I disagree.

Very small minority of players walks in the casino thinking they're more likely to lose than win...

Most players walk into the casino expecting to win.

However, when they actually sit down at the table, other emotions take over and winning moves down the priority list.

For example, when a megawhale is stuck $2000 and people are "giving him no respect" by calling all his bets. In his mind, he might be thinking "I am going to teach these guys some lessons!"

I'm not really sure what makes your over simplification more accurate than mine. Again I think the "fun" atmosphere is specific to the card room and whether or not you play at a resort/casino as opposed to just a casino or a card room. Generally speaking I think you may be over estimating the amount of recs with the attitude you describe in the non resort/casino environment. In the same way I may be overestimating the other end of the spectrum. Either way, it all semantic anyway.

This is a lot of weird tangenting even for the wr thread.

Can we just agree that 80% of people that walk into a casino are stupid and that they have the idea that they have the chance to win money? Similar to a scratch off. They don't buy them expecting to win but more so out of the possibility.

Then there are the 10% that know they are going to win and that luck just hasn't been on their side lately.

And finally there are the 10% that understand the concept EV (they might not call it expected value, but they understand the casino games favor the casino) and that they are playing a losing expectation, but they are successful enough to ngaf and they know that craps is really a fun game.

I do think there are alot more rec players that don't really care one way or the other, more than people realize. Again not that they think they are losing or winning. Not that they are made of money. Just that they enjoy poker and they have the possibility to have a good night.

For a game that revolves around conflicts, it always baffles me why people are so against arguments.

Why do we need to agree on anything? Arguing is how we learn new things.

Latest argument is pretty interesting, because now we are dissecting why some people choose to walk into a poker room. It would help to think in these players' shoes and further improve our ability to beat them.

We don't, i think its more about that this is not really the place for it. I believe the tangent was my fault.

I would argue that many of these people are not consciously thinking much at all about the reasons they are walking into the poker room or into the casino to play any other game. I think some people are delusional enough to believe they are winning players at the game, and others, subconsciously, are driven more by the idea of winning a certain amount of money than losing a certain amount, so much so that they are willing to ignore EV and not think about the fact that they are playing a losing game. I think almost no one, if not exactly no one is going into the casino and thinking to themselves, "I know this is a losing proposition according to EV, but I will place a wager anyway, as I find the entertainment value worth what I am losing in the long run".

I agree with a lot of this. I wonder what poker market YGOchamp plays in that has this large crowd of recs who dump tons just for the fun that the casino environment provides for them.

I would completely agree with this entire post, but that'd be too ironic

Good post, and would like to highlight this as far as mods are concerned, that so long as the conversation is civil and not completely worthless, it really should be a non-issue. (complete de-rails and e-peening are another issue ofc)

I think it wasn't necessarily a huge market of people who just love to dump -- but more to Birds point, I think most are not actively thinking about the prospect, but if were asked directly, they would likely admit they think they're a (slight) underdog. Just like those playing blackjack, they don't actively think about how they're giving up a 1% edge or whatever every time they play, but they do it anyway.

Man, most of the people that walk into the casino can't even spell EV.

Its nothing like blackjack or slots or any other house game. There is no grey area with slot/black jack advantage which is known by 99.9% of even the most degenest of the degen. In poker, its person to person, the only way to determine your edge or lack there of are your results or your opinion which the player measures accurately or inaccurately. For people who don't actively think about edge, its probably because they assume by default that they have one because they are awesome.

Most of the time IME, the only people using the word "gamble" when playing poker are the obnoxious regs who are patronizing a rec who they think is stupid, or when they gii pre w/ anything but AA or 2p+.

Question that's prob been answered a million times... What is an average 2/5 live tightish/taggy standard deviation/100?

I ask because people ITT have been quoting some ridiculous numbers. According to pokerdope 60-80bb/100 is standard for full ring games. Why do I see people using seemingly crazy/much bigger numbers here? Are people confusing sdev/100 and sdev/hour?

1) no one keeps track of bb/100

2) 60-80bb/100 would be ridiculously low


A typical taggy 2/5 players would probably be something like 60-70bb/hr. A little lower is possible and so is much higher.

Live poker goes 5 way to the flop for 5bb each... it is much higher variance than online. 50% vpip vs 15% vpip will do that...

I see. Thanks for your help.

I've played 1-2 and some limit tables where most of the table literally play poker like it's a slot machine, calling down street after street with next to nothing. And sincere table chatter to the effect that, "yeah there's some skill, but mostly it's just gambling."

They'll admit there are some 'sharks' out there, but still...mostly gambling.

These are weird tables to play at because no one respects your bets. You're left trying to mine the nuts. I prefer players with a little more skill, and sense.

Just value bet and don't bluff. Bad players don't understand this and complain about the other bad players playing any 2 cards. Just flop TPTK+ and value bet the crap out of people

Should a winning player have a similar hourly in a 8/16 limit game that they would have in a 1/2 NL game? Will the limit structure greatly reduce skill edge?

With my admittedly limited knowledge of limit games, you should prolly do better at 8/16. 2bb/hour is what a good limit player can make, so that's $32/hour?

Where as most won't make over $16-$20 an hour in a 1/2 NL game.

My std deviation is $307/hr at 2/5 over 258 hours this year. Winrate is 93/hour (running hot obviously). $1000 buyin.

At 25 hands an hour, that is 1228/100, or 250bb/100, which seems a little high but standard-ish for a deep game.

My *guess* is that the 2 BB/hr expected good winrate for Limit is thrown around just as loosely as the 10 bb/hr is for NL (i.e. probably a lot more unicorn than most of us would like to admit). I'd also guess the typical winner would have fairly similar hourly winrates in both games, although my guess is 1/2 NL would have less of a cap on potential winrate than 8/16 Limit would.

GbutI'vealsoplayedexactly2sessionsof8/16Limit,sowhatdoIknowG

Adding one point beyond where you are at, how many places are there were 8/16 or bigger fixed limit holdem runs? 8/16+ is a decent sized limit game. We're not talking about a game where the seniors come in and trade their $100 for 3 hours. This is not the relevant comparison. I would expect that most places with limit of 8/16 or above would have a higher stakes NL game than 1/2. Someone who can max out the win rate at 8/16 or 1/2 may be better served playing 2/5 NL or comparable PLO games (or higher, if available)

In theory, 8/16 limit should be more profitable than a lot of 1/2 games with a 100 bb buy-in limit, but it's going to be less profitable than lots of other games.

I highly doubt a good limit player can make $16/hr in 4/8, because if that's the case, there would be more 4/8 limit than 1/2 NL.

Doesn't make a lot of logical sense.

Why would winning players even play 1/2 NL if they can make same amount of money playing 3/6 limit?

^ sqrt(4) = 2

Your stdev "/100" would be 2x your stdev "/25".

Anyways - there is no need to convert to another base for live poker. Leave it "/hr".

In NY where 1/2 no I s always available and usually 2/5. Considering a move to Phoenix and 8/16, in addition to higher limits seems to always run. Not moving for poker obv but considering switching to limit as my main game.