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 02-08-2020, 02:32 AM   #24951
Mr Spyutastic
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Mr Spyutastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 12,226
Re: stop/win stop/loss discussion

I just play until I don't feel like playing anymore which is usually within the window of 4-6hrs.
Mr Spyutastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 04:20 AM   #24952
johnnyBuz
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnnyBuz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Beast Coast
Posts: 7,093
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

this tangent comes up every 3 months. max downswings/runbad/whatever are at least an order of magnitude greater than you think possible. if results are distributed normla/poisson/whatever it's just a fact there will be small fractions of the population at either end of the spectrum (ie: sun running thru entire live sample size or running into the death star in the abyss for seemingly ever).

as someone who has logged ~7000 hours i'll say that's a drop in the bucket of the "long run approaching EV" shtick. maybe its cuz i dont play full time anymore but i find these queries humorous like people looking for comfort that the variance boogeyman doesn't exist. the forum player pool turns over every couple years. either they're all popping out babies and moving on in life or the variance catches up and they realize they're running in place. which do you think it is?
johnnyBuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 08:03 AM   #24953
browni3141
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: South Florida
Posts: 5,140
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I mean, no matter how badly you think you're running, it's possible to run worse, and out of a thousand "crushers" somebody has to be the one running -3 sigma.

It doesn't mean that a 3kBB buy-in downswing is something you should realistically expect to happen and over-prepare for it. It is unlikely to happen in your lifetime if you're a good winning player unless you're playing high stakes, online where win-rates are lower or uncapped buy-in games.
browni3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 08:32 AM   #24954
Petrucci
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,266
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by browni3141 View Post
I mean, no matter how badly you think you're running, it's possible to run worse, and out of a thousand "crushers" somebody has to be the one running -3 sigma.

It doesn't mean that a 3kBB buy-in downswing is something you should realistically expect to happen and over-prepare for it. It is unlikely to happen in your lifetime if you're a good winning player unless you're playing high stakes, online where win-rates are lower or uncapped buy-in games.
Exactly. The chance of such a downswing will happen to a good longterm winning player with small to no big leaks is so small its not worth using energy to worry for it to possibly happen.

JBuz is of course also correct about the playerpool gets turned over every 2 or 3 years, because people discover that they arent as good as they thought when variance catches up to them. Many rec players keep playing though year in and year out because they are addicted gamblers and cant stop playing. It still amazes me when i play with players i know for a fact have been losing for 10 years+ to the tune of $20K+ pr year.
Petrucci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 09:14 AM   #24955
johnny_on_the_spot
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnny_on_the_spot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: S-Mart
Posts: 10,927
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyBuz View Post
this tangent comes up every 3 months. max downswings/runbad/whatever are at least an order of magnitude greater than you think possible. if results are distributed normla/poisson/whatever it's just a fact there will be small fractions of the population at either end of the spectrum (ie: sun running thru entire live sample size or running into the death star in the abyss for seemingly ever).

as someone who has logged ~7000 hours i'll say that's a drop in the bucket of the "long run approaching EV" shtick. maybe its cuz i dont play full time anymore but i find these queries humorous like people looking for comfort that the variance boogeyman doesn't exist. the forum player pool turns over every couple years. either they're all popping out babies and moving on in life or the variance catches up and they realize they're running in place. which do you think it is?


As someone with kids, popping out babies is variance catching up with you
johnny_on_the_spot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 09:21 AM   #24956
johnny_on_the_spot
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnny_on_the_spot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: S-Mart
Posts: 10,927
*** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petrucci View Post
Exactly. The chance of such a downswing will happen to a good longterm winning player with small to no big leaks is so small its not worth using energy to worry for it to possibly happen.



JBuz is of course also correct about the playerpool gets turned over every 2 or 3 years, because people discover that they arent as good as they thought when variance catches up to them. Many rec players keep playing though year in and year out because they are addicted gamblers and cant stop playing. It still amazes me when i play with players i know for a fact [players] have been losing for 10 years+ to the tune of $20K+ pr year.


