Oaks is like game2 as I remember. Cal Grand is like game1. Post to get a hand at Oaks and not at Cal grand. I haven't been to Oaks in years but I guess the 3/6 is still $4+$1.

So as I posted in the other thread which game looks to be better for possible win rate?

Another difference. Chop at game1 but no chop at game2.

At game2 there are usually 6-7 to the flop each hand.

I would think that the extra $2 OTB would make game2 better.

Oaks 3/6 is $4 drop, no flop no drop. BB $3, SB $1.
Cal Grand 3/6 is $4 drop, no flop full drop. BB $3, SB $2, BTN $2.
Oaks 6/12 is $4 drop, no flop no drop. BB $6, SB $4.
Cal Grand 6/12 is $4 drop, no flop full drop. BB $6, SB $4, BTN $2.
Oaks 15/30 is $4 drop, no flop no drop. BB $15, SB $10.
Cal Grand 15/30 is $5 drop, no flop full drop. BB $15, SB $10, BTN $5.
Oaks 30/60 is $5 drop, no flop no drop. BB $30, SB $20.

I am 90% sure that Oaks is $4, not $3+$1. The jackpot is entirely house-funded, which is why (if you've noticed) that its max value is << $1 (chances of hitting BBJ are somewhere in the 1/200k range, so the Oaks BBJ is worth something like $0.05-$0.25). I am 60% certain Cal Grand is the same way; most places with a separate BBJ drop (which entails rules regarding how much of the BBJ drop needs to be returned) will have a separate bin for the BBJ money so it doesn't get comingled with the drop money, e.g., Lucky Chances.

As for which 3/6 game is better, it's pretty hard to say. NFND vs. NFFD doesn't matter because there's always a flop. BTN blind sucks but again when there are 5 limpers to you on the BTN, you're playing a lot of lolwat anyway, so a BTN blind doesn't cost as much as one might initially think. I suspect that the difference between the games lies primarily in how many big street pot padders you get (the people who overcall, over-overcall, over-over-overcall the river just in case the 2 people ahead of them were bluff-calling). When I moved up from 3/6 to 6/12, I really missed getting 6-8 BB on unraised big streets.

Speaking of 6/12, what I can say for certain is that both 6/12 games are AMAZING and I can say from first hand experience that they're easily beatable with the most basic advice on this forum. As a matter of fact, you can butcher all your marginal hands and still do alright with a basic game. Asking which 3/6 game is better when you've got TWO spectacular 6/12 games available is like asking whether the steak at Denny's or the steak at Lyon's is better when Outback and Black Angus are both across the street.

Thanks. I played 90% 6/12 at oaks 2006-2009 time frame. 3/6 was a wait for a 6/12. At Cal I played NLHE 90% from 2004-2006 timeframe and then moved 90% 6/12 LHE. About May last year I gave up 6/12 for 3/6. Thus my question.

I probably should go back to 6/12... Oaks is probably better than Cal. Bigger pots at Cal, both loose.

The nofold'em 3/6 with $2 OTB helps to offset the drop IMO.

Lots of loose callers with 5 3/6 tables to choose from.

Nice analysis of the games. Now I'm hungrey for a steak. Black Angus.

When I was growing up, the Nebraska Cornhuskers were the dominant college football team. They had some astounding (500?) number of rushing yards per game and crushed their opponents with a playbook consisting of 2 plays - quaterback option right, quarterback option left. They'd line up in the wishbone every single play and everyone knew exactly what they were going to do, and yet, nobody could ever stop them.

Beating 6/12 is like being the Nebraska Cornhuskers 25 years ago. We in the forum seem to constantly worry about what you're going to do on 4th and inches from your opponent's 35-yard line, but honestly, if you can run the basics like the Cornhuskers ran the quarterback option, it doesn't matter what you do in those rare/specialized cases. You'll score MORE if you can play 4th and inches correctly, but that just means winning 55-17 instead of 42-17.

Also, Morton's.

