I'm a tiny winner in the game. Small casino, one, two tables-three tops. Game 1-3, unlimited bi. Avg bi. 300-500, some 1K. Pots aren't super large, 200-300 largest pots. I can sit, TAG up $500- $700 from a $300 bi. Then around midnight the game changes. A couple of player types show up, betting 20-60 pre. This casino allows running it three times. One guy does it over and over. Jackshit will win one out of three. So, one of the new shorties will do this over and over. Sometimes he win all three. Everybody gets a hand sometimes, so this guy can run up to $500-$600. Still over sizing straddles, button straddles-betting up to 25 pre.

Hero tightens up. TT+, AKss EP. I add 66+, 78ss+ KQos CO-BUT, if it's only $20 to see a flop. TP, I will raise big on uncoordinated flops. Bad idea. See two ugly ass pairs or a fold.

Another player shows up late sometimes. Buys 2K+. Straddle $50+. Call and get raised, raise and get called. I tighten up the range above in pre-flop action.

Say, I will have $400 when one of them arrives. Maybe I get QQ, open or call, jam? Jam gets you $30-$50 plus the blinds. Or run three times. (trying to simplify the detaits), maybe one of them flat calls. OTTF. Pot 64-104. 3d,7h,Ts. I'll bet 45-75 into a that size pot. Call. pot $158 -$274 Turn 2d. Board 3d,7h,Ts,2d Turn pot $274, I bet 140. Pot is $550. I only have $135 to bet the river. No pressure. Next thing I am down to $210-290, I do not feel comfortable putting in more money when the game changes.

Losing $400-$500 is very different for me than for them. Every pot with the big stack is possibly for all my chips. If short stack shove hits the flop, I'm done. There aren't any other casinos around. Still, I have concluded the game is too big for me. I've won money off them, but losing to these player types sucks. It ends my night. I always think I should have just leave when one of these guys show up.

So, just find a new spot or learn how to beat them?

You are right, the game is too big for you after midnight. Many people look at the blind levels as determining the size of a game. It is the maximum buy in that defines the size of the game. In your case, the buy in is infinite.

Prior to the poker boom, NLHE was almost never spread as a cash game. The reason was that with an unlimited buy in, the game was unsustainable. Most players would get wiped out and have to leave. In a relative short period of time, there wouldn't be enough players to fill a table. While TV brought NLHE to the masses, the Stratosphere's innovation of limiting the buy in made cash game NLHE possible.

My suggestion is to just play until about 11:30 and leave before the game gets too big. You seem to do fine in that environment. No shame in saying I don't have the financial resources to play. You could also talk to the poker room manager about how their game is going to collapse over time, but I doubt they'll listen.

Eventually you should like to beat them but your going to need a big bankroll to do it. As you have noticed, their play style runs up variance and they apparently have a lot of money to play with. If every pot is raised $60 preflop then $1K stack is suddenly a short stack. You need multiple buyins and be ready to ride a lot of variance. If you don't have the bank roll then it's time to leave.

1st option get up and leave whats wrong with cashing out a winner

2nd option just because they like to run it 3 times doesn't mean you need to agree to it
if they want to play 98 against QQ why give them more chances

3rd question you say pot $274 you have $275 and are betting $135 on turn why aren't we simply jamming there.

short stacks look to get lucky and double up and sounds like you are playing to help them not yourself

as stated above, if your not rolled for it leave is best

Maximum buy in is obviously very important but the #1 determinant for the size of the game is the players.

In the past, the 1/2 uncapped game at Golden Nugget Las Vegas was one of the nittier ones in town even though you often had multiple $1k+ stacks at the table. OTOH I’ve played in 100BB buy-in games with double or triple straddles where you had at least one 100BB stack all-in preflop every other hand.

There’s nothing wrong to admit that the game gets too big for you. Variance is for people who can afford it and are willing to deal with it. If that’s not you, cash out and go home.

Because he’s out of the game if he runs it once and loses to 98.

Running it as often as possible actually benefits players who don’t have the bank roll to deal with huge swings or are risk averse. In theory the best case scenario for OP would be to be able to cash out his equity every time he’s all-in.

I think you should post hands so we can give more concrete feedback.

Game is only as big as your stack, but realize the SPR will change if you can raise more PF and still get action.

All these things sound like they should be a benefit to you or other winning players. If you can more easily control the pot size with larger PFR then you can more easily stack off with TPTK type hands.

But post hands.

Open straddles to $50? Open jam for $400 when you pick up a hand you want to play. Change the game on them.

Like everybody is saying. LEAVE!! IT'S GREAT TO GET FEEDBACK FROM YOU GUYS!


No 3 Times? I did that w/AA. The caller QQ to my 4B shove binked a Q. If he loses?? For me it's a bullet.

What I meant by I only have 135 left to jam the river was why I went in on the turn. You almost have to go all in from the start because that's where the hand is going. The problem jamming pre when you get a hand is there are other players in the game. They might wakeup with a hand. Leaves you jamming AA, KK, QQ? Even the maniac isn't going to call after seeing your range.

