If every street is capped (California 4-bet), it will cost you 12BB to play out the whole hand and never run out of chips. Obviously this doesn't apply to heads-up/no cap.

I disagree. I know others have shown how there is a benefit to playing shortstacked and getting it all in preflop in certain situations, but I'm thinking there is way more benefit in having a zillion dollars behind and being able to push huge edges postflop. Plus, by getting it all in preflop we totally eliminate any postflop edge we have, a huge part of the game. And I'm also thinking the majority of money we make at small stakes lol live games are by making good value bets, pumping huge equities on the flop, and getting paid off big time by calling stations, none of which is possible if we're all in preflop.

The other night I saw some moron go 6 bets on the river HU vs a tight player on a JJ99x board, and then he finally slapped his head and said "oh no, I think you must have a Jack!". Not having chips in play against opponents like this has got to be a huge mistake.

I don't do it, so I shouldn't really be the ambassador of short-stack limit play, but I wasn't thinking of being all-in PF. I think the largest benefit is probably when you have a gutshot or bottom pair plus overcard or something and have odds to peel for a SB on the flop but will then have to fold the turn. Barry Greenstein made a good point about it once--can't remember if it was on his sight or here--that I wish I'd saved.

Noob question: Is this game beatable???

Only one of my local B&M spreads a limit game - 3/6 full kill. The rake is 10% up to $6 and $1 for BBJ.

My guess is "no," however I am curious if the "full kill" can make enough of a difference to make this game profitable.

Thanks!

Everyone here says no, although I have been able to usually beat 3-6 full kill with a $5 max drop for about $1200 a month playing about 90 hours a month.

But that is me, and I am a very solid limit player, so maybe for some it isn't beatable? I know the rake and tip and gas/commute is terrible and takes away from your $ so take that into consideration.

I remember when I made $1200, $1400 and $1300 3 consecutive months in a row playing 2-4 and 3-6 limit poker, usually 70-100 hours a month and I didn't feel like I ran great but the biggest down swing I took in that time span was about $600 or 150BB.

Again, for most people it isn't beatable though.

(yes 3 months is a small sample when talking about PT live, but I was just pointing out that it could be done)

Noob time.

What is showdown value?

I actually think I know intuitively, but I have never heard this term before.



......................................

Showdown value is talking about the expectation a hand has to actually win at showdown. How much equity does your hand have unimproved vs. people who are going to show down? It is usually referred to in relation to potentially turning a weak hand in to a bluff. i.e., "you shouldn't semibluff bottom pair HU on this turn; your hand has showdown value and you should c/c to the river." I guess you could also contrast the drawing aspect of your hand vs. its showdown value.

A7 on a T7K3 board...

In a HU pot, the hand has some showdown value. In a 5 way pot, it is a NFD. See how the same hand might or might not have showdown value on the same board depending on circumstances?

A-high can have showdown value
2nd pair often does
6 high almost never does

Thank you for the articulate and timely answer!

................................................:d iamond:

Edit: I asked what MUBSy was, then I figured out through context that it is Monsters Under the Bed Syndrome.

I also think this game is beatable, but I agree the effort/reward ratio is going to be very high.

I am taking a trial run with PT3.

I don't have any point of reference with the software.

What numbers am I looking to acheive in my game (VP/PR/AF)

And what numbers am I looking for in expoitable opponents?

I have been playing poker for a little over year. Last year I have been playing Heads Up NL SNGs successfully so I would say I have a good No limit knowledge.

I am getting quite bored with NL, so I would like to start playing some limit poker in addition.

I don't have much clue how to play limit (I have played some micro stakes for a while when I started with poker, but thats all) and I am interested what limits should I start with (6-max). I have enough money aside of my regular banrkoll to play up to 2/4 but is this a good idea for a limit newb with good general poker understanding (I think I am a quick learner too).

I'd definitely advise against starting at 2/4. For someone with your background, start out at $0.50/$1.00. You'll know quickly (within a few thousand hands) if you can move up in stakes or not. Don't just look at winrate, but judge yourself honestly and HOW you're playing vs. how everyone else at the table is playing.

$2/4 on Stars is where you start seeing a bunch of the same nitty regs who are grinding out rakeback. The key to success is to sit at good tables, to the left of the worst players at the table. Avoid the nits if you can.

Since the biggest fish are usually not regs, you won't know them by their HUD stats. Look for anyone who open limps, especially from late position. Generally, sit at the highest players/flop % table you can find.

I went to 6 max LHE from full ring about 6 months ago and it's an entirely different mindset than the microstakes FR games, especially as you move up and the games get more aggressive.

I consider myself a recreational-type player (I go to the local casino a few times a month). I have a ~$1.60/hour rate at the 2/4 for almost 300 hours and a ~$10.50/hour rate at the 3/6 for almost 100 hours. I realize these sample sizes are likely too small, but I have two questions:

1) What is considered a good, successful rate for low limit live play? 1BB/hour?

2) How many hours do I have to log before I can consider my rate to be fairly indicative of where I am as a player? In other words, how many hours of 3/6 should I log before I can feel comfortable about moving up to 4/8, assuming I maintain my 3/6 rate?

Thanks for responses.