You’re failing to take into consideration the costs/activities those people would incur if they didn’t play poker.

The retired crowd specifically. This is there way to get out of the house. This is there entertainment. This is their social circle. They are receiving something for their $.

Pretty much every other activity for entertainment is a (-) dollar hit to their bank account. At least with poker, there is a possibility of a (+) return.

Plus they get free food and drinks.
johnny_on_the_spot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 09:49 AM   #24957
Petrucci
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,266
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny_on_the_spot View Post
You’re failing to take into consideration the costs/activities those people would incur if they didn’t play poker.

The retired crowd specifically. This is there way to get out of the house. This is there entertainment. This is their social circle. They are receiving something for their $.

Pretty much every other activity for entertainment is a (-) dollar hit to their bank account. At least with poker, there is a possibility of a (+) return.

Plus they get free food and drinks.
Sure, maybe some percentage of the losing players is in the category youre describing. Even though $2K+ pr month to get out of the house seems pretty steep to me for people with a "normal" average income.

I suspect most of the steady losing players just turns the blindeye though, because as mentioned they are addicted gamblers who cant bring themself to stop playing.They dont track their losses/results, and they forget so so easily their big losing sessions and overall results from year to year. Imagine what a guy who have lost maybe $20-30K pr year every year for the last 10 years+ could have done instead with that amount of money. Think of what he could have saved up. Think of what he could have bought. Think of what he could have payed down on his depth. Playing cards/gambling is more important than anything else for those people, and its quite alot of them.
Petrucci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 10:18 AM   #24958
johnny_on_the_spot
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnny_on_the_spot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: S-Mart
Posts: 10,927
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Both of those reasons are not mutually exclusive.

I don’t doubt that most losing players have an inflated idea of their skill and their win/loss numbers
johnny_on_the_spot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 12:29 PM   #24959
LordRiverRat
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,513
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

One more reason to not talk strategy or win rates at the table. Especially win rates.
LordRiverRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 07:10 PM   #24960
Tanqueray
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 1,052
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Worst part of talking strategy and WR isn't that it might help your opponents or that it might inspire them to learn, but rather that it is stale, FOS, and nobody really cares.

The higher the stake you go, the less people care. In 1/2, people still enjoy talking about poker because the game itself is not about winning, but rather creating an illusion that they are winners. Majority of these players can't wait to have a platform to showcase what they know about poker and why they are winners.
Tanqueray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 07:20 PM   #24961
Tanqueray
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 1,052
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Majority of rec players play because they really have nothing better to do. I have over 5k hours with the weekday afternoon crowd, so I know these guys pretty well.

They are almost exclusively people who are just looking for social interaction. We talk about sports, vacations, current or past careers, and occasionally politics. Game itself is just an excuse for bunch of people to sit around. Funny thing is that this kind of environment actually becomes a deterrent to more serious players, because apparently when it comes to playing serious poker, you cannot also have fun and relax.

Weekends are just full of people who are looking for outlets, whether it's from their work or family obligations. There aren't that many options for most people to find outlets, especially the older generation with discretional income.

Being a serious grinder should treat game and casino selection like applying for a job. Look for time slots and crowd that are best suitable for your comfort level, or change your mindset to match the crowd if there are limited options.

Most people I see who are burned out from grinding are those who don't mesh well with the crowd. 30+ hours a week will not be easy if you don't like the people around you.
Tanqueray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 07:31 PM   #24962
reaper6788
Pooh-Bah
 