The game is just wrong for me. I played 2/5 buying in for $500 for years in casinos. I never play 5/10. So, I figure I'm used to playing higher stakes. But these guys bump the game up way over the 2/5 games I have played.

maybe I mis read OP post but he seems to be saying he has 5-6 hundred and short stack of 1-2 hundred go all-in and want to run it 3 times winning sometimes all 3 until they build a stack similar to OP.

if a player goes all-in for $200 with 98 suited pre against my QQ , I'm not giving him/her 3 chances

I'm a 4-1 fav and they are not getting 4-1 on their money so seems to me run it once is much better +EV for me

Just look up tournament ranges and learn to play one-two street poker where top pair or better is worth getting it in.

This...

... and this...


@ snowman

Running it multiple times doesn't change the overall EV (unless rake is taken out each run, which I don't think it is?). It just reduces the variance by getting you that much closer to the long term EV in the short term.

GimoG

I'm not debating the EV of once vs 3 times
I'm saying if V is willing to go all in $200 short stack with a hand like 98 suited knowing I have AA because V knows we're running it 3 times then a way to deter that is by refusing to run it 3 times.
OP post
OP has $600
V short jams my QQ
if we lose we are down to $400 and still can cash out a winner
if we win we have $800 and can cash out a bigger winner
once we let it be known we don't run it 3 times and start leaving right after taking their short shove they will either get the hint or continue to shovel money to us when we have the best of it.
just throwing out some ideas on how to combat their actions while not toasting off our whole stack

Why would you want to deter that? He's making a -EV decision and he's lowering your variance!

read OP post
he's under rolled and in over his head.

so we run it 3 times and V wins 2 of 3 now we have $530 and V has $340 then V goes all-in again.
this is what is happening now and OP can't handle it.

we all agree leaving at mid-night is best.

2nd option take a shot at the small stack we win we leave, we lose we leave
BUT WHY ; WHY let them set the rules on how we lose or win

If you get it it in with AA vs 89 your equity is 78% vs 22%. If you run it once, you are going to win 4 out of 5 times.

If you run it 3 times, the chances of your opponent winning all 3 runouts is.... 1%.

Which is better for your bankroll?

If we’re not rolled to comfortably get AA all-in preflop 300BB deep, we’re probably not rolled to play in that game with 100BB effective stacks because we rarely get it in as good as that preflop. If there’s a way to get somebody to call all-in against our AA preflop, we should be very happy no matter if that involves running it twice or twenty times.

You can always try to sell action if you know people willing to take on the risk in exchange for equity.

This is a bankroll issue. If you had 50 buy ins, you wouldn't be sweating this style of play. If you show up to the casino with 1 buy in and that's all the fun-money you have to gamble with for the next month, then this style of play is very stressful.

There is a ton that has been written regarding bankroll recommendations and acceptable risk of ruin, etc. There are also many useful calculators and other such tools that you can find easily online. primedope has a great one. I suggest that you research bankroll management.

I have always found 10 buy-ins to be sufficient for me, but I try to play a lower variance style and I am a recreational player with a job and I can supplement this roll from time to time. I don't WANT to supplement it, but I can add to my roll if I have to. Besides, I am good, lol (joking). If I were you, I'd buy in for $500 because you said the average buy in is between 300-500 and I'd want to be high-average at least. So, do you have a $5,000 dollar bankroll and the ability to supplement? If not, your roll is insufficient to handle the high variance of the game you describe. Frankly, if people are losing $500 pots in this game, you may want much more than I recommend. I'm just telling you what I would do and that is based on the risk that I can tolerate. Everyone is different.

This game that you describe is not unbeatable at all, it is just going to be boring for you and it is going to be higher variance. I play to have fun and I play to make money. A game like this is fun if you are the one splashing money around, but guys like you and me who don't want to get in races and coin flips are going to have to buckle down, tighten up, be patient and disciplined and wait for our spots. If this isn't fun for you and/or it is too stressful, then definitely leave, but don't leave because you think you can't exploit these guys and outplay them. You said that the villain's style causes you to tighten up. Damn right. That is what I think you should do. That makes for a boring session, so if I am going to be bored, then at least I'm going to try to really focus on making some money.

I took group's advice. I started leaving when the action changed.

+1

Not sure why you would avoid running 3 times if your bankroll is low lmao. Run it 3 times. Let them blast off with 89 into your QQ. This is a miracle game I can’t believe you would ever leave this. Send me the address, I’ll go. Sheesh

Let's assume H has 1 bullet. V has unlimited funds and can match your stack. V says lets go all in 5 times, I get 89s you get AA. We agree to not leave until all 5 hands are done. You will lose 7 out of 10 times. If they ran each of those 5 instances 3 times, almost impossible for H to not win. Now, if V agrees to do this once a day for a month and you can afford 1 buyin a day, you will be a huge winner. But if your funds are limited you can't reach the long run.

The dynamic of unlimited buy-in, plus Vs with unlimited funds, plus Vs willing to put it all in against you means you can't beat this game unless you are willing to leave when you double up.

I mean if im the OP im sitting in this game all night looking for QQ-AA. Tighten your range to OMC status. Guy in my game plays like this. 1/3. Omc. Raises to $35 pre and somehow people still call him. So when you limp with AA and they raise to $60 easy jam and take down $60 or 80/20 shot at $600+. Sit and wait for 2% of hands until they adjust to you. No chance I would leave that gold mine if I was in OPs situation and scared of going bust. Easy money