Check out halp/noob/wat thread...

Any positive winrate at live 2/4 is pretty good due to gross affect of rake, IMO. Your 300 hours is a decent starting sample size, although I'm sure you can even see some pretty drastic swings within it.

Biggest piece of advice from this forum that I wished I would have followed earlier is: move up to 4/8. I logged 1200+ hours plus a BBJ before moving up and realized the game, for the most part, is pretty much the same except the rake doesn't have as crushing affect.

Your numbers seem to suggest you have a handle on things so I'd recommend what others recommended to me in the past: start taking shots at 4/8. If things don't go smoothly at the start there is no shame in dropping back down to 3/6 to get your confidence back / rebuild your bankroll.

P.S. Of course, only play with money you can afford to lose. If you can't replenish your poker rankroll and thus have to stop playing poker if you lose it, then move up more cautiously (should be rolled ~300 BB for the current level, enabling you to drop down if having problems).

GcluelessnoobG

That depends on whether you are playing full ring or shorthanded, and on the opponents you play against. You should never try to alter your play inorder to hit some statistical threshold of VPIP or PFR or AF.

Each opponent will be exploitable in their own way but my favorite are probably loose passive players that have VPIP/PFR/AF numbers of the 50/5/.8 variety. Just value bet them relentlessly. Rocks who play 12/10/2 but don't have a high WTSD% are susceptable to bluffs while the ones who do show down you can maximize return by folding more preflop.

The best advice I can give is to search the micro limit forum for the Official Stats Thread where some of the best posters have shown their stats over large samples.

Sounds like you are off to a good start. But that is only the case if you are keeping score on all the bad days as well as the good. R U?

1) 1/BB/hr. = 3/BB/100 (approximately) IMO, that makes 1/BB/hr. a "base" good rate for real winners. At low limits, any positive win rate shows a far better than average player because of the rake.

2) The hours thing is a lot more arguable. Swings of 200-250BB happen independent of skill level. I spent all of last year digging out of downswing at the start of the year in 4/8. And your game shouldn't be static either. You should always be looking to improve your game. So you can't really "know" or "prove" when U R ready. Therefore:

a) Are you comfortable taking shots?
b) are you rolled for taking shots?

If so, take the shot and be willing to get off the table early, say after dropping 2 racks or after dropping 1 rack in one orbit so that neither your confidence nor your roll get harmed by the shot. Or play with "their $", take some winnings from that night's 3/6 play and more up. But GG is right, do it sooner rather than later. The LLHE player lives between two meat grinders. At the low end, its the rake. At the high end, its variance, bankroll and skills that can eat you up. Gotta live between those two buzz saws while paying your learning curve dues. Enjoy.

I need some advice from folks who have more experience than I.

According to my Poker Tracker DB, out of 25,500 hands, I showed down a pair 569 times and won 38% of the time, for a total loss of $968. I'm net-profitable with every hand stronger than a pair.

My question is whether this is normal? These stats are for $1/$2 and $2/$4 PokerStars 10-handed. Is 38% typical? Am I showing down too many pairs at this level? I think I'm fairly tight (VP$IP=15%). I don't usually stay in with less than top pair/good kicker.

Do even good players lose with pairs? Are they a necessary evil? Or are there better ways to play them that I don't know about?

Thanks in advance...

are you talking about the 'one pair at showdown' thing as opposed to 'two pair' or whatever? i think most folks are about even with that category.

i recommend focusing on playing better in tough spots, and not on stats so much. post hands and post in other folks' threads.

anyway, welcome to the forum.

Does anybody process a specific thought over and over again while playing? I only have 123 hours of live play under my belt, so I'm not sure if my thoughts are applicable to more experienced players.

I notice sometimes when I've been playing too loosely that I tighten up by telling myself "Look for reasons to fold, not for reasons to call." Once I get on that thought, I stop spewing chips and tend to play better poker.

Anybody else have a line they have to tell themselves sometimes, or is this just a personal quirk?

Well, I'm less experienced than you, but I've always had the opposite problem - I played way too tight and refused to bet anything besides really, really good hands. I think your experience is more typical, though.

When I look down at J4s or 36s or 47s, or whatever, and want to play it, I just take a second, tell myself "don't be an idiot," and muck.

Yea, once in a while I laugh at myself in similar situations. The low limit games are soft because people do these kinds of things, and especially because they're so willing to call bets in the last 3 rounds of betting. If we start doing these things ourselves, we become the reason these games are soft.

If I have been card dead for a long time and get a decent hand but am out of position and feel the urge to limp in I ask myself, "Would Ed Miller tell you to play this hand at this table right now?"

I also like to order beer from the waitress and then tell the table, "Man I need to put my beer goggles on. Then these cards will look prettier." before mucking.

Strangely, I look those same hands and say, "Is there any possible way that this hand could be close to a call? I sure want to play a hand with these idiots." I look left to make sure the button doesn't have any raising chips out, and I put in a small bet. Did you ever wonder if Ed is a nit? HJ is pretty close to the button. CO is practically next door. The actual button is like a small blind of sunk cost, and this seat is the whole reason you put in money on the last two. People buy the darned button for a reason; you've got it for free = extra cash to gambool. YMMV.