Why Obsess Over Correct Strategy Online?

[chipnut 0]

While playing well is certainly a requirement in live games, and I suppose in high buy in online games as well (though I can't speak from personal experience there), it is no benefit at all in low limit or buy in games online. In fact, I would go so far as to say that playing well is a handicap in these games. I am talking about SNG and MTT under $50 and NLHE ring games below $3/$6. The successful player there is invariably seeing 70-80% of the flops, going all in on draws or with small pairs, and calling raises with any draw. In a live game these are dream opponents. Online these are big winners.My question is - why? It is not just the faster play. Yes we see more bad beats in an hour but we should get lucky more often too. Annonymity may make bad play easier, but should not effect its success. I don't want to believe that the dealing is dishonest online.I have played poker for 30 years. I am successful at modest buy in live games in casinos and small tournaments. I started playing online 4 years ago and tracking my play with PokerOffice. I have tracked my own play and others I see frequently, for many hundreds of thousands hands. Maniacs win and tight aggressive players lose in the long run. They don't just appear to - they actually do.Bottom line:1. Why? and2. Without becoming a maniac, how does a solid live game player adjust online?I don't want to quit playing online, but right now I don't see how to continue.

[Abbaddabba 0]

Hundreds of thousands of hands in your own database likely translates to a couple thousand hands against other people.You cant conclude much about anyone from that, especially when you have even fewer hands against the 'maniacs'.I have 300k worth of hands on absolute which is a small site compared to what most play. The most hands i have on anyone is about 10-15k. 9 out of 10 of people i have that many hands against are "TAGs".... maniacs dont play that much. They lose before they have a chance to play that much.There are two people i have more than 10k hands on (i dont datamine) that dont loosely fit the "TAG" profile. And they are huge losers.This is LHE between 2/4 and 5/10. Tight in 9max i consider to be between 15 and 20Tight in 6max i consider to be between 20 and 30That doesnt mean that all of the "tag" players do well. A lot of them just arent very good. They are break even, or in many cases, worse. They are marginal winners after bonus, rakeback and player reward points.

[Zach6668 513]

I seriously think you are just in a downswing, or quite possibly, you are not a winning player.I will back up what Abbaddabba says with no facts of my own, that maniacs/idiots are not big winners online.

[erac22 0]

When i was playing below 3/6nl i was quite successful seeing 28% of flops, much less than the 70%-80% that you feel has proven optimal. When I upped my stakes 3/6nl and higher, I began to find it more profitable to see more flops. The general belief, (which I buy in to) is that it's easier to beat small stakes games playing tight, and it becomes more important to loosen up your game as you up your stakes. So basically, I think you have it backwards. Players are generally better online than in casinos, so dropping limits might help your adjustment from live to online.erac

[MasterLJ 0]

A lot of it is because what people consider TAG and what TAG actually is, are two separate concepts. I see people say, "I'm 12/3 at Full Ring, I'm totally TAG." I guffaw.

[Head_Trauma 0]

NLHE ring games below $3/$6. The successful player there is invariably seeing 70-80% of the flops

Are you kidding me? Where are these games at?? Just looked through my PT database of NLHE shorthanded 1/2 and 2/4. I can't find a single player that I have 200+ hands on that plays this many hands. The consensus among successful shorthanded NL cash players is that optimal vpip is usually 20-25% depending on your style. I have heard of winning players as low as 17-18 and as high as 31-32. But 70-80% vpip is simply NEVER a successful strategy in a NL cash game at ANY limit with ANY amount of players at the table. I challenge you to find one.To give you a better idea, I have about 500 PT hands on Phil Ivey playing NL heads up on Full Tilt. His vpip: 63%!

[Abbaddabba 0]

VPIP means almost nothing in short handed 6max NL without any other information.It's just that people who win tend to be within a certain range, because table conditions make certain VPIP ranges more desirable. If everyone is super loose passive, the best vpip is closer to 100%. But even then you'll find that most winning players dont play nearly that loose simply because they tend to multi table, and they make more by playing a bit tighter and therefor giving themselves the ability to play more tables.If it's a really tough table, the best vpip is closer to the 20-30% range that is generally considered "TAG".

