GG, do you not feel like you're absolutely shtting all over the other players in your room?

What does this mean?

Well he said he feels like he's a winner in the room but imo you should feel that you're absolutely annihilating the opposition @ LLSNL. Either that or you got plenty of work to do or ur game is super tuff

This is a very common response, but as I've stated many times before, it's not just me that's not getting paid off: it's everybody.

I've currently started a new tracking project: I'm tracking every time I see a set tabled (not just by me: by anyone at the table). My guess is that this will be a pretty good indication of how payoffy the tables are in general, and maybe even more overall conclusions can be made with regards to IO (which I think are vastly overestimated at a lot of tables today).

I'm only 2 sessions / 12 hours in. Obviously early going, but so far I've seen 5 sets tabled. Of those, only one of them could be classified as a setmining case (as all others were big pairs that raised / 3bet+ preflop for pure high hand value and happened to hit sets). And even in that lone case the "setminer" on the Button with 77 called an EP raise for 1/6th of stacks and needed the preflop raiser to slowplay his flopped TP in order for him to hit his set on the turn (profitable?). In other words, and I know this is still early going, but I've yet to see a single person turn up like a flopped set on the river after getting paid off for a couple of postflop streets and having their opponent tap the table and say "wow, set, nice hand, nice hand". My guess (and I'm hoping my data collecting project will tell me if my guess is on track) is that this is *standard* in my game today.

I'm hoping I can get in like ~100 hours worth of data (not sure if I have the stamina for it, we'll see), but the writing is on the wall even early on, imo.

GcluelessIOnoobG

This makes a lot of sense. However, it should also work the other way in that GG gains better information on the competition over time. Perhaps the competition is making better adjustments to GG than he is at making adjustments to them.

I think it all comes down to how you look at things and expectation.

What is "annihilating" the opposition @ LLSNL? A few years ago, I would have had a particular number in mind. But now after taking a more honest look at the game and my typical opponent and evaluating it and them without as much "lol, it's LLSNL" prejudice, the number I have in mind is much much lower. I'm still beating the table overall for about that new number, and that might be as "annihilating" as it gets nowadays in those conditions.

BGP recently said something regarding this in the chat thread, something along the lines of people will always think the game is beatable, and yet at the same time their expectation of winrates will drop vastly as the game becomes more difficult to beat. Yesteryears "annihilating" winrate of x bb/100 will simply become today's y bb/100 and tomorrow's z bb/100.

FWIW, from an annihilating point of view, and a purely egotistical one, I still feel I'm generally the best player sitting at my table (especially when stacks are short, I actually don't think it's very close in this regards). In other words, tables are still good, and still beatable. Just not for as nearly as much as they once were (noting that increased rake + less hands dealt per hour can easily account for a lot of this).

GcluelessannilhilatingnoobG

Why would you be getting less hands per hour than in the past?

In our previous room, we had chip runners. The dealers only job was to yell "chips!" and then they'd continue to go about dealing, as the chip runners would take care of all cash-for-chip transactions. Since downsizing the room and staff, the dealers are now responsible for making all player cash-to-chip transactions at the table, and further more then have to interact with the floor every so often when it comes by to collect the cash. My guess is that if they were dealing 30 hands per hour before that this could easily reduce the number of hands per hour by about 3, which is 10%. So, for example, if you were sitting on a 10 bb/hr winrate (which I was about 0.5 bb/hr off from at 2000 hours), this alone would affect my winrate by about 1 bb/hr.

Add to that my rake has increased from a maximum $5 to $7 in a 100bb max BI game, my guess is that alone has affected the winrate by about 1.5 bb/hr (I think there is a good argument for 2 bb/hr, but I'm taking a conservative guess).

So, without even mentioning the overall increase in level of play of opponents, my guess is that my winrate could *easily* be affected by 2.5 bb/hr due to condition changes alone.

Gwe'reallhangingbyamuchthinnerthreadthanwethink,im oG

GG, if you can't get three streets out of a set versus two pair or whatever, then how do you ever lose a hand? Steal every pot.