reaper6788's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: bring online back to US!
Posts: 3,772
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I play to win but I enjoy the social aspect and totally get how that can be an even bigger part of the game for people. I work in pretty specialized field where everyone has spent most of their life in school and then working in that field. At work I'm surrounded by a bunch of nerdy squares like me and it's nice to go play a game to meet completely different people. An one table I've sat with a real estate agent (nit), a longshoreman (random maniac), and a retired career soldier (calling station). Also I recently moved to a big metro area and I don't work with many people from the area so it's nice to meet random folks who have lived here longer and know more about local history and things to see and do.
reaper6788 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 08:17 PM   #24963
LordRiverRat
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,513
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I don't mind a social table. I prefer it. Way less boring when card dead. The only thing I don't like about it is the occasional guy talking to you who lacks the social skills to shut up when you're in a medium+ pot. I hate having to shush someone or giving them the look so they get it. I always resume the conversation after the hand as if nothing happened (or use it as an excuse to end the conversation if it's some guy telling another bad beat story).
LordRiverRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 02:38 AM   #24964
Dacriz
journeyman
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 288
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Not a big poster but a somewhat consistent player for about 20 years. Then 21 months ago I moved to within 20 minutes of a poker room and started tracking. I am doing very well, which I expected as I’ve always been a winning player. I am surprised to the extent of my win rate (still somewhat on the small side sample size) as I play somewhat conservative/deceptively but with occasional bluffs. Thanks to the people who post in the live no limit small stakes forum (especially gg although not always in agreement with the stack to pot ratio stuff). I had trouble figuring out how to post my graph but stats are as follows after about 21 months:

Profit- $21,048
Hourly- $23.25
Cashed 103 out of 175 visits for 59%
B.B./hour standard deviation- 41.69 (not entirely clear what this means)

Played mostly 1/2 or 1/3 as I’m afraid my game of picking on weaker players won’t translate but looking to move up more consistently at the two year mark.

I was going to wait for 1,000 but I was too stoked after my current fire streak. Thanks guys!
Dac
Dacriz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 03:53 AM   #24965
reaper6788
Pooh-Bah
 
reaper6788's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: bring online back to US!
Posts: 3,772
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dacriz View Post

Profit- $21,048
For a second I thought it was troll then I was like "oh *hyphen* 21k, not negative 21k!"
reaper6788 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 04:36 PM   #24966
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,396
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Spyutastic View Post
When people say low stakes are hard to beat because of rake, I don't think they are meaning low stakes is hard to beat like in the game itself.

It just means it's harder because you have a bigger handicap to overcome which is the rake. Not that the game itself is difficult.
Late to the rake discussion, but +1 to this take, imo.

You'll never find an *easier* game than 2/4 Limit circa 2006; seriously, the play at those tables set the gold standard for lol play and it's unlikely been reached since. But, that game was virtually unbeatable... thanks to rake.

Will the same eventually happen for the lowest staked low BI live games? I don't think it's impossible. There is of course a maximum rake where even the best of the best (let alone the best of the rest) won't be able to beat it. I'll admit I have no clue what it would be. But my guess is it might be smaller than what most would think. And eventually that will make even the lol kiddie table game a "tough" game.

GcluelessrakenoobG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 05:24 PM   #24967
feel wrath
The Situation
 
feel wrath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: lost on the turn
Posts: 23,906
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by gobbledygeek View Post
Late to the rake discussion, but +1 to this take, imo.

You'll never find an *easier* game than 2/4 Limit circa 2006; seriously, the play at those tables set the gold standard for lol play and it's unlikely been reached since. But, that game was virtually unbeatable... thanks to rake.

Will the same eventually happen for the lowest staked low BI live games? I don't think it's impossible. There is of course a maximum rake where even the best of the best (let alone the best of the rest) won't be able to beat it. I'll admit I have no clue what it would be. But my guess is it might be smaller than what most would think. And eventually that will make even the lol kiddie table game a "tough" game.

GcluelessrakenoobG


Crown in Melbourne runs a 1/2(100) with 10% rake to $15 a hand. Can’t see how this is beatable
feel wrath is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 05:48 PM   #24968
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,396
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by feel wrath View Post
Crown in Melbourne runs a 1/2(100) with 10% rake to $15 a hand. Can’t see how this is beatable
Yeah, personally I would highly doubt it's beatable (but haven't you mentioned in the past that you know pros attempting to beat some of these high raked games)?