Nice analogy - BTW Morton's like 20/40 thanks sounds like good idea - thanks - I know that you would remember a 6/12 player from Oaks circa 2006 time frame (if I gave you a hint) when the game was tighter - he was at cal grand 6/12 last year and it was 3-way - I had a 6 for a 9 high one card straight looking at a flush card on 4th and 5th streets. I folded river due to their aggro raise/re-raise and of course I complained on 6th street that I mucked the winner (bad habit) - he said if I folded a 6 I didn't deserve to win. I misread the situation; Anyway that soured me on the game. But, I agree that the 6/12 is much better than the 3/6 games.

How is this so?. I imagine you have to post the $2 every round as everyone else.

Yes, that is true and that was part of my question. It does not help the cost of the blinds but it does offset the DROP when you are not in the blinds.

Game1 - Seed money from blinds = $4 ($3,$1)
Game2 - Seed money from blinds = $7 ($3,$2,$2)

You have AKs and raise either OTB folds ($2 dead) or calls with a (hopefully) worse hand. That is $2 toward the drop.

Games where no OTB blind then no dead money when they fold.

This is my idea and no way to know if I am correct?

You need to take into account the cost of completing your button every round it's limped to you.

Doing 10k feet arithmetic,if you win one in 10 pots (with extra $2) but are required to post $2 every 9 hands, what do you think?.

You don't lose the whole $2 you post (on average) but I'd guess it doesn't really change much.

You keep insisting a 3/6 game with $4 rake + $1 tip is beatable for 1BB/hr. I'll point out one more time that imo it is not by a long shot (as your results, even though anecdotal, confirm)

That part does suck.

I never insisted that a 3/6 game is beatable because I will never play enough to know. Assuming that I get better with time last year and this year I am anout $2.52 hour for 294 hours. The margin is so thin that one bad session will kill that. My win rate ranges between -5 and +5 per hour but that could be variance.

The issue is choices: A compared to B.

I have not been able to consistently beat 6/12 either.

Choices are:

1 Quit, 2 get better, 3 keep playing.

My question which is better 3/6?

Since 3/6 is for entertainment purposes only. There is no money to be had.

Food for thought. People say that 3/6 is not beatable because of the high drop/rake true? Then an expert player should have a win rate of 1BB/hr minus the drop of 5/6BB.

That would be -$1/hr.

All food and beverages out of pocket and not chips.

If the results is different there are at least 3 reasons.

1 not an expert
2 variance
3 something other than drop cost.

Disagree?

I just checked and you claimed in the 3/6 BB/hr thread that you'd expect a max winrate of $5/hr. I took that to mean that it's possible and not just an safe upper bound. After all 5 is greater than 0, but I don't think you meant it that way

How many thousand hrs do you have of 6/12?. Do you see people making mistakes in that game?

Imo, both games are equally bad. More fun to play all buttons tough.

We all play for different reasons. I'm trying to clarify some points so people make informed decisions.

Thanks for the input. So both 3/6 games are equally bad. Well it is a hobby.

No fun playing without some money involved. I get bored quickly. I could never play the online free games.

I started playing Hold'em in 2003. I have been using the BBJP money $35,200 as bankroll. I have played 2,297 hours of 6/12 with a losing rate of -5.90/hr and 2,070 hours of 3/6 at -2.41/hr.

I see players making mistakes at 6/12 and 3/6 all the time.

Cal Grand 3/6 starting January 2011 Win rate $2.52/hr for 295 hours.

Over the years I have actually won at 8/16, 12/24 and 20/40 but not enough time to count. 160 hours and $1,190. Not sure if I had played more I would be winning.

The only 6/12 game that I am ahead now is AJs and I have played there 13 times over the years.

I will never know for sure if I have won LLHE until I stop playing.

The 1 BB/hr figure (which has been bandied about willy nilly probably too much and not likely possible in a lot of games) usually is figured post rake/drops and tips.

You are correct that you should be playing 3/6 for fun and to sharpen your skills. Get a job, save money, and move up.

I wouldn't try to grind a roll from 3/6.

Good advice. Making money at 3/6 is like pushing on a string. I can afford to play 6/12 and 15/30 but I don't like to donate. Luckily I have a great job and I can afford to play. I spend more money on wine and scotch than poker (I like drinking more anyway).

