Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Live No-Limit Hold’em Cash Discussion of no-limit hold’em live cash games of all stakes.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-07-2013, 05:39 PM   #3476
Tim Brice
veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: @timjbrice
Posts: 2,961
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

But what if you took one of the world class players and put him/her into the average $2/5 game with $1000 eff stacks. How do you think he/she would do then? Could that theoretical edge be reached?

In other words, is that about us as players or about our opponents as players?
Tim Brice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 05:47 PM   #3477
Phatty
old hand
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1,834
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I like to have the fish covered. Sure, the situation where you get to felt them doesn't always come up, but it will never come up if you don't have them covered, rather, you will just double up your shorter stack. The fish you especially want to have covered is the one that will stack off lightly. I can't remember the exact details, but Shane "Noluck17" Rose had a story about some guy who came into the Commerce at either a 5/10 or 10/20 game I believe with $10k and he made sure to cover him and ended up felting him pretty lightly as I recall. Again, he couldn't have done that had he not covered him.

I mean, it's hero and villain dependent obviously. If being so deep is going to cause you to fold a lot and worry about getting felted and not pick up any small pots, that's not good. But, again, I personally like to have fish covered and the more of a fish they are, the more important it becomes. Some whales can't ever fold TPTK or Aces. It's nice to pick up 150bb + stacks when the right hand comes up.
Phatty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 05:51 PM   #3478
LotGrinder
Pooh-Bah
 
LotGrinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 4,393
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Do any of you see this value?

Lets say you have a 5k bankroll

That's good enough for 20 buy ins of $250 at 1/2.

But, you think you could make a better hourly if you moved up to 2/5, and you don't want to risk buying in full for $500 because you'd then only be at 10 buy ins.

Why not buy in for $250, employ a solid short stack strategy, then bam, you're now up to $500 off a $250 buy in and you're "shot taking" at 2/5 for the same price of one buy in at 1/2....
LotGrinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 05:55 PM   #3479
acescracked84
old hand
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Beautiful Southern California
Posts: 1,420
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb12345 View Post
I also play 60/70bb, and dont think my winrate would be much higher given the extra risk involved in playing 100bb.

Limon also plays 70bb from his thread.
Limon plays 70bb.....in 5/10+ games! He has said before you should buy in for the max at $5 blind level games. You took that statement out of context.
acescracked84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 05:59 PM   #3480
RobFarha
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
RobFarha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: @robbyrobbb
Posts: 9,469
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by LotGrinder View Post
Why not buy in for $250, employ a solid short stack strategy, then bam, you're now up to $500 off a $250 buy in and you're "shot taking" at 2/5 for the same price of one buy in at 1/2....
Nothing could ever possibly differentiate from the bolded. This is guaranteed to happen everytime.

Short stacking because of bankroll consideration is a completely different argument.

Lets say my bankroll is 500k, the biggest game at my casino, casino X is 2/5nl.

The buyin is 200-500. It's a typical 2/5nl game where a good 2+2er should have an edge on nearly everyone.

Should we ever buy in for 320?
RobFarha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 06:01 PM   #3481
acescracked84
old hand
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Beautiful Southern California
Posts: 1,420
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by LotGrinder View Post
Do any of you see this value?

Lets say you have a 5k bankroll

That's good enough for 20 buy ins of $250 at 1/2.

But, you think you could make a better hourly if you moved up to 2/5, and you don't want to risk buying in full for $500 because you'd then only be at 10 buy ins.

Why not buy in for $250, employ a solid short stack strategy, then bam, you're now up to $500 off a $250 buy in and you're "shot taking" at 2/5 for the same price of one buy in at 1/2....
I see the value and I agree with the logic. However, we weren't talking about being under rolled. When I said a true pro always buys in max at $5 blind games and below I was implying that they were properly rolled (and they should be if they are a pro).
acescracked84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 06:31 PM   #3482
LolPony
Pooh-Bah
 
LolPony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: @DeTalores
Posts: 4,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge View Post
That's exactly it. I am 100% positive the theoretical edge exists, but no one I have ever analyzed who plays lag has ever had a WR that surpasses the max win rates of the best tags.
So were you talking about lag/tag earlier or short stacking?

I just don't see how having less money on the table when we have an edge could ever possibly produce a higher win rate.
Is it because you think by having a 60bb stack we win 60bbs more often than if we had a 100bb stack?
Do you think this is only the case for llsnl? If not then why didn't all online pros cap at 60bb instead of 100? (I know there were pro ss'ers- but their winrate wasn't as good as the top players at those stakes?)

