Actually that does sound pretty standard for 1/3 games, yet many players beat these kind of massively multiway games with non-nit strategies. A nit strategy is probably the easiest way to beat this type of game, sure, but it's far from optimal, which is why you see so many players in similar games with TAG or sLAG strategies doing considerably better.

And a note about player pools...if your player pool is as small as I think it is, your opponents have adjusted to you. Maybe not as much as they should have, but they have adjusted. I suspect more than anything else this is the reason your nit strategies don't work as well anymore, because the regulars know when GG puts the money in, he has it. You should use your nit image to look for more ways to make money, like abusing your massive fold equity limp/reraising hands like A5s preflop, and post-flop looking for barreling opportunities. Particularly when deep, if your opponents are tight and won't GII without nut hands, you should have many bluffing opportunities. It just can't be both ways that they don't pay people off yet playing a 100% value strategy looking for fat payoffs is optimal.

Ed Miller noted in one of his books...The Course I think, that it's typical for a player's winrate to stagnate over time if that player does not advance, because you're no longer an unknown and the regs do adjust to you.

Finally about deep play, yes, people gifting you their stack is rare, but when they do, it's a massive pot. If every 100 hours someone massively screws up and basically gives me a 800BB pot (compared to say 200BB), that's an extra ~300BB or 3BB/hr which is massive. And that's just the huge screwups. There are many more subtle screwups where people just pay you off a little more because they have money behind, or let you off the hook for less when they're the aggressor because they get MUBSy about you slowplaying the nuts or w/e. And tight players? The ones I know will not stack off 400BB deep with an overpair? Well when I know those guys are capped and the board looks scary I can usually blow them off their overpair because they don't want to felt 2k (or even 1k usually) without the near-nuts. There are so many more tools you have deep to win money. The only tool shortstackers have that deep stacks don't is being able to get the money in pre-flop or OTF, which is IMO more of a handicap limiting yourself from five street poker. But for people who suck at post-flop play, short stacking is great and may save them money.

Its profitable to limp 98s UTG in some games. Im sure its not at Parx. This may be hard to believe but Im smart enough to adjust to different kids of games.

I got destroyed at Parx 2/5 over 3 hrs and 45 mins. I lost just a tad under $1000 and $500 of that was QQ vs AA all in preflop. That's suddenly a sample size worth even mentioning? LOL

I also won $2332 in 10 hours of 2/5 at Borgata. I guess that's the softest game on the planet cuz I won a few nice hands huh?

Total in my little jaunt thru that area incl Parx, Sugarhourse and Borgata, I played 19 hours of 1/3 and 2/5 and won $759 for $39.84/hr.

Also, for the record, I started keeping track of hands that I play in the first 2 positions that most people would say I should fold. Things like KT, A4s, QJ, 98s

Results so far
Limped..39 hands for $290 profit
I raised...29 hands for $482 profit
I limp/called...7 hands for $55 profit.

Yes Mike your 75 hand sample size really closes the book on that one.

I sincerely hope you forgot to add the “s” to KT and QJ by accident and you’re not actually playing the offsuit variety because you think your skill advantage is just so massive.

a large part of it is game conditions but a part of it also is being prepared to chase and then open up your game vs action players and open yourself up to massive losses if you run bad when making correct decisions

I won a 350bb a 400bb and a 500bb pot in the same 4 hour stretch at a 2/3 table the other day. And if I'd had the minerals to make a correct shove with a combo draw, I would have won another 450bb pot if Villain had folded his overpair and (wait for it) a 1700bb pot if he'd called. (my draw came in on the turn

it was an admittedly amazing table, where 3 of us had left the bigger game to bum hunt a known lunatic but...it does happen if you have the stones for it. I was down 250bb initially calling down with 1 pair hands against him and one of the other regs had a 2k loss, but by the time I left when the lunatic busted his final buy in, there were 3 3k+ stacks at the table.

A couple of thoughts:

(It's all a matter of definition, but my idea of shortstacking is roughly <40BB/$120 at 1/3.)

But more importantly: It's not just simply a matter of thinking "Hmm, it seems most money is made in 20-130bb pots, so I'll play with 66BB"

Think of these 3 scenarios:
"Player A" playing a hand heads up at 1/3 with a 66BB stack vs "Player B" who also has a 66BB stack.

