true or false..say since around Sep 2005.

if true, those that adjusted, what do you think the Sklankites need to work on ?

thanks.

ps.. and don't say: "Play SH" or "Play NL" ... stick to Full LHE.

Bah! I was gonna say "play SH", now I have no insight.

Good bye.

Maybe. It have something to do with all the college students that are off for summer and would rather play poker than get a job. Personally, I find the 10/20 to 20/40 games pretty soft right now (compared to around April).

I can't have a winning session anymore.
but maybe 10 hands shouldn't count.

it seems tighter and better than I recalled.

and by better I mean a worse game to sit in.

i strongly agree, actuary. there was a period in like jan-feb where i thought that suddenly everyone was having a pro watching over their shoulder, and TAG didn't work anymore at 10/20+. as for lower limits, i think you're KINDA right, but not to the point where TAG doesn't work anymore. now that i'm back at 3/6, i'm TAGing full ring on party and it's working just fine, but of course i'm throwing in blind steals, etc.

the biggest thing i had to start doing in the tougher games was raising marginal hands in position (sometimes down to T9o) against anyone who was kinda weak postflop to get more than my share of their money. try that, maybe?

Lower limit games are tight as hell.

There're a million mediocre players out there who take this **** seriously and put in a real effort to make money at .50/1.


There are a lot of micros out there that are tighter than 10/20 games that i watch.

Doesnt necessarily mean that theyre GOOD.

Has anybody went to the darkside and started experimenting with LAGing it up?

Define lag.

YES. These are my feelings exactly. I remember when I went from 2/4 to 3/6 that I felt the games were impossible to beat for a decent rate cuz everyone had taggish stats. But most of them are weak and very trusting. Now I notice when I move up, everyone has fishy pf stats, but play a lot trickier postflop.

Throw in more river raises with weak made hands that you will call with anyway (as well as busted draws some times), try to steal more, and throw in a few flop c/r's with boards that are unlikely to have hit your opponent and these games will become much easier.

i will not play limit holdem anymore. tight players plus high rake equals a game that is not very good. notice how people used to say yea you can do 3bb/100 if you play good. this seems to have been downgraded recently to you can do 2bb/100 if you play very good. sure its still beatable, but you can make a lot more playing other games.

the players still suck though they are just tight. if they all played 5/10 like this and didnt play any better i would play them until i fell over from exhasution.

there is a player at my 3/6 table right now who is 10/4 (VPIP/PFR) over 2K hands.

Well, the new fishes are the weak tighties that are'nt as profitable as the loose passive ones.

3BB/100 isnt impossible.

The fact that 2BB/100 is more commonly cited might be because people are being more realistic.

And rake shouldnt be an issue if you have a good rakeback plan coupled with reload bonuses.




Alphachic? Msnake? Puffmethepot? I need a name!

well its not MSNAKE and you guessed right sooo

here's a hint:
I opened a pot in EP with JJ, got reraised, this person cold-called, then the 15/4/1/300 small blind capped it, then led at a 2KK flop. I have never had such an easy fold of JJ.

i win.

yesterday, i was playing with a guy who was around 40/ZERO/1.5 over about 800 hands. earlier he had open limped QQ in mp1.

QQ in mp3, dude raises UTG, i fold.

It was a long orchastrated bluff you fool!

http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/current/jockusch0706.html

That's an interesting article that somewhat relates to this situation.

good stuff

i'm disturbingly curious as to what he had. did you check his history to see if he had AA in those 800 hands (at a showdown i guess)?

He probably had 87s or something and was "mixing it up." either way, pretty funny.

lol, no. he had AA, some poor sod had AK, hit a K, and called him down.

i, however, sucked myself off in congratulatory fashion.

Must be alphachic, come to think of it...

Puffmethepot probably doesnt play enough for you to have that many hands on him.