In 2004 I had aspirations of playing middle level hold'em. It took a few years to dissuade me of that goal.

Now, I approach Hold'em one as a hobby, two as a challenge. However, at 3/6 I don't try to play as well as I should. Too much chasing.

I find poker logic more difficult than chess. Example:

You have a pair and there are 5 enemy - the hand plays different every time. Depends on position, pre-flop action and the three cards on the flop of which there are over 19,000 possible combinations. Too many variables.

Do I have the best hand? Do I have the best draw?

I figure that if I break even or make $1/hr at 3/6 I am doing good.

Some day I might try to move up again.

I was just curious which 3/6 game was better.

Maybe I will wonder over to Oaks later and play 6/12.

THANKS

If you feel your game is improving I'd recommend staying at 6/12 as a minimum. You'll at least have a chance to beat the rake.

At 3/6 with $5 taken by rake and tip the P(losing all your bankroll) is very close to 1.

The issue is not win rate but am I making mistakes? The theory is that win/loss will take care of itself if you make fewer mistakes that your opponents. I suspect that this theory is wrong for LLHE games that are very loose.

I think that tracking win/loss below 8/16 is a waste of time.

My 3/6 game is improving - I had always preferred 6/12 because it is the same drop as 3/6 and with $2 OTB I can toss more hands.

I did play some 6/12 over last 15 months - 65 hours - that is not enough to tell except that I lost more often than I won. It convinced me to just play 3/6.

A lot is convenience - Oaks is 30 minutes - Cal Grand is 40 minutes - AJs is across the Bridge but 35 minutes - Bay 101 is 40 minutes no traffic but busy - Lucky Chances is 50 minutes. Cache Creek is 1:45 and 96 miles.

Last two times at Oaks 6/12 was once in May 2010 and once in Jan 2011 and I won $200 each visit.

At least I have choices of locations and games.

FTOP always applies. Making fewer mistakes than your opponents is always profitable.

Yes, over the long run. It might be with lots of players they might be making fewer or smaller mistakes. SSHE discusses this.

No, not over the long run. It always applies.

Okay - I will agree with you since it is hard to disagree with sound wisdom.

I will concentrate on making fewer mistakes, like I have not been doing that already but I have a renewed interest after this discussion.

It seems that chasing is my biggest leak -

bet when should check (hate to give free cards)
check when should bet (river error)
call when should fold (preflop too loose)
call when should raise (not aggro)
fold when you should call (over call river error)

I think that you can grind out $5 ph at 2/4 or 3/6 but why would you want to? The only reason to play such games is for enjoyment or learning or you can not win at a higher level. I am stuck at 2/4 because of all three. But Hey, better to win $5ph than play golf. My opinion is based on about 300 hours in LV.

Yes, all three. If I could beat a higher level I would do that. I sometimes enjoy Hold'em so I play it.

Goal should be to move up if you are young and bright.

In 300 hrs of play, the standard deviation in your balance is around 200BB which is huge if you are trying to see if the 0, +-100, or +-300BB you won come from your average long term winrate or are due to random fluctuations.

Drawing conclusions about what's possible long term based on 300hrs of play is very misleading.

I have over 2,000 hours and I am not sure that it is enough.

I have always considered game selection near the top of the list of things to consider. Is that critical at LLHE?

Say you have 5 games to choose from: At what point are there two many loose/bad players in a game to make it -EV. Players that are making preflop errors are good to have on your table but they also must make post-flop errors as well since that is where the money is. Is there a point where there are too many making post-flop errors?

Where is there good information on game selection? Is it worth studying more? I need to open SSHE and see if it is discussed there.

This is a excerpt from cardplayer article.

My results (we have to consider overall results for the life of the game) varies depending the on the game that I happen to land on any given day unless I seek to change to a better game or quit for the day. Short term it is luck but over the longer haul skill should prevail.

Signs the game is not good or that you should move/quit:

-too many loose players? True?
-too many good players
-running bad and players are taking shots at you
-you are tilting
-you are playing bad (different than tilt)
-you are tired

I'm sure that this is not complete or even correct.

Ideas?

Is it this simple: This looks like sage advice.