Double digit rake maximums are already at lots of rooms (a neighbouring room here just went to one, so mine likely won't be too far behind). It's of course just a matter of time and something all rooms will eventually have to do in order to keep up with inflation / cost of doing business. Although others will argue that the lowest stakes / BIs may be increased to help offset this (which is possible).

Ggoodlucktousall,imoG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:39 PM   #24969
LordRiverRat
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,513
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I'm not sure how long 1/3 has been around, and if it was a response to inflation. But if it is then that's a great step in the right direction. And I feel like all rooms should phase out 1/2 completely and spread 1/3 as the lowest. The max buy ins are usually 300 for both anyways, so the nits can't complain that it's a much bigger game.
LordRiverRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:49 PM   #24970
Mr Spyutastic
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Mr Spyutastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 12,226
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I'm not sure. But it was around when I first started playing poker around late 2005.

The first time I ever played was at the Wynn I think they had just opened and they had 1/3 and the buy in was uncapped. There was this guy sitting at the table w/ 100k lol.

I bought in for $300 and lost it in about 2 hrs. I barely knew the rules and the hand rankings.

I've posted this hand before and can't remember the exact details except for the betting and that I had the 2nd nut flush on the river, but one of the first hands I ever played I had something like QT in a limped pot and on a flop of J 6 4x
4 ways to the flop it gets checked to last position who bets $5, only I call. Turn a brick and it gets checked around. River is K I check, he bets $10, and I call lol.
Mr Spyutastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:53 PM   #24971
Tanqueray
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 1,052
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Games are already trending toward unbeatable in a lot of places with combination of bigger games slowly dying and increasing rake.

Funny back in 2010, most of us probably thought if poker were to die, it would be because players have gotten a lot better or they lost interest and moved onto something else.

In 2010, I was playing $3 rake and $2 jackpot in a $2/$5 game where the jackpot equity is around $10 - $12.

In 2020, games are mostly $1/$3 with $4 rake and $3 jackpot, and the jackpot equity is about $5 or worse.

Even if players are exactly as bad as they were, I would still have to improve my WR to beat the extra $1 rake and $1 jackpot (which is actually $2 - $3 after consideration of equity). All things equal, I would have to beat the game by an extra $10 - $15 an hour just to have the same WR.

Combining with the fact that games are becoming smaller and that edge is smaller...
Tanqueray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 06:56 PM   #24972
parisron
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
parisron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,933
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I have never heard of any game with a $3 Jackpot drop. $2 is bad enough.
Where is this?
parisron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 07:05 PM   #24973
feel wrath
The Situation
 
feel wrath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: lost on the turn
Posts: 23,906
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by gobbledygeek View Post
Yeah, personally I would highly doubt it's beatable (but haven't you mentioned in the past that you know pros attempting to beat some of these high raked games)?

Double digit rake maximums are already at lots of rooms (a neighbouring room here just went to one, so mine likely won't be too far behind). It's of course just a matter of time and something all rooms will eventually have to do in order to keep up with inflation / cost of doing business. Although others will argue that the lowest stakes / BIs may be increased to help offset this (which is possible).

Ggoodlucktousall,imoG

there are as many as 10 pros playing my main game which is also 10% rake up to $15, but that game is 2/5/10 (1000) which is way easier to beat for a profit than a game with 10x smaller buy ins

but there are also several players drawing their main income from the 2/3(500) game that has the same rake structure. I have a friend who plays that game exclusively and is over $40 per hour still.
feel wrath is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 07:20 PM   #24974
LordRiverRat
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,513
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

That $3 drop is disgusting I hope it's staggered and not just taken every pot. That $4 rake though...
LordRiverRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2020, 07:21 PM   #24975
Angrist
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,884
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Not sure when $1/3 started, but I can tell you the first time I played it was September 13th 2009 ... at *Treasure Island* of all places.

Raising the blinds a little bit to $1/3 gets more rake in the small pots, which is bad, but it also makes it easier get beyond the max rake point so the % taken from the pot drops, which is good. Not really sure which is more important to overall winrate though.
Angrist 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 01:29 AM.


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