscribe

...