I have long been of the opinion that table selection is one of the most important factors in winning online poker, but recently I have been reviewing exactly what makes a 'good' table.
My natural game is pretty tight (I'd like to say tight/aggressive, but one out of two aint bad) so I normally look for a pretty loose game where I will still get callers when I raise for the first time in three orbits.
Using PAHUD I look for tables where 2 or more players have a VP$ of over 40% with a table average VP$ of around 30%, or higher if possible.
The difficulty then comes with the fact that nearly all the pots I play are bigger than average, and with a couple of calling stations on the table, after a raise with maybe two callers, and a continuation bet with one caller, or maybe more, I have odds to call with almost any drawing hand, which can start to get expensive when I miss (and I miss a lot of draws).
I have been wondering if there is a better way to play, maybe by picking tighter tables to play on and playing more hands, a more LAG style.
This way I get to play more hands, see more flops, for less money, and once people see me playing more junk, I should get called down even more when I do hit a hand.
I'd be interested to know how any readers pick their cash tables, is the loosest game always the best ? I notice that from time to time, there is a big queue for a particular table for no apparent reason, I guess there must be a big fish sat there to have 7 or 8 people waiting for a seat, but I don't see the need to join a queue that long, as surely the fish is the first to leave and by the time 6 or 7 people in the queue ahead of you are seated any value must surely be gone.
If anyone has any strong views either way on this please post a reply.