Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
May LC Thread: Bangarang May LC Thread: Bangarang

05-06-2014 , 02:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
You're effectively getting 80% RB if you paid 3BB and are now paying .6BB. It's going to increase your wr by 2.4 to make it 3.4BB instead of 1BB.
Right. That makes a lot more sense. Ty
05-06-2014 , 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimM
As I follow along I'm trying to remember what it was like when I played full time. It was 2005-2006, and yes the games were much easier for any given stakes. I played mostly FRLHE, and most of my hands were at Party 10/20 and 15/30, with some occasional 20/40, where I was never able to stay.

There was never the threat you speak of, because in any bad run, one could always drop as low as 2/4 and crush it enough to pay the rent. There was no sign of competence at that level at all.
ya, and now you cant really drop down bc the 510 game are actually worse than the 3060 due to the rake. hell, most of the time the 3060 games were better disregarding rake anyway.
05-06-2014 , 03:38 PM
I am a little disappointed this month. I had always observed that the 30/60 games were pretty damn soft. But so far this month, they are fairly tough most of the time... like the fish are usually just LAGs who aren't that bad. Is this what the rest of you are seeing too?
05-06-2014 , 04:11 PM
Yes
05-06-2014 , 04:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
You're effectively getting 80% RB if you paid 3BB and are now paying .6BB. It's going to increase your wr by 2.4 to make it 3.4BB instead of 1BB.
In theory, then, would a winner prefer to get 80% rakeback (assume weighted contributed) or have his winrate increased by 2.4? How did you come up with 2.4?
05-06-2014 , 04:43 PM
Nothing is that different about the games lately imo. Except no racist guy. So mb a little worse.
05-06-2014 , 04:55 PM
and the bad lags are just elo and i
05-06-2014 , 05:02 PM
lol bk

I last saw FamousRacist about a week ago. How can somebody that angry be that tight/nitty/passive? I need to give him tilting lessons.

UG: yes

Also, a confession: I don't mind playing full ring games whatsoever.
05-06-2014 , 05:08 PM
Yeah, I busted my roll at 30/60 last Tuesday, so I'm not in the games anymore until I get another miracle $150 > $7k month.
05-06-2014 , 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dark_horse
In theory, then, would a winner prefer to get 80% rakeback (assume weighted contributed) or have his winrate increased by 2.4?
If you're playing the exact same games/players just with a different-sized rake then presumably you win/pay rake on the same number of hands. So it should make no difference afaik.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dark_horse
How did you come up with 2.4?
3.0BB-0.6BB = 2.4?
05-06-2014 , 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dark_horse
In theory, then, would a winner prefer to get 80% rakeback (assume weighted contributed) or have his winrate increased by 2.4? How did you come up with 2.4?
Jeez dude, I have met plenty of good poker players who suck at math, but this is middle school math lol. You were paying 3 BB/100 in rake at 3/6 and .6 BB/100 at 30/60. 3 - .6 = 2.4.

Thinking of this as rakeback is kind of an odd way to look at things since on a site like Stars, you are going to be getting both the rake drop you are talking about on Bovada in addition to 40+% rakeback from Supernova+. But yes, moving out of the rake trap is extremely important on any site and the key to making big money. On most sites, the rake trap ends at 8/16-10/20 and keeps getting better up to 30/60. Above 30/60, the stakes are so high that rake becomes almost nothing. Like I think an SNE at 100/200 on Stars might pay less than .1 BB/100 in rake.

The problem is that the bankroll/tilt management requirements are just too high for a lot of players at 30/60. Also, weaker regs will get absolutely smashed by top tier Stars pros to the point that the rake drop does not help them at 30/60+. In general, the higher rake games tend to be much softer than lower rake games because the high rake keeps pros out of the games, especially the rakeback grinder types. This is one reason Bovada is soft... if they gave out 30% rakeback, we would see a massive increase in pro players. Fish do not give a **** about rakeback.
05-06-2014 , 05:30 PM
Elo, what annoys me about the full ring games running is that it reduces the total number of games running. I would ideally like to be playing 4 tables. So if a full ring game is running at 8/16, that means I have to play one really slow table of 8/16 instead of 2 shorthanded tables. So excluding all of my other tables, a full ring table might give me 60 hands/hour. But 2 6-max tables might give me 180 hands/hour. So it just absolutely cripples my winrate. He only does it at 8/16-10/20, but I am sure it affects the 20/40-30/60 games too since a lot of the fish play both.

