At some point you should learn to play deep. There is more money to win and it maximizes the value of your skill advantage. Also because if you are a winning player you should end up with a deep stack and leaving a table you are beating is not good strategy. But until you have the bankroll and experience to handle it limiting how much money you have on the table is fine.

Keep in mind that short stacking will reduce the absolute amount you can lose at one time it actually increases variance. Because you will be committed more often with AK preflop and with draws postflop you should be all in more often with smaller edges.

I’ve lurked in this thread for awhile, but this is my first post here. I work full time and I live with my fiancé, so my poker time is limited. But I’m trying to put in more hours, and I figure a public posting can work as a commitment device.

Over the last year I’ve managed to play only 57 hours. I play almost exclusively 1-1-3 in Bay Area rooms, with the rare 2-5 when my rich friend (tech money) comes out with me and talks me into it. According to Poker Income, I’m at 17/BB per hour at 1-1-3, although that number might be utterly worthless over such a small sample size.

All that said, here’s my (modest) goal: By the end of the year, I’d like to have 250 hours logged. Given what I’ve played so far, that’s a little more than five hours per week. I should be able to get that by going a bit more often and slightly extended my sessions. And if you guys hold me accountable.

I promise to post updates and hopefully I’ll soon have a sample size that’s slightly more meaningful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is exactly why you should quit instead of playing with a large percentage of your bankroll in play.

There is nothing wrong with quitting and it's actually the right thing to do in your situation.

I am in the GG camp on the issue of win rates and like him i am kind of surprised that most people on here don't think the same! When i started on here 10bb/hr was quoted as a rate that if you were really good, you could get there. In the games at the time (2004-2006) i remember the rake as capped at $4 and the limit reached at $60. That quickly changed to $4 by $40 with an extra $1 at $20 for bbj (so a cap of $5 by $40). Now for the most part you are seeing $4+2, $5+1 and even $5+2 usually with it all taken out by at least $60 in the pot. Its just math, playing the same stakes, win rate goes down if rake is higher. Now take into account that villains don't stack off with QJ on a J high flop at the rate they did in 2006, and it is even harder.
To throw some of you guys a bone, DCFT, Squid; if it was achievable by 15% back then, it is probably achievable by 1-2% now. And that 1-2% probably wont stay at $1/2 or $1/3 to do it.
SUB7bbhrwr@1/310bbhrwr@2/5oversmallsamplesizeMERGED

Nobody is saying 10bb/hr is easy. I agree that very few can do it. I think the 1-3% of players is probably a pretty good estimation.

However, I completely disagree with anyone who thinks 10BB/hr is easier at 2/5 than it is at 1/2 or 1/3 due to rake being a bigger factor at lower stakes. The skill difference in the average 2/5 player compared to the avg 1/2 player is a much bigger factor than the rake is.

Disagree with your second statement. My guess is that in most casinos that run $2-5, tonight (a Friday) most will have have at least one 10bb/hr crusher. Because of the fact that at $1-3 and $1-2 a 10bb/hr winner will move up, most casinos that would have a 10bb/hr winner tonight at low stakes wont have one. Which is good for me because i play $1-3. Your argument really can only be made in a vacuum. It almost cant be demonstrated. Over the last couple of years i have seen too many hands get to showdown where i think to myself "where is all the $$" and it will be 2 guys playing their hands passively as bluff catchers unwilling to put $$ in the pot without the nuts. I think some of that is attributed to the high rake in these games.
Also, more whales show up to $2/5 than $1/2 or $1-3. Before i get taken out of context, i am not saying $2/5 is easier than $1/3. But i am saying for a crusher that 10bb/hr is easier at $2/5 than $1/2 or $1/3. The lower stakes are just too passive and rake too high!

I think youre comparing how many people crush 1/2 and how many crush 2/5. Im comparing my personal results at 1/2 and 2/5. The rake is the same at both stakes in my room. My results at 1/2 (in terms of BB/hr) are significantly higher at 1/2 than 2/5.

There may be more whales that show up at 2/5 than 1/2, but there are way way more people playing 1/2 who literally dont know how to play. When I played 1/2, I would see people who didnt know what a straddle was. I saw people who didnt know what "buying the button" was. Some had to be told over and over when the action was on them. Im not saying every table is like that, but I would say there are as many completely clueless 1/2 players as there are total whales playing 2/5.

I put in about 650 hours of 1/2 (a little of that is 1/3). I can honestly say I saw exactly 1 player whose game I respected and I thought would do really well at 2/5.

Im sure its a different story in rooms where 1/2 or 1/3 is the only game, but in rooms Ive played in where they have multiple stakes, the lowest game is so soft that a good player will just completely demolish it.

The more passive the 1/2 or 1/3 game is the easier it is to win.

From my limited experience 10BB per hour is much easier at 1/2 and 1/3.

This is an excellent strategy, imo, especially if you feel outmatched when deep. ETA: In regards to leaving tables when deep against good opponents. Obviously if you're deep but no one else is or if your deep opponents are terrible then much more reason to stick around (leaving just to book the win is much more of a meh reason although it's your life so whatever). And obviously another option is to get good at playing deep (easier said than done, though).

Instead of leaving the room, another option is to find a shorter stacked table (maybe one that has just recently started or one where anyone else sitting deep you don't consider a threat), and then attempt to move your stack to that table (where you will then be effectively sitting shorterstacked again).

GcluelessNLnoobG

It's pretty bad for the game to get a big stack, cash out, and come back an hour later with a regular starting stack. The players you win the money from don't like it (most likely fish) and they'll start to not want to play with you / pay you off. It's frowned upon and borderline unfair.

With that being said, if you're done for the day, then sure, it's fine to leave if the conditions aren't good.

If your risk of ruin is that great then you simply must not play this game. Again, you cant really build a roll hit n running just to preserve what little money you have. Lets say you had $200 to your name, 1 single buyin. You would be better served having an epic night running it up to $1000+ or whatever than you would quitting every time you double up, because you arent likely to double up enough between sessions to counter the times you get felted or just bleed chips from a bad night. The circumstances that make for a good game dont come around all the time. Never underestimate the power of momentum. When you're running hot people play differently against you. HECK you play differently against them. Your confidence will be high, you'll be making all the right moves, their confidence will be low, they'll be afraid of you because somehow you always have it, etc etc etc. These are all tangible attributes that contribute towards your bottom line. Coming back the next day with a non-threatening 100BB stack to re-grind just puts you back at plan A which is "hope for the best".

No this would never be profitable. What do you do if you lose 3 hands in a row then win 1, you quit while youre down? Shortstack strategy isnt really profitable live at all because the game is typically already running with short effective stacks considering in a 1/2 game the standard opening raise is often $15. You're basically playing with 5-10 BB's if you bought in for the minimum and will get nowhere.

No it's completely different. If you were in a 2/5 game and ran it up to $1500 do you feel the game flow would play the same as a single buyin shot at 5/10? The preflop sizing will be different, the quality of players will be different, the blinds themselves will take a greater toll on you and you'll lessen your FE as your stack diminishes, the risk aversion will be different since the prospect of losing 300BB's in a 1/2 game feels much scarier than losing 150BB's in a 5/10 game.

2,958 hours I've recorded total at mix of 1/2 and 1/3 for 7.36bb per hour.

I'm better now than at the beginning with data backing that up. But also this is a hobby for me and as such low stress is important. 75% of my time at the table is also spent watching movies or tv on my phone. If I actually put effort in to focus all the time no doubt at least 3bb more per hour should be easily attainable.



Sent from my SM-G955U1 using Tapatalk

Nice results Zippy.

Expecting to add 40%+ to your winrate easily just due to focus is a little bit optimistic.

GimoG

I disagree.

1/2 and 1/3 players are just awful and I often pay just enough attention to not slow the game down. I'm not a super nit though and get away with a lot of shenanigans due to my nitty image.

Unfortunately this is just my opinion as I have no data to back it up.


Sent from my SM-G955U1 using Tapatalk

Is the 2-5 pretty much good all the time?

I've been playing recreationally but I'm debating quitting the job hunt down here and just playing for a living again. The 1/2 is comical like we had briefly touched on elsewhere. All these senior citizens try to analyze hands and tell me how I should be playing lol.

No games are really good all the time like they used to be but there's really no tough games at 2/5 or lower imo. Potential winrates are dependent on games being loose enough that people are losing a lot as compared to the games where everyone nits it up pre and still sucks but barely loses, because it's hard to lose much if you play tight pre and aren't a moron.

If you want to make enough to play full time you'll likely have to put in a good amount of effort (and cause yourself a good amount of stress) to loosen up the games you're in/get an image as an action guy (without actually being one).

