I play primarily MTTs with 40-75 people though not on PS. I think there's a difference between overall tourney strat and individual hand (within that tourney) strat and perhaps that's where the disconnect is.

Shouldn't the variance drop as field sizes decrease?

Yes. This is one of many cases where someone uses variance to mean something like "probability of facing a downswing", not statistical variance.

Oh, it's a site I send people to when they need to do a Google search, but I guess it comes off as a bit harsh. I didn't intended anything personal, and I do appreciate that you seem to be serious about wanting to improve your game.

This thread isn't about tournaments or O8 but it looks like a good start. At least it establishes that I'm not some crank claiming to speak for the accumulated wisdom of 2+2. Same basic concepts:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/27...-fish-1075470/

Exactly. Variance and ROI will both be higher. The best situation is a table of incredible loose passives -- calling with any piece of anything, but only raising the nuts. If you can't get that, though, clueless LAGs are usually going to make more -EV decisions than weak-tight players. At the extremes, obviously, a really bad weak-tight player will be more profitable than a marginal LAG loser.

I hope you'll read the whole thread, but this post is particularly on target:

Not really. The first ten posts or so in this thread originally were posted in the "Blind play %" thread, but really have nothing to do with blind play %. The originator of the "Blind play %" thread, grunta0, suggested a separate thread and I obliged him. I chose a post of yours as the starting post for the new thread, and I quoted some of your own words as the title.

The "Blind play %" thread is an excellent thread, in my opinion, thanks in no small part to your own contributions. (That's not to say this is not an excellent thread as well, but I thought you had at least one great post in that other thread).

Exactly. Just routine "housekeeping." There was no intent to offend you (or anyone else) by starting another thread for posts that had wandered from the topic of the other thread. I greatly appreciate your contributions to this forum, AKQJ10.

When I move a posts from one thread to another, I can't choose where to place them. The placement is done automatically by the vB system 2+2 is using, oldest post first.

Buzz

I guess u dont play on stars but if did i am sure u would change ur opinion. You have to obviously play different versus dfferent categories of players but if you have a table full of spewtards that wanna gamble it up preflop every time then ur gonna struggle with variance.

although i counteract this with 3 bettin less and keeping pots small pre flop and useing my post flop edge on these guys its often happens were u just gotta gamble with them preflop. If you get a stack it makes it way easier ofcourse.

A table with more weak players with a cpl of spewtards is ideal for my game strategy. and my ROI will be higher i am certain of it rather than a table full of clowns. ur gonna get a bad beat in most mtts if there are 8 gamblers at the table but playin smart aggro versus tight players u can often get a stack without gettin al in every other hand.

This is spot on as to what's going on and how to cope with it.

I think my results are better, but maybe someone can give me some tips as to what I might be missing. I don't have HEM or any tracking software.

The only real stats I have are my finishes from OPR. These are O8-only stats, but they only have stats by year (not month). Pre-BF should be 90+% PL/NLO8 and much of it at mid-stakes (11R, 22s, 33NL), while post-BF is all PL/NLO8 at mostly micro-stakes. E/EM/M/EL/L is when you bust (early... middle... late at 10/20/40/20/10% ratios). The sample sizes are similar, each about 1k MTTs.

Pre-BF
------------------------
ITM 21%
E/EM/M/EL/L: 8/14/37/26/15


2012
----------------------------
ITM 24%
E/EM/M/EL/L: 5/12/39/29/15

I also have this info by field size, if that would be useful. It basically indicates that I am stronger in larger fields (360+) and am weaker in smaller fields (< 90). This is what I was trying to say earlier, I already know this to be the case, but see a lot more small fields than large fields at present.

I guess it seems to me that I'm not donkin it up that much early and ITM a bit more, but it's not really helping me late. I'm not sure how to increase the late % without increasing variance substantially in the process. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Leroy I'm playing only Stars at the moment. What other sites have decent Omaha coverage as I would like to try a few.

Thanks.

Thanks Buzz I thought it was probably you who started it.

I originally got the idea off a couple of posts by "billygstar" and then when "AKQJT" said "you are wrong" I thought some discussion warranted.

Again, thank you!

"I didn't intended anything personal, and I do appreciate that you seem to be serious about wanting to improve your game."

"AKQJT" I have to admit that you have definitely screwed with my head. Just when I think I have a line on you you change and alter my opinion.

Are you on drugs?

Some days you seem to go out of your way to insult people and be sarcastic and on others seem quite agreeable and willing to help.

Could this be some mind game you are playing because you have nothing better to do. If so it is a shame because you obviously have a lot of experience and a good read on poker which myself and a lot of others would like to tap in to. The jury is still out!

Fwiw, I've never played PLO8 on PS, but it seems odd to me that it was full of ABC nits pre BF and its full of aggro spewtards post BF.

It may seem odd, but that's basically the trend. Some of the good US players moved and are still playing... none of the decent/bad (weak tight, stations, spewy) US players moved. The good UK/Can/Euro players are there from before, as well as most of the bad ones (which are similar mix to US). Now there are a bunch of players from Europe/Russia/S.A., some TAG, some PF aggr, some LAGgy/spewy. The % of good players has probably stayed the same or gone up (gone up in the 5R... not sure about mid-stakes, possibly same or lower). The remaining bad players are much less exploitable and force you to push PF edges much more, leaving much less opportunity to A) see flop and B) play flop with good IO. This reduces the post-flop edge.

Micro MTTs are fine and that's what I'm playing. When I talk about reducing variance, I'm talking about mid-stakes tourneys, where you basically have to get to FT to cash (sometimes 12 pay, sometimes 5).

In my case, I'm not rolled for mid-stakes really, but before BF I could still play mid-stakes, because the variance was less for me (maybe not for others, IDK). Maybe I should try to get backed? I'd like to coach, but don't see much market for that, unless it's another game (I might be able to learn and improve at PLO?) and/or cash (which I basically have zero experience).

Let's not forget a sizable group of players playing on vpn on some of these sites that did not want to move and found a way around it. I am not talking about pokerstars either.

Mega

I wouldn't doubt it. I know that since BF there's a LOT more Canadians and even quite a few "Mexicans" that are playing O8. Yet I only recognize a handful of SNs from the past... things that make you go hmmmm

Nice run at WSOP Mega!

There must be a way around it as I know some Americans are playing with a Canadian IP address. (and good luck to them).

The other day in a NLHE game there was a guy talking away about how he only lived 5 minutes from Vegas and goes in two or three times a week to play in this and that game.

When I looked at his location it said Canada.

I wrote him that I was terrible at geography but I didn't know there was any part of Canada that was five minutes from Vegas.

He immediately stopped chatting (which was probably a smart thing to do).