As long as people call PFR's with QJo and A7o, and a 6bb open can go 3-5 ways to the flop with any regularity, live poker will be super beatable. You may have to change up your preflop ranges or postflop play, but when ranges are too weak to the flop, you can have really high winrates.

This is also a standard response, which I've responded to many times.

In a nutshell, in those 12 hours to date, and if I've done my math right, someone flopped a set 18 times (not to mention two pair, or turned sets, or other big hands). You will steal a lot of pots and get TP off their hand a lot, no doubt about it. But in multiway pots (and there are even still a large amount of multiway raised pots in my game), there is simply too good a chance you'll run into that minefield of sets / two pair / etc. that aren't going to fold, and my guess (I could be wrong) is that you're going to spew off all your profit into them.

Last night I was fairly card dead and played very few hands, which certainly didn't help my already super rock image. But I once found myself in a 7way limped pot (limped pots being the exception these days) with A8hh on the Button. KQ8hh. It's checked to the CO who bets. The cutoff ain't a nit who likely would have raised KQ and possibly even 88 preflop. I have a super nit image that he is well aware of. I could have just called and tried to invite others into the pot and played for stacks behind, but instead went for the steal. I raised, he was the only caller, and I shoved for a little over a PSB on the blank turn. It was my only "steal" attempt of the night in 6 hours. I ran into Q8 who tank/called (who knows what he thinks hes ahead of), but I got there.

Ggoodluckintheminefield,imoG

gg you simply cant have it both ways.

Adjust your game. period. You like poker. Thats ossum. But I am calling you out to do something about your "crappy game". Take a step back. look at everything from a new perspective. While in game try to find spots where a bluff might work. See if that same spot v a villian type keeps repeating itself. Vibe it out. Then nut up and pull the trigger.

If you want something binary - poker aint 4 u. But resolving problems and adjusting is what makes it interesting imo.

I'm definitely adjusting my game, although overall I'm likely going in a direction many of you think is incorrect.

I'm always on the look out for spots where I can steal a pot, and will pull the trigger when I think it will work a profitable amount of times. They don't occur much in very multiway pots and very rarely in multiway raised pots low SPRs (as not nearly enough room to figure out what is going on and set something up), imo.

But before G starts wielding flying medieval headkicks, with regards to the thread it's more just part of a general overall point that there are many different conditions that can change in your game conditions that make the game much more difficult than it was before. It's a finer line that most think; I know I certainly didn't realize the line was so fine at 2000 hours.

GcluelessNLnoobG

awesome gg!! I wish you the best of luck. Also I agree the big multiball pots are generally not great for bluffin. I honestly think with your image, and the state of your poker room game that you are entering possibly the most exciting phase of your career. You have won a substantial amt playing ABC nit. You can still play the nit style but having the wild card in your back pocket ready to whip out at any time, pulling the trigger, and gettin the folds is a lot o fun as well as profitable

Ha, not to derail the thread Squiddy, but I'm not sure you'll like my conclusion regarding the best way to play in my current poker conditions (hint: it involves almost never seeing a flop). Ha, good luck to me obviously.

G/derailG

I don't agree that misplaying a 7 way limped pot is an indication you can never bluff. I don't want to talk about the hand since it is the winrates thread, just saying it does not prove your point at all.

Being seen as a nit, while being able to bluff, is hugely +ev. Pick good spots for it, not 7 ways with the nut flush draw and two pair outs, and your winrate will improve.

GG, the adjustments you've made are to get even nittier which is exactly the opposite of what you should be doing.

Any tough aggro player will beat that type of game up pretty badly as the nits sit around waiting for the nuts to play back.

There is no doubt in my mind that I, or any tough aggro player, could beat your 1/2 game for 15BB+/hr. That game sounds just like the daytime 1/2 in my room.

Yeah GG, I know you just can't seem to fathom the idea that it's you, but at some point you just have to start believing what everyone here has been trying to tell you now for quite some time: it's you.