The way I'm seeing it(not sure if analogy applies or not) if we were to have a 10%roi on 100 or a 8% roi on 200 wouldn't we rather have 8% on 200?(the 2% less is just to account for the "mistakes" you think playing deeper brings)
Or do you just think that playing deeper gives us less of a wr because it diminishes our edge by enough to make our wr less than playing short?

The only thing about this is, it doesn't matter if we play twice as bad with a deep stack... If the fish plays 10 times as bad with a deep stack then who cares if we aren't playing as good as we were if we had a short stack.

If our skill level was 1000 with short stack and a fish was at 500.
When deep we are 1/2 as good we would be playing 500 and he would be playing 50. (Again not sure if analogy applies how I'm wanting it to)

Last edited by LolPony; 01-07-2013 at 06:46 PM.
LolPony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 07:13 PM   #3483
wj94
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 7,719
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I always buy in max at $1/2 or $1/3, and can't stand the $100 short-stackers. If there are more than two at a table I will table change. Short-stackers are always, always terrible players. Can't think of one short-stacking reg that ever wins anything, it's usually just them buying in for $100 over and over and over again, waiting for a big hand and then whining when it doesn't hold up.
wj94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 08:44 PM   #3484
shadowdodger
adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Delaware Park
Posts: 984
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I think playing on a big stack is generally a good plan, but I often buy in for 60BBs as I think it sets up a good image and dynamic at the table.
I play my first 120$ very aggressively, and the first hand that I get into, I normally end up planning on getting my stack in. (Over 70% of the time, I take the pot without a showdown, netting 75$ or more in the process and bam, I'm no longer a short stack.)
If I do end up losing it, I always buy in for full 300$ and get paid off in every pot I'm in for the next 3-4 hours.
shadowdodger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 09:09 PM   #3485
Tom Dwans Son
banned
 
Tom Dwans Son's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,004
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

When you play full stack you generally want to play with deep fish. I see it time and time again where there is one or two deep fish at a table and then 4 good regs all go to that table. Ok, so you have the fish, but you are also now playing with several good players which hurts your EV and you are all just trying to get lucky to be the one to felt the fish.

On the other hand, I am rarely concerned with stack sizes. As long as everyone (or virtually everyone) has me covered then I can play my game and this is pretty much always the case at 2/5. So, often times, while 4 good players are at another table trying to felt a fish, I will be the only good player at a table the other regs are avoiding because it's too shallow for them. Shallow stacks often indicates less action, but I'm just as comfortable (if not more) destroying a table with 8 bad nits as one with a bunch of action players.

BTW, this reminds me of an instance a few months ago where a loose semi-competent reg that builds huge stacks had $9k at 2/5. Of course, this drew many of the top players to the table (both 2/5 and 5/10 players) which certainly isn't EV+ for the guy with the stack, but also may not necessarily be highly profitable for the good players either. Long story short, I got there the next day and the guy's stack was down to $3k. I asked which sicko got him, and was told none of them. A bunch of random donks hit and run on him. LoL

Anyways, short stacking is a skill. Playing stack-a-donk is just playing for luck. Heh
Tom Dwans Son is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 09:39 PM   #3486
SeaUlater
banned
 
SeaUlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,797
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by wj94 View Post
I always buy in max at $1/2 or $1/3, and can't stand the $100 short-stackers. If there are more than two at a table I will table change. Short-stackers are always, always terrible players. Can't think of one short-stacking reg that ever wins anything, it's usually just them buying in for $100 over and over and over again, waiting for a big hand and then whining when it doesn't hold up.
I don't get it. So if short stackers are terrible players, why are you avoiding them?
SeaUlater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 10:42 PM   #3487
wj94
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 7,719
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaUlater View Post
I don't get it. So if short stackers are terrible players, why are you avoiding them?
Because I raise a lot of hands PF and I can't do that when the short stackers just shove over my raise any time they pick up a hand. There is also no set mining odds when too many players are short stacked and you can't win $500+ pots against them either. It's just annoying to play against.
wj94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 11:08 PM   #3488
SeaUlater
banned
 
SeaUlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,797
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

So if they're correctly shoving over your loose open and not giving you proper odds to set mine, how are they terrible?

What are you talking about? So now they're annoying instead of terrible?
SeaUlater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 11:22 PM   #3489
wj94
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 7,719
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaUlater View Post
So if they're correctly shoving over your loose open and not giving you proper odds to set mine, how are they terrible?