"Player A" with a 66BB stack playing a hand heads up vs "Player B" who has a 200+BB stack.

"Player A" with 66BB playing a hand multihanded with opponents with multiple stack sizes, larger and smaller.

All these scenarios require different approaches/strategies. A few examples:
Set mining ability is more limited.
Less ability to muscle opponents around/can't bet put the fear of future large bets into opponents
Psychological fear of going broke.
Good opponents can manipulate your odds for draws while you have no financial strength to do this to them

LOL...now you want to quote sample size?

People always talk about how poker players in general are so miserable and time spent playing poker sucks the life out of them. Im really starting to think you are one of the culprits. You never having anything nice to say about anything. Every comment you make is negative.

If I cant profit after playing a few 100 of those marginal hands in EP in situations where I think I can, then Ill stop playing them. If I can at least break even, then Ill be seen as a looser player and Ill get more action on my other hands. Trial and error is the best way to find out. I don't care what the books say. Im not saying that I play them on every table in every spot. If you've seen me post a hand where I played one of them, then I was in a situation and on a table where I thought I could play it profitably. Simple as that.

I assume you're subtracting raise/folds and limp/folds from profits? You're averaging 2BB+ profit playing KTo UTG? It's not that I don't believe you. It's just hard to believe. JB is right though, it's hard to conclude much over that sample size. Whether you've made or lost money amounts to less than 1BI over 75 hands.

You should track different hands separately if you aren't already. I'd love to see the results when you have a large sample size.

Mega congrats SABR! I recall when you were going through that huge downswing (breakeven stretch). It really speaks to your dedication and worth ethic that you didn't allow it to deter you from achieving your goals.

Congrats on your success Sol Reader!

Also, WJ94 won $41.82/hr over 1453 hours playing 1/2 at an off-strip locals casino in Vegas.

That's fine, and understandable. Unfortunately, you aren't very good at normal stack either.

The fact that you don't think it's possible for Mike to profitably limp 98s UTG shows your closed mindedness and total lack of creativity. Mike is a very strong winner in the games that he plays and rather than simply criticizing him for doing something that goes against conventional wisdom, I think you'd be better off seeking to learn why he does the things he does. Maybe you don't have an UTG limping range at all and that would be ok. However, you are likely to face creative opponents like Mike at some point and it would be smart to try to understand the lines they are taking rather than simply labeling what they do as fishy.

This is nothing new. When JohnnyBuz was crushing poker he was high on life. After he got brought back down to reality he has seemed to have nothing but contempt for successful players. Contrast that with GG, who was riding high while crushing the pokers and seems to still be riding high despite being brought back down to reality.

Of course I subtract raise/folds and limp/folds from profits. I didnt say I was averaging 2BBs with KT. The numbers listed are for all hands played in the first 2 positions that most people would say I should fold.

Small suited Aces, broadway hands like KT, QT, QJ, JT, suited connectors or gappers like J9s/76s...ect. It would take me years to try to track any meaningful sample with each individual hand.

I havent been tracking it all that long. I just decided to start several few weeks ago to see if I was leaking with those hands. I very well may be leaking and if I am I want to know that I am. If I am I will stop playing those hands from EP but so far so good.

You're forgetting the the situation where both players have 200+BB stacks and still play a 100BB pot. There's yet another dynamic going on there.

Just so I know, what is the winrate for someone who "isn't very good"?

Gyikes,gottaloveourstandards,imoG

What does “tabling a set” mean and why do you think your fair share is 1/N? If you simply mean the percentage of the time your flipped set got to showdown then 1/N doesn’t represent your fair share.

I think the math/game theory aspect of your game is somewhere between extremely deficient to non-existent. Not based on this post because I’m not sure what you’re saying, but posting history.

Does anyone know where gg actually plays or is it some sort of well-guarded secret?
I mean the only way to see if his games are really that nitty/dry is to have someone else decent at poker to show up here and chime in with their opinion of the card room.

Also, if the games are really that bad, why even play poker there? Is it really enjoyable to sit there under artificial light with bad posture and grind out 4-5BB against other nitty short stacks?

Vancouver?

Calgary?

It's in Canada somewhere out west IIRC.

I'm not really sure if his games are bad or not. The rake is high as **** for sure, and he's always telling us about not getting paid or how short the stacks are ... but I think both of those could be impacted by his choices (play-time and stylewise).

