[SpeakEasy]

Mentioned this concept in another thread, and there was a request for more discussion, so I'll posts some thoughts here.

The name "Schooling Effect" has its origins from a school of fish. Fish often swim in packs in the ocean, and seemingly turn and flow together as a single mass. For a really interesting discussion about the behavior of schools of animals, like fish and birds, read "Prey" by Michael Crichton.

I read about the Schooling Effect as it relates to poker in one of my poker books, but I forget which one. From my experience the Schooling Effect can have two forms at the poker table.

First, if you are playing with a bunch of fish that play too many hands, while you are playing a tight-aggressive strategy, then the strength of your hand lowers in value because you are combating a bunch of junk hands that are more likely to catch lucky two-pair, straights, flushes, etc. The idea is that each of your opponents junk hands is a serious underdog to your strong starting hand, but if you face 5 junk hands every time you pick up KK, for example, you're much more likely to get beat by one of the junk hands that catches lucky.

Second, the Schooling Effect can take shape against a bully or overly aggressive player at your table. Say that someone is constantly raising with junk, talking a lot of smack, and generally pissing off everyone at the table. The table naturally starts gunning for the bully, in an effort to take him down. Especially if he amasses a big stack, because the perception is that he has not rightfully earned the chips. You become part of the school that has the bully as the target.

One player can drastically affect the play of an entire table. Ever played at a table where a wild player sits down, and suddenly the chips are flying based on his strong personality and affect on the table? The key to your play in this regard is to avoid steaming against this player if he cracks your aces, but rather stay solid and let the natural Schooling Effect of the table take the bully out of action. Also, you can take advantage of other players that are steaming as a result of the bully -- if everyone is lowering their starting hand requirements against the bully, chances are that this will have an overall negative effect on their play. Sit back, stay calm, monitor the play carefully, and take advantage of favorable situations when they arise.

[dad604]

All the above are something I have notice many times when I play.

[Tatdave]

That's what my week of 1/2 has been like. Soooo many people playing any suited cards to the river that you get ripped by BS flushes. Getting rivered repeatedly by the school gets tiresome.

I'm thinking about going a bit deeper in my pockets to 2/4 or 3/6 to see if I find smaller schools.

[JM]

Is that 1/2 limit or no limit Dave?

Originally Posted by Tatdave

That's what my week of 1/2 has been like. Soooo many people playing any suited cards to the river that you get ripped by BS flushes. Getting rivered repeatedly by the school gets tiresome.

I'm thinking about going a bit deeper in my pockets to 2/4 or 3/6 to see if I find smaller schools.

[whitepotatoe]

It sounds like you are talking about Morton's Theorum. The bad players are in effect, unknowingly colluding with each other, and it costs you money. Check out this link: http://forums.cardplayer.com/viewtop...=asc&highlight=

I think I am going to reread it again now.

[shadesofgrey]

I get the theory & I have seen it in action all too often. I havent read much on 'Implicit Collusion' but that doesnt seem too unreasonable either.

It definately applies to lower ($.02/$.04 through $2/$4(?)) limit games, but I am not sure it applies as much to tournies.
unless you're playing some wacky unlimited rebuys / winner takes all tournament. Or for free money online

What i've found is that position play, overtime, is a very strong defense.
If you're playing tight/aggressive, raising a premium hand in position is nearly a must.
raising non-premium sets is up to you, milage caries to future hands.

Against a school I play position fairly consistently - tight/aggressive - so if I come out with a raise, in position, it doesnt "shock" anyone into folding & the school calls.... just test the water.

if I hit a premium hand out of position - i check it or raise a BB - the school will do the betting.

OR - post checking, if one limps early, and others follow around - a check-raise (2-3xBB)works too. get in front of the hand, throw out some bait. give balance & thought to them coming back over the top... LOL

Most action against a school depends on prior history at that table. Guess I am saying it depends on the size of your stack/bankroll/game & opponent.

maybe i've been lucky for the past 95-years

i love fishing!

[SpeakEasy]

Originally Posted by shadesofgrey

if I hit a premium hand out of position - i check it or raise a BB - the school will do the betting.

This is a good strategy. When you hit a big hand, you can be farily sure that someone will do the betting for you to bring the school along for at least some of the ride.

[Tatdave]

Originally Posted by JM

Is that 1/2 limit or no limit Dave?

It's limit. I think it's much easier to push out folks who have garbage in NL.

[coyote]

Originally Posted by Tatdave

That's what my week of 1/2 has been like. Soooo many people playing any suited cards to the river that you get ripped by BS flushes. Getting rivered repeatedly by the school gets tiresome.

I'm thinking about going a bit deeper in my pockets to 2/4 or 3/6 to see if I find smaller schools.

I don't understand this logic at all. You want to leave the fishy games where players will often incorrectly chase draws, i.e. they aren't getting the odds to make the calls that they make?? Instead you want to move up in limits where players are better and don't chase??

I understand the theory of this thread, but I think everyone needs to keep in mind that IN THE LONG RUN, these types of games make you a lot of money. Variance is a *****.

To be honest, if you're moving up in limit simply to find a more beatable game where players "don't chase", then perhaps your game isn't where it needs to be to make that move.

[Wooderson]

Originally Posted by coyote

To be honest, if you're moving up in limit simply to find a more beatable game where players "don't chase", then perhaps your game isn't where it needs to be to make that move.

I made this exact error about 6 months ago, and you could not be more correct. I found a good number of holes in my game due to it (which was a great discovery), but it cost me a good penny for that knowledge. Here's hoping my continued practice at lower levels while tightening up aspects of my play will pay off in spades what I lost to learn the holes.