What are you talking about? So now they're annoying instead of terrible?
You're right, short stackers are awesome. They always rack up with 1k because of their super skills.
wj94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2013, 11:40 PM   #3490
Jibber
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 486
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaUlater View Post
So if they're correctly shoving over your loose open and not giving you proper odds to set mine, how are they terrible?

What are you talking about? So now they're annoying instead of terrible?
they can be both at the same time, esp if you want to be playing laggy.
Jibber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:28 AM   #3491
slimshady1999
Pooh-Bah
 
slimshady1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,256
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibber View Post
they can be both at the same time, esp if you want to be playing laggy.
That's only cause most players, even "good" ones don't know how to play against short stacks who are at least semi competent. U won't make as much money but if they're jamming light just raise with a hand ahead of their range and snap call their shove. U just have to be patient and be able to deal with bigger variance
slimshady1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:40 AM   #3492
wj94
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 7,719
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by slimshady1999 View Post
That's only cause most players, even "good" ones don't know how to play against short stacks who are at least semi competent. U won't make as much money but if they're jamming light just raise with a hand ahead of their range and snap call their shove. U just have to be patient and be able to deal with bigger variance
Or just change tables...
wj94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 12:46 AM   #3493
Jibber
grinder
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 486
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I know how to adjust, I just don't want to make that adjustment. My postflop edge at a small stakes live game is ginormous. I want to be seeing flops with trash.

I actually have a solution so I can accomplish this if I am playing 1/2. The last thing I want is 2 ppl limp, i overlimp j7s, someone makes it $17 with 88+, kj+.

So when those 2 ppl limp, I make it $6. with my entire range that I would play. always 3bb, no matter how many limpers, as long as I'm not in the blinds. No one squeezes this without a very big hand(they should, it would be profitable with any two cards provided there aren't any mega donks at the table willing to call anything. actually its the fear of a donk calling that protect my "juicer raises".)

and lol at short stackers being semi competent at any game below 5/10, and even then. also lol at opening tighter than they are jamming.

Last edited by Jibber; 01-08-2013 at 01:09 AM.
Jibber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 01:06 AM   #3494
The Detonator
Pooh-Bah
 
The Detonator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,017
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Booked $24 an hour at 2/5 for the year (450 hours)

Booked -$198 an hour at 5/10 for the year (22 hours)

Wanted to play lots more, ended up doing some travelling and got pretty burnt out at one point and stopped

Not sure of the volume for this year, I'll look to start playing in a couple of weeks and go from there
The Detonator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 02:05 AM   #3495
Tom Dwans Son
banned
 
Tom Dwans Son's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,004
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by wj94 View Post
You're right, short stackers are awesome. They always rack up with 1k because of their super skills.
Yeah, because players that rack up with the large chip stack are always the best players that make the most money. LoL. This sounds just like what every donk and dealer thinks.
Tom Dwans Son is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 02:08 AM   #3496
Tom Dwans Son
banned
 
Tom Dwans Son's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,004
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Detonator View Post
Booked $24 an hour at 2/5 for the year (450 hours)

Booked -$198 an hour at 5/10 for the year (22 hours)

Wanted to play lots more, ended up doing some travelling and got pretty burnt out at one point and stopped

Not sure of the volume for this year, I'll look to start playing in a couple of weeks and go from there
Good work at 2/5. Hopefully the number of hours at 5/10 will be 0.
Tom Dwans Son is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 03:21 AM   #3497
wj94
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 7,719
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Dwans Son View Post
Yeah, because players that rack up with the large chip stack are always the best players that make the most money. LoL. This sounds just like what every donk and dealer thinks.
...wat
wj94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 03:29 AM   #3498
ibelieveyouoweme$80k
LLSNL FF Champ '13
 
ibelieveyouoweme$80k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wentzylvania baby
Posts: 12,851
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Dwans Son View Post
Good work at 2/5. Hopefully the number of hours at 5/10 will be 0.
or he'll just improve his w/r.

there's one regular shortstacker who does well where i play. he posts on here. i'll try to get him to respond to this thread next time i see him.

he plays anything from $1/$2 to $5/$10, mostly $1/$2 and $2/$5.
ibelieveyouoweme$80k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 07:01 AM   #3499
Tom Dwans Son
banned
 
Tom Dwans Son's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,004
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Well his sample size at 5/10 is really small but an improvement in his winrate would seem to just slow the bleeding.
Tom Dwans Son is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2013, 06:09 PM   #3500
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,367
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Just totalled some of my wins in my current 13-1 session streak.

400+bbs: 2
300+bbs: 3
200+bbs: 3
100+bbs: 2

GholycrapI'mrunninggoodG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive