Poker Journal by far.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using 2+2 Forums

Good luck with your poker career, especially if you have hard time losing.

Playing til unstuck is ******ed, the game is not going anywhere. This will only increase your losing sessions and decrease your winners as you will be playing worse as the session goes on.
Looks like you ran redic hot first month, got overconfident and couldn't suck up a few losing days the next.

you can check crown casino australia website for confirmation of rake. 1/2 10% caps at 20 and 2/5 i think was 14% with 30 cap or something along the lines of that, im 100% sure of the 1/2 cap tho. And we have soft games here it's not the U.S. where everyone thinks theyre a superstar, you have drunk people with no idea how to play buying in max 80 playing 1 hand calling raises PF and Flop where they ship it with Ax or draws. Anyone who has played at crown casino in melbourne can confirm this

I don't think he was questioning the rake/structure of the game. He was questioning the ability of anyone to beat it.

its actually reallllllllllly soft, not hard to beat at all but yeah these are the rake and "sitting" charge.

I know it varies greatly, but I want to hear from people who play or who have played 1-2 , 2-4, or 5-10 and was profitable.

1. What is an expected win rate in those games at a local cardroom or casino

2. Is a local cardroom or casino better to play at?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using 2+2 Forums

My understanding is that anything over $80/hr at Crown Casino's 1/2 is unsustainable. Everyone's solid.

$80/hr in a Vegas $1/2 game is definitely sustainable. We won't even touch the cash cow known as $2/4 limit.

yeah i said i was on a heater last few days, bought in for max walk out 600-800 after 8 hrs. usually its 30-40 tho an hour

it's rather disgusting seeing all these casino's just raping the poker community. anything over 10% $5 max rake is excessive. $20 is criminal.

yeah australias high living costs and inflation are the cause of this, dealers are paid 23-28 bucks an hour regardless of day and night and they cant accept tips, apparently theyre illegal. Seems like a robbery in progress, i guess the casino always wins!

prove it.

1,000 hours minimum. So that's six months of 40/hrs week.

Profit: $80K.

Good luck.

Pretty sure you just got trolled bro.

pleze two reefer two teh boulded az this iz an joak

Oh yah foe sho. With that low rake capped at $20 and the ability to buy in for anywhere from $40 to $80 then $40/hr in that 1/2 game is supa easy. I bet you even see $200 pots from time to time which makes me think $80/hr is definitely achievable.

I don't understand why people are making jokes when people are really trying to get some solid information. :\

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using 2+2 Forums

LOL. Hate to break to you man, but if you're going to ask a question that has been asked hundreds of times, you are not going to get a decent answer.

Try to search on your own.

When I get ready to play a live session, I have three options, all of which 1 hour driving distance or less. Most of my poker career, I thought like an amateur, something like: "just pick one and hope for a good session". But I have evolved in my analysis of game selection (among many other aspects of my game), and now I know I can do better than that.

But how do I choose? I still feel like my selection is arbitrary. For the moment, I am a $1/$2 NL player, occasionally $2/$5 NL. Let's also assume that all poker rooms have the normal distribution of fish, regs etc so they are all equally beatable (based solely on the skill level variable).

Option 1
15 minute drive
$1/$2 runs anywhere from 4-7 tables most of the time
min buy-in $60, max buy-in $200
rake = 10% up to $5 + $1 or $2 for BBJ/promotions (no flop, no drop, but only 80% sure)
no automatic card shuffler

Option 2
1 hour drive
$1/$2 runs anywhere from 6-12 tables most of the time
min buy-in $60, max buy-in $300
rake = 10% up to $5 + $1 or $2 for BBJ/promotions (there's a drop even preflop)
has an automatic shuffler

Option 3
1 hour drive
no $1/$2, it's $1/$3, runs anywhere from 4-8 tables most of the time
min buy-in $100, max buy-in $300
rake = 10% up to $5 + $1 or $2 for BBJ/promotions (I don't know if drop occurs preflop or not)
has an automatic shuffler

I'm curious as to feedback on this. Thanks.

I'm taking the 15 minute drive for sure. If I later decide the games are too slow or the stacks too short then I''ll consider the other games but 15 minutes vs 1 hr is a big deal IMO.

Facts + given assumptions:
1. The rakes are identical for all three.
2. We will always buy in at max.
3. All games are 9 handed.
4. Promotions/comps are relatively equal at each location.

Variables:
1. No automatic shuffler at option 1. That means seeing fewer hph, although that depends on dealer competence with other variables being equal across sites.
2. Drop can vary from $1/$2. Is it always static when we go, or does it change based upon time of day?
3. No flop/no drop vs. always drop.
4. Bankroll: Assuming we have sufficient for $1/$2, but unsure about $1/$3 and if that would play into our decision.
5. Length of sessions: Do we play for 2-3 hours or 6-10 hours? The longer we play, the less the drive is considered as lost play time.

It seems that the answer to this question is going to rely on you confirming whether or not the drops occur with no flop and the schedule for drop amounts. If every location always drops $2 and only drops with a flop, then they are relatively equal.

The other major variable is time lost to shuffling vs. drive time. The longer the session, the more a lack of shuffler is weighted.

I'd go option 1. Definitely not 2. No flop no drop is a big gain. If 3 is no flop no drop its taken into consideration. without doing the math though my guess is that if you do 6 hour sessions or less option 1 is going to be the best game after expenses (assuming your winrate will be equal at all of the above: which assumes players are of equal skill)

Can't you make an arguent for factoring in travel time to the winrate? You essentially get an extra 90 minutes at the table from the same total time commitment with option one. Depending on winrate, that's a lot of money

Sent from my SCH-I535 using 2+2 Forums

If we think that we will make roughly the same BB / hour at 1/2 that we will at 1/3 then going to play 1/3 is almost always better.

Even if we assume that we will win less per hour, but that we are still a decent winner, then 1/3 is better.

Assume a natural win rate of $20 / hour at 1/2 which equiates to ~$10/hour after rake.
At 1/3 that win rate would be $30/hour. Then assume a skill increase and therefor a profit decrease of 25%, so we're down to $22.5/hour - rake $12.5/hour. So, we are making $2.5/hour more at 1/3 then 1/2. So, if we lose 90 minutes of drive time, we are losing $15 ($10/hour * 1.5 hours) so we need to be playing 6 hours to make up for that lost cost.

But the better the player we are say a natural win rate of $26/hour - $10/hour rake (8bb/hour is pretty reasonable win rate post rake) then we are making $16/hour.
Same $26/hour * 1.5 = $39/hour at 1/3 - 25% skill factor = $29.75/hour - rake = $19.75. So we are making $3.75 more per hour, so we only need to play 4.25 hours to make up for the loss in travel time.

If you are marginal player, go play 1/2. You will not recoup the playing time that you lose from driving. If you are pretty good player then go play 1/3 on your longer sessions, and 1/2 on your shorter sessions.

If you are a very good player, you should certainly go play 1/3 almost all of the time unles you are playing less than 3 hours at the table.

Also, I think that assuming that 1/3 players are that much better than 1/2 players is pretty false. They are just as likely to be good or bad. And that makes the 1/3 option even more attractive, even for short sessions.

Cost to drive 2 hrs a session are not insignificant either (ie gas prices).