But really only one thing matters:



Just my opinion, from experience.

When you decide to leave the game has nothing to do with whether you can make profitable decisions while you are playing. That makes zero sense, it's broscience.

Shortstacking live is probably more profitable than it ever was online (on a single table, anyway), because it's way easier to get paid off with your monsters as open raises are often closer to 5x or 6x the big blind naturally rather than 3x, though the higher rake might bring it more in line with how profitable it was online.

I noted that it wasn't the exact same, but the prospect of putting 3 buyins in the middle on a flip or 60/40 is a ticket to play scared unless you're rolled very well.

So I am familiar and concur with some of the things you put forth. The big culture shock for me from going from playing for a living to joining corporate America to having to move from Texas to South Florida is that in Texas, where I only played at WinStar in Oklahoma to having casinos in abundance in this market. Which is swooning me into just going back to playing cards and grinding 2/5 and occasionally 5/10 like before.

I was really asking because I know what room he plays in mostly and none of the people "look" good so it was a very ignorant and superficial question based on stereotypes to get an answer from someone who's more knowledgable.

Also, it's inconsequential, but in a 200BB cap, would you recommend always keeping at least 4000BB for a game that runs that deep? All this deep-stack, button straddling, $2 chips, high hand stuff is all new to me surprisingly enough lmao.

Also, in regards to the spoiler, that's pretty much what I tell myself in my head to stay disciplined. Eventually you run good. Just play properly, let the run good occur, and let others make the mistakes.

i think i set the record in this thread for never moving up ive got about 30,000 hours of $1-2 NL over 25+ yrs. during this time i won anywhere from $10k to $46k per year, but never once had the money to move up in stakes due to 75% or more of the money constantly going to hotel expenses and a little bit to non poker actitvities.

im now in a game with 2/3 blinds $40-300 buyin and its incredibly loose. if u make it $33 preflop u get like 5 or 6 callers with the winner having 78 offsuit. i got down over 190 and then recovered when i made my 4th and final buyin for 300. my first buyin was 40, my 2nd was 61, and my third was 100. a $40 buyin doesnt go far with $2/3 blinds but its my usual initial buyin and im at 37 an hour for this room for the 4-5 days ive been here. up over 700 in all but as usual most all of it goes for my hotel which prevents moving up. if i wasnt worried about taking big losses which i cant afford id quit martingaling my buyins and buyin a little more than 40.

i think for as little as i buyin, my win rate means a lot more than if i bought in for more. one of the regulars ran his stack up to 1400 then lost it all back. there were many many deepstacks on the table. if u have never been in southern california u will have no idea how beatable the games are.

This is awesome (ossum)! Any chance you can post a graph for us?

no because only the last 2 yrs of my current iphone will have records stored on any type of tracking program. i use poker income. for many years i didnt keep records and im estimating for many of those years i knew i was a winner, because i had no other income and paid my living expenses.

Bummer on not having a graph but congrats on the grind! Good luck!

Did 1-2nl even exist 15 years ago?

I also moved from Texas to S. Florida and also played a good amount at Winstar. IMO, the games at Winstar are some of the softest in the country. The room I play in definitely has better 2/5 players than the avg room Ive played in around the Country. Ive also recently asked several snowbirds if my room or their room back home is tougher and they have all said they do better back home.

The 2/5 games in my room are fairly soft during snowbird season but very tight/nitty during off season especially during the daytime. The season doesnt affect the evening time play all that much because the snowbirds are all older guys who mostly play during the daytime.

So in summary...
from November-early March the games are really good.
The rest of the year the games are good in the evening but if you play daytime you have to adjust your game and LAG it up or expect to never get paid off on anything.

If you can beat the daytime summer 2/5 games for more than 7BBs/hr you are expert level IMO.

Not to derail the fascinating discussion ongoing in this thread about the sustainability of a 10bb/hr winrate.

I thought that I would post up my 6 month giraffe of $1/3 NL $300 max results. I'm about to start dipping my toes in the $2/5 game in my room as I am now sitting with a little over a $12k roll and feel that losing a BI or two will hardly be a big deal and I can always drop down if I need to.

I had a super hot run as you can see but have struggled for the last 80hrs or so with a little run bad. Nonetheless, I set my self a goal of moving up to 2/5 when I hit 10k profit and 6 months of play. Both have been met this month so its time.

$2/5 here I come