I was collecting some data attempting to provide some insight as to what IO were like at my tables nowadays. Not only did I not really get the clarity on the issue I was hoping for but it's possible my whole method was flawed, but anyhoo...

I simply tracked any time someone at the table got to showdown with a set (and tabled their hand, so it does ignore times people didn't sympathy show their sets when beat on the river). I also tried to categorize whether it was purely a setming set (versus, say, a monster pair that just happened to make a set along the way).

Anyhoo, I ended up tabling 16% of the the tabled sets which I thought were more-or-less setmining cases. You're going to have to point out where I've gone wrong with the math, but all things being equal, at a 10 handed table every one should show down the same number of set-mining-set cases (i.e. 10% each). Now of course it was a lol sample size of only ~100 hours (i.e. I only tabled 4 setmining sets in this time period), and of course not everyone plays the same (interestingly enough, I actually play tighter than most as I highly doubt anyone is folding small pocket pairs in EP like I am / folding to raises with no callers / etc., so if anything you'd expect my share of tabled sets to be way lower than everyone else). But regardless, I found it interesting how I technically I got more than my fair share of action (which sorta disproves the you-don't-get-action-cuz-you're-a-nit idea).

As I say: where do you think I went wrong math wise here? I'm not a math guy, I'm open to be shown my mistake.

GcluelessmathnoobG

Where in the world are you getting the idea that my games are nitty/dry/bad? I've never said any such thing.

And are you arguing that a winrate of 4-5 bb/hr at a lowstakes / 100b BI / high rake is poor?

Gcripes,ifthat'ssubparthenIguesseveryoneinthebotto m99.9%shouldquitpoker?G

Saskatchewan Poker and Bingo Emporium.

Gtakearightatthebarn,watchforroadapplesG

The way you describe how the action goes at your table says it for you. You don't have to explicitly state it.

I'm implying that it's entirely reasonable that if games are bad/dry, then being in the top 1 percentile may mean they are only beatable for 6-7BB, whereas in a juicier game, the same player will be able to beat it for 10-11BB/hr

Feel free to argue for that or against that, I'm just throwing it out there for discussion.

still advocating that any GG pertaining topics and GG himself be banned from this thread for the sake of everyone else. otherwise any poster asking about WR/etc. (yknow, the strict topic of this thread) is gonna be responded to by him and then everyone else is gonna say “no actually” and it’s the same terrible f***ing posts from him and everyone that ate the bait over and over and over

Maybe only people who regularly post their winrates in this thread should be allowed to post?

I mean, I take a lot a ****, but at least I put my money where my mouth is and stand by it (for better or worse). Can't say the same for quite a lot of the **** talkers in this thread.

Gputup,orshutup,imoG

New rule: Only ppl with 4k+ hours at a certain stake are allowed to respond to winrate questions. Everyone else has an lolsmallsamplesize and is just running hot and thus their opinion is meaningless.

Oh, I'd love to see everyone's 600hr sample size too, so feel free.

Giraffes away! Put me in my place! This should be awesome! I'll finally have to eat crow!

GnotholdingmybreathG

Yes it would, which is why it would be interesting to see results for individual hands at a live table. Such data is hard to come by. I remember playing online I could analyze how I'm doing with specific hands in each position after just months of play. But live...so much guesswork because building live databases is ridiculously slow and tedious.

Some of the hands you have in this range might be quite profitable, while others not at all. I'm not sure what tracking such a disparate range accomplishes...KTo plays very different from 76s as I'm sure you know. Just an idea, but if you separated the hands into groups you could get reasonably accurate results with much less time invested than tracking individual hands. For instance, group A: Suited Broadway, group B: Offsuit Broadway, group C: AXs (X<10), group D: SCs

I would track this myself but I don't want to start limp/calling all these hands for experimentation's sake at this point.

I repeat this story all the time, but I still remember when I reached 2000 hours and wondered "gee, I wonder if playing 55 UTG is profitable?" and was angry at myself for not keeping track of all this information so I would know for sure. Then I did the math and realized the conclusion would have been based on how well I ran in just 4 flopped sets (if I ran at par).

Git'stoughtodrawconclusionsfromdatalikethis,imoG

missingthepoint.gif