What a tight wad. They cant possibly be winning. They probably think that they're brilliant players too... and it must eat them up inside to see such terrible results at the end of each week. They probably break even with rakeback and bonus, but it could be close.

i want to get into a tight table now and just raise 72 off utg for +EV

There's one around now, IVO-something that is 8.5/4 after a couple thousand hands. I really don't think you can win at 8.5.

But you're right, they think they're great. I had a conversation with one regular who says he's been playing for 3 years, has over 1.5 million hands and is currently on a 50K hand downswing. His stats re 13/6/2. I don't understand how you can play for 3 years and now be able to play more than 13% of hands profitably. Or in his case, break-evenly.

This question is pretty easy. The vast, vast majority of newer players online are NL players. Those who started on Limit for recreation moved to NL, and those looking to make money at LHE play like Sklansky robots.

I have noticed, over the past 6 months or so, an improvement in the # showing up to play lower-limit Omaha, Stud and split games, especially on the medium-sized sites. 2/4, 3/6 Omaha 8/b and Stud Hi/Lo are super-soft right now.

i know this is going to sound really dumb but what are all those numbers you guys are listing (ex. His stats re 13/6/2)?

not dumb.
PokerTracker software convention.

% He put money in preflop
% He Raises preflop
Post Flop agresion factor (ratio of times he Bet or Raise to the Times he Calls.

thank you. i have heard about pokertracker i dont use it though. does it really help that much? i never really thought about trying it out.

yes. use the search function - there's a few threads discussion if/how it is helpful.

Ive heard of him/her.

I think breaking even with a VPIP of 12 would be impressive for the 9max tables.




People are delusional.

There's a guy on 2+2 who insisted he was a 2-3BB/100 winner, and that 'variance' was responsible for a 200k hand break even stretch. Lawl.

yeah. Q ? something?
I thoguht it was curious.
Perhaps Screech or Kdawg will chime in.
I think they support the notion that he;s a solid player.
I have no opinino; but am fascinated by the question: When do you know you are beating the game?.. or better.. that you will beat it long term

I think that you're thinking about someone else... who had a breakeven stretch over 100k hands, and it was at the mid limits, and he never claimed his winrate was as high as this guy was claiming.

Of course anything is possible.

But do the math.

The probability of a 2.5BB/100 winner EVER experiencing a 200k breakeven stretch is so low that it isnt worth giving any consideration to.

how would i figure out my range of 'actual' win rate for a given win rate over a given sample size.

for instance, if i win 2bb/100 over 20K hands, what is the range of my actual win rate, given reasonable significance. is there a formula?

I'm vaguely recalling a post about someone losing 1500BBs at middle limits, claiming to have been playing winning poker the entire time. I don't see how that's possible.

Didn't know you were into LHE, mr. threesomes. I will make a point to post more from my infrequent 5/10 sessions in the sick day thread.

ah yes, you should have been paying closer attention to my ranty posts. i'm actually TP/MT right now, playing 1/2-3/6 LHE mostly just bonuswhoring.

actually one of the things i'm interested in is the relative level of play at 2/4-3/6 on absolute, and 5/10-15/30 at other sites (aka party) so i'd be interested. also, i love torturing the non-poker playing Sickies with LHE strat discussion.

I dont have excel loaded on this computer, but i have default figures loaded for 2BB/100 with 50k hands and a stdv of 14.

For those figures, there's a 95% chance that your true winrate lies between 0.77 and 3.28.

Or in other words, there's a 2.5% chance that your true winrate lies between 0.77BB/100 and a 2.5% chance that your true winrate lies above 3.28BB/100.



If you phrase it as a 200k hand sample with a stdv of 14 and a samlple wr of 0BB/100 (breakeven), there is a very small fraction of a percentage chance that the true winrate lies at or above 2.5BB/100. I just checked on my other laptop. There are about 10 decimal points needed. Or in other words, 0.9999999999% chance that someone with 200k hands of break even poker will be within +/- 2.5BB/100 from their sample. And technically it's only half as likely that the true winrate exceeds 2.5, the rest accounts for the lower bounds.