[chipnut 0]

That is probably it. I and the 20+ other true TAGs I tracked are all having a simultaneous 4 year streak of bad luck. Or, more likely, I don't know anything about poker, am just a very bad player having a 30 year lucky streak at live casino games.Those are the only possibilities after all, right?

[chipnut 0]

BTW, I'm talking full tables - not short handed.

[chipnut 0]

To give you a better idea, I have about 500 PT hands on Phil Ivey playing NL heads up on Full Tilt. His vpip: 63%!

What does this have to do with a 9 handsd ring game?

[Zach6668 513]

What does this have to do with a 9 handsd ring game?

He's saying that his VPIP is 63% heads up, where it should be the highest. He makes a good point.Furthermore, I don't even know how or where to start to explain why this whole thread is strange and almost definitely wrong.

[trystero 0]

Personally I know of no winning players with a VP$IP of ~70%. None exist in my PT database. None seem to exist in anyone else's database here either. And they aren't in a database with over 23,000 hands compiled by Excession, himself a winning lower-limit player (and you will note that there TAGs are very successful):http://www.bet-the-pot.com/poker-tracker-p...two-page32.htmlThe author accepts the limitations of his sample size, but at least he's provided some reliable data, and none of it supports your allegation that maniacal play is optimal. Now you apparently know plenty of these maniacs who see almost every flop and who call raises with any draw (even 3-outers?). And supposedly they're as high as $2/4. I'm wondering where your evidence is for these mythically successful players. No one but you seems to have ever heard of them.

[Abbaddabba 0]

That is probably it. I and the 20+ other true TAGs I tracked are all having a simultaneous 4 year streak of bad luck. Or, more likely, I don't know anything about poker, am just a very bad player having a 30 year lucky streak at live casino games.Those are the only possibilities after all, right?

An even better explanation would be that you suck at poker, but the people who play at the casinos you go to suck even more.

[chipnut 0]

Here is an example of what I am talking about. Maybe this will help.Player 1 (not me): vpip 27%, aggressive (raises, reraises, steals more then calling/limping) fills open str8s and flush draws 15% of the time with 2 cards to come.Player 2: vpip 90%, hyper-aggressive, fills same draws 50% over same 2 year period on same site.That is not explained by head trauma's lack of faith in my ability.

[Zach6668 513]

Here is an example of what I am talking about. Maybe this will help.Player 1 (not me): vpip 27%, aggressive (raises, reraises, steals more then calling/limping) fills open str8s and flush draws 15% of the time with 2 cards to come.Player 2: vpip 90%, hyper-aggressive, fills same draws 50% over same 2 year period on same site.That is not explained by head trauma's lack of faith in my ability.

Do they play once a month?How many hands?It's possible for you sample to be statistically insignificant.Or you just don't get it.One or the other.

[chipnut 0]

It's possible for you sample to be statistically insignificant.Or you just don't get it.One or the other.

There is a third possibility - but admitting it will require more intellectual honesty than most internet pro wannabes will be able to muster.Why are B&M casinos regulated so tightly if there is no incentive for casino operators to cheat?I know - they make so much without cheating - why risk it. And CEOs of big corporations make big salaries already so no one would risk cheating on option trading, right?Keeping the poor players alive keeps the tables full, attracting more business to the site. Keeping good players from accumulating too much money reduces withdrawls therefore keeping more money in site accounts. And since the results can always be explained away by willing apologists like a few in this thread, how could they ever be caught?I am honest enough to say that I can not be certain that the sites are cheating. Is anyone else honest enough to admit that they could be cheating?

[kkot 0]

Player 1 (not me): vpip 27%, aggressive (raises, reraises, steals more then calling/limping) fills open str8s and flush draws 15% of the time with 2 cards to come.Player 2: vpip 90%, hyper-aggressive, fills same draws 50% over same 2 year period on same site.

You will fill your draws as often as anybody else.

I am honest enough to say that I can not be certain that the sites are cheating. Is anyone else honest enough to admit that they could be cheating?

They could be.But they aren't. They make way too much money to risk their reputation being ruined.

[Zach6668 513]

This is the stupidest thread in Gen Strat in a long time.

[Shimmering Wang 1]

That is probably it. I and the 20+ other true TAGs I tracked are all having a simultaneous 4 year streak of bad luck. Or, more likely, I don't know anything about poker, am just a very bad player having a 30 year lucky streak at live casino games.Those are the only possibilities after all, right?

