*** MOD: Moved to Low Stakes [2014-07-26 10:15 CET] ***

@OP: What you´re essentially asking for is the blueprint for winning poker, right? If somebody could post that in a short recap, he´d a) be a genius, b) likely would be a billionaire (before c) happens) and c) poker would be dead.

;)

Not exactly, just wondering how standard ranges should be adjusted..and if we should be 3betting a lot more since its anonymous and no history or playing tighter..etc.  Obviously not the exact formula but instead comments that are helpful to this particular game.

Just play standard ranges, whilst being aware that the average zoom type game, at these levels will play somehwjat tighter in general preflop, so you can likely steal more blinds and beaware that you may be against stronger ranges than usual postflop.

Do not attempt to make any extreme maiximully exploitable plays, as you have no knowledge on your specific opponents. 

You can attempt to adjust in real time in the form of reacting to the information you are given at present, i.e irregular betsizing, timing, limping etc, these may give you a reasonable insight to your opponents game, therefore you can adjust accordingly when you percieve your opponent to be a recreational/weak player.

Ive been toying around on these low stakes tables for a little while now (maybe a few weeks) and Ive noticed that people are "quick folding" the bb & sb with their trash hands too much i.e. not defending properly against btn and sb steals. so I just open 100% of my range from btn and sb and its definitely profitable. 

i think these games play much tighter preflop than regular 6 max tables and people DONT get out of line very often preflop at all.  that being said, when standard steal situations present themselves you yourself can get out of line with a 3b to resteal from the blinds as the 3bets are getting ridiculous respect (as they should, since almost nobody is 3b light).

Since you are anonymous: showdowns mean nothing, there is very little or no meta game, no dynamic development.  There's no reason to ever look someone up light for info. as the info. is meaningless when not attached to a screen name.  Its even useless to pop up the hand replayer to see what a losing villain hand was at showdown.  Why would you care? 

I would think the optimal way to play these tables is some kind of weird, non-standard, weak tight, trappy style at the 100NL tables and just regular tight aggressive at the 25NL tables.  You'll see many more "standard" tags at 100NL and more fish at 25NL.

I know it sounds crazy but I think it might be the most +EV to limp/call AA in the 100NL Zone whereas I would never do that in 25NL zone.

I would love a blue print for zone on bovada. Playing against a new pool of anonymous players kills me. TPTK could be insta felt against one villain or snap fold against another villain.

Ya, I think all of what everyone has said makes sense.  I find going from 50 NL to 100 NL the 3 bet frequency in the blinds goes up a lot, but is difficult to tell. I find nearly cbetting 100% works well, and have a looser opening ranger and pretty tight call range.

Glad everyone is helpful, thought this would be interesting because you hardly ever play poker where you have no clue on who your opponent is.

So I think everyone can agree 4 betting light is almost never the right play at these stakes with no dynamic?

Also, 3 betting out of the small blind and bb to a btn or sb open is probably very profitable?

these type of games seem genuinely terrible for the long term prospects of poker.  The game structure encourages good players to gradually drift towards a more GTO strategy, and of course as certain portions of the player pool drift towards that strategy their will be counter adjustments, and then counter-counter adjustments etc.  But over time as poor players are knocked out and good players continue to evolve you'll end up with a bunch of players getting closer to GTO just passing around chips while the house rakes them to death.

The aspects of poker that makes it most enticing for casual and losing players are lost in this format, and the long term prospect for the game looks dim.  I understand why these adjustments are being made by sites in the short term (eliminates issues with table camping and reg-fish abuse, speeds up game time and allows thew to rake more while also lowering win-rates and reinforcing correctly tight play for non-regulars).  But the long term results seems to be the slow bleeding death of online poker. 

it just seems sad.

I never thought of it that way, very interesting points.  I definitely don't like the way the games play out..but on Bovada I think it is much more profitable for now.  I think Zone was introduced only in the fall of this year on Bovada, so therefore the player pool hasn't adjusted enough (as most of the player pool is american based and never played on stars or ftp (zoom)).

It doesn't seem like sites will slow this format down especially if it is profitable to them.  It definitely looks dim when you think of it in that way.

I played on those tables at the beginning of this month and imo they are a waste, you can get in a lot of volume but compared to the regular tables they are just way too tight. I looked into my db to try and see how guys were playing (gotta love being able to see all the hole cards) and the majority of the players are nits! Sure there are big fish around and they do make some horrendous plays and spaz shoves but you have no idea who they are until after the hand is over and then they are gone to disappear back into the anonymous player pool. So, imo, if you are sure you want to play zone treat everyone as a nit. I looked through my db (it was only ~28k hands) and filtered for triple barrel spots - when that 3rd barrel gets fired it is 75% top pair or better w/ ~60% of the 75% being 2 pair+. I believe that to be fairly accurate because you don't get the SD bias that you get on other sites when doing a db review like this. I went back to regular tables and play way less hands a day but actually make more hourly. Take this w/ a grain of salt - I was playing bad and tilting during that period too. But thats why I did the db review and I came to the conclusion that it is just not worth having zero reads at all when I can play regular tables - spot a fish rather quickly and play accordingly. Good Luck.