Last edited by Unguarded; 05-06-2014 at 05:31 PM. Reason: also, cannot play right now, but I see a racist dude playing 30/60 lol
05-06-2014 , 06:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodeo
i don't actually take off my shoes and run. i just try to use the barefoot running form (toe strike) with zero drop shoes on.
What brand/model of zero drop shoe do you use? Do you recommend it?
05-06-2014 , 11:25 PM
http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/show...an=&page=&vc=1

Quote:
It turns out that he went so far that he cant even get a boner anymore, not even a little poke! Nothing stimulates him, what kinda hell is that.

Guys who play poker everyday get the exact same way. Without any outside stimulation they need to get all their stimulation from poker. It causes them to play in worse and worse games at worse and worse times, just for the action. Then one day u’ll see them practicing the poker version of auto erotic asphyxiation, short handed limit poker at 10am after pulling an all nighter.
games are complete crap right now. first time ive felt like playing weeks. oh well. this guy makes it seem kinda badass at least.
05-06-2014 , 11:57 PM
That was a pretty badass rant! The internet used to be so much more fun
05-07-2014 , 02:03 AM
Remember back in the days when ppl in here posted hands that actually were fun and interesting or bragged after big heaters.
Lately it seems everyone is turning into some borderline suicidal rb grinder.
05-07-2014 , 02:22 AM
I am only posting this to cheer up henholland, not because I want to brag and draw attention to myself:



My April, and my best online month since 2011 (have made more live though). Oh, and +$1533 more since Elo told me about that NL donkament that I did well in.
05-07-2014 , 02:45 AM
awesome!

Running pretty good in 2014 myself, with 3BB+ winrate and ~1$/hand, but ofc i play a few hours per week on avg, so its a puny sample.

The positive about playing so little is that the game feels interesting every time i sit down and i feel i am able to make good non-autopilot plays a lot more frequent.
05-07-2014 , 08:59 AM
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...ng-us-1433678/

Lol @ this scumbag organization.
05-07-2014 , 02:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unguarded
That was a pretty badass rant! The internet used to be so much more fun
Yeah, that was pretty great. The author is that kinda wild-haired guy who plays at Commerce, think mostly the high PLO/NL games and just occasionally LHE.

Nice graph!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RonMexico
Regulatorrrrssss

You're corrupt

Thanks a lot PPA
05-07-2014 , 07:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeoneElse'sFool
What brand/model of zero drop shoe do you use? Do you recommend it?
the shoes i'm using right now are addidas adipure tr 360. they're not meant specifically for running though. i can't really recommend anything since those are the only shoes i've tried. when i get to the point where i'm running a 5k a couple times a week, i'm going to get some new balance minimus.
05-07-2014 , 10:04 PM
On barefoot running, check out this study on foot strike done by the US Army where they find that heel vs. forefoot strike has pretty much zero effect on injury rate:

http://www.runnersworld.com/injury-p...ct-injury-rate
05-07-2014 , 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unguarded
I am only posting this to cheer up henholland, not because I want to brag and draw attention to myself:



My April, and my best online month since 2011 (have made more live though). Oh, and +$1533 more since Elo told me about that NL donkament that I did well in.
Impressive how you can go 27k hands in a game like that and not have a downswing more than 2k. I'm just about .5/100 over 27k hands and have +/-100 bet swings every day. But I run lolbad even worse than victor omgggg fml :handgun:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unguarded
Thinking of this as rakeback is kind of an odd way to look at things since on a site like Stars, you are going to be getting both the rake drop you are talking about on Bovada in addition to 40+% rakeback from Supernova+.
I was thinking about it purely in a mathematical sense, comparing playing a 3BB/100 game with 80% rakeback versus getting no rakeback but reducing my rake paid by 80%. It's a method I thought I could use to extrapolate my old 3/6 data and assess my real 30/60 winrate without clawing my eyes out first.

Last edited by dark_horse; 05-07-2014 at 10:18 PM.
05-07-2014 , 10:24 PM
As far as the math, the 2 scenarios you describe are exactly the same.

If you just want to make a direct comparison of your 3/6 winrate to your 30/60 winrate, just take your winrate in BB/100 at each stake and add the rake in BB/100. Like if your 3/6 winrate was 2 and the rake was 3, your winrate without rake was 5 BB/100. If your winrate at 30/60 is 1 BB/100 and the rake is .6 BB/100, then your winrate without rake is 1.6 BB/100.
05-07-2014 , 10:30 PM
That's simple enough. But even losing players benefit from rakeback. That's why break-even SNE grinders can make a living. In a vacuum if you lost every single hand you played you are paying zero rake. So I guess my original question was, if losing players benefit more from rakeback, wouldn't winners benefit more from paying less rake?

      
m