No, there are more possibilities:You're lying.You think you're a winning player live, but you don't keep good track, and you're not.You're crazy.There might be more. I wonder why every single person I know with 100K+ hands logged (15ish people, off the top of my head) say their numbers line up well within the expected/hypothetical values. Maybe it's because:I'm not lying.I think I'm a winning player online, and keep track, and I am.I'm not crazy.Also, I'm only like 23, so I probably haven't played NEARLY as much poker as you have. Wait a second. I'm sure I've played like 10 times the number of hands you have...

[chipnut 0]

I think I'm a winning player online, and keep track, and I am.I'm not crazy.Also, I'm only like 23, so I probably haven't played NEARLY as much poker as you have. Wait a second. I'm sure I've played like 10 times the number of hands you have...

ROFLMAO.First, every person who ever posted is a winning player. I never met a loser. In fact there are no losers. Everybody is an internet pro bringing down six figures playing part time just like you. Your honesty is so refreshing.Second, since you know I am lying and know you have played more hands, and have 100% indisputable proof that the sites do not cheat, please give us your PROOF. Not your immature, uninformed, uneducated opinion. Proof. Start with my play. How many hands have I booked at Foxwoods? How many at Mohegan Sun? How many on PokerStars and Party? Exactly what records do I keep and how are they organized and summarized?I actually don't think you are crazy. Just an immature 13 year old poker wannabe who thinks personal attacks work when you don't have anything real to say. If you can PROVE I am wrong - please do. If you can do it without sounding like a little 6th grade bully maybe someone will listen.If any adults frequent this forum and can discuss this I would welcome that. I guess maybe I overestimated this forum's readers.

[kkot 0]

You're far too stubborn to change your point of view. Trying to explain something to you is beyond pointless. If you read some of Wang's posts in strat, you will see that he knows what he is talking about. Not your immature, uninformed, uneducated opinion. Proof. Start with my play.OK. First, you are the one acting immiture and uninformed. Informed players know that draws will not come in as different percentages for different players. That is called paranoia. If any adults frequent this forum and can discuss this I would welcome that. I guess maybe I overestimated this forum's readers.Exactly what is it that you want to discuss? How all poker sites are rigged against you?Try being rational. Then we can have a discussion as adults.

[Zach6668 513]

This is the stupidest thread in Gen Strat in a long time.

QFT.

[ahosang 0]

Many sites have their hand outcomes audited for statistical fairness by companies such as PriceWaterhouseCoopers.You should look for a link on the site's web page or something...

[chipnut 0]

You're far too stubborn to change your point of view. Trying to explain something to you is beyond pointless. Informed players know that draws will not come in as different percentages for different players.

I said that I will admit that it is possible I am wrong. No one has offered anything but unsupported opinions to dispute what I have offered as ONE POSSIBILITY. The stubborn ones are the people who just want to attack me personally. They are so emotionally invested in their self image as "players" that anything threatening that must be silenced. Please "explain " to me why it is impossible for a poker site to influence the outcome of the games to favor weaker players. I already know that no one believes it is happening. Now tell me why it can not be happening. As for "informed" players, are you actually stating that as some law of nature? If a crooked dealer tried to deal hands to different players at different frequencies would some bolt of lightening strike him dead? Certainly, in an honest game, all players should catch draws with similar frequency. If they do not it is either luck, or not an honest game. As the sample grows larger, the chance that luck is the force creating the difference goes down. Eventually, with a big enough sample, honest minds would have to consider the chance that someone is cheating.Crooked gamblers have made money for years off of naive players. They still do. And even if you choose to believe that everything you see on-line is honest and above board, the possibilty exists that dishonest people could do business on-line too.

[Zach6668 513]

lol dude. I have 100s of thousands of hands logged that show me as always having been a winning player. I don't have a deal with the websites where I just happen to be the lucky one, nor do I play 70-80% of my hands preflop.I'm sure GlisteningPenis will say the same thing.Your accusations are incredibly laughable.As I've said before, this thread is retarded, and I don't even know why I continue to reply. I don't really know why anyone continues to reply, to be honest. I'm done.