Anyone who's not getting paid off at LLSNL is just doing it wrong, plain and simple. Open up your range, show up with a few dumb bluffs once in a while, quit limping and checking everything, etcetera. Just be more active in general. This whole forum has been sounding like a broken record about this, but unfortunately you refuse to listen and simply look the other way. You give new meaning to the word stubborn lol.

You make it sound like Wednesday noon games are more profitable than Saturday midnight games.

That's not what I meant to imply. Im just saying that a tight super nitty table can be run over like a bull dozer for a very good win rate and super low variance.

Its funny you say that though because Wed is my best day of the week and somehow Sat is my worst.

Where I play the weekday games are full of bad regs but the weekends are a mix of wild drunks and semi pros, so it can be a bit hit or miss.

If no one is paying off your sets on the river, then bet the river with air more.

But the two times he tried it, it didn't work, so we gatta give up forever now

But yeah like, no offence to GG, not calling you a bad player but I'm pretty sure we'd all agree you're no crusher (a winning player, yes, but not a crusher), so your preaching of variance wrt to 10bb+ winners at 1/2 isn't very relevant, because I feel very confident a true crusher would be able to always sustain a high WR at 1/2 unless it was just truly truly horrid variance. Obviously it's been discussed that we'll never know who a "true crusher" is bcuz of survivorship bias/heaters and whatnot, but they do exist regardless if we can confirm who is/is not one. Once you get to 2/5-5/10, then yeah even a crusher can go on a downswing over X hours bcuz you cannot exploit as much.

$1/2 winrates are capped by rake.

Without rake a lot of people would theoretically be winners, but the rake makes it so that the first few bb/hr you "win" are spent offsetting losses from rake. And everyone loses so much to the rake that top winrates will be significantly capped. Do the math yourself. Large casinos rake in 8 figures every year, it is always the biggest winner and the single biggest reason why winrates are capped.

I'm definitely calling BS on anyone claiming to have a true winrate significantly higher than 10 bb/hr (which is extremely hard to achieve by itself).

I have over 10000 hours of poker played lifetime, online and live. My first 2 months of playing $2/5 live full-time I made $32K, for a winrate of 20 bb/hr. I was by far the best player in my room, but was that my true winrate? **** no man, I ran hot as hell and won tons of big pots and rarely lost them. After 500 hours I still maintained a winrate close to 18 bb/hr and used the money to buy myself an expensive car, which is still my car today. Needless to say, that winrate did not last.

I currently play mostly $10/20, and I'm a far better player now than I've ever been, and do you know my winrate over the past 18 months? It's positive, but barely. And I know why it is what it is. In that time period I've been set over set around 10 times in big pots (at least 150 bb lost). I set over set someone only once (for a much smaller 60 bb). I've put tons of money in with big pairs to have people spike underpairs on me in big pots, and lost numerous big pots in spots where I flopped the nuts and lots of money went in and I lost to draws. Meanwhile my own draws seemed to hit about 15% less than they statistically should have.

But whatever, I'm not saying this to feel bad for myself because I've had multiple times in the past where I ran hot for 500-hour stretches and made more than I should have. You know what's common about every hot strech that anyone's ever had? You simply got very lucky at avoiding coolers. Your overpairs help up, your value-betting hands got clean boards to keep betting, and you hit plenty of sets and draws and people just gave you money. During a hot streak you may think you ran normal and won at your true winrate but the truth is you ran hot in a lot of ways that you don't realize.

The nature of live poker makes it so that there will always be some people who are running extremely hot for even thousands of hours, but even those people never maintain their inflated winrates and come back to earth eventually, it might just take a few years. I have seen it many times.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Yeah good post.

The key is being astute enough to know when you are running hot, cold or avg. Once you've played enough, you should be able to tell the difference and be honest with yourself.

My point is that at 10/20 you're running very bad and able to sustain a slightly positive WR -- if you were playing 1/2 with that same variance you'd very easily be able to still maintain a relatively high WR because there's just SO MUCH ROOM for exploiting people. I don't want to dive into the nuances, but 1/2 and 10/20 is just milessss apart that even if you were god-running both, the god-running WR possible at 1/2 would be like double or whatever.