This sounds like a viable strategy. I'm surprised it took this thread this long to come up with this (also referrring to the post a bit above this where someone else also identifies this strategy).

It now seems most likely, as others have stated, that he gives up small ev, mostly pre-flop and with some call downs like the one in the hand earlier, and this causes his opponents to make lots of mistakes. Hence, he's probably running somewhere in the 1.5-2.5 range and is running good.

Edit: I'd like to add that i often play preflop like this against tight and/or predictable tags because the extra bets often do make them play incorrectly, and you really arent giving up much.

Thanks for the link. But which one is DERB? Is it Lojzka? And if so... why is everyone calling him DERB?

Don't Ever Run Bad (see post 1)

I know that but he provides a link that purportedely has DERB speaking, but then he starts talking about this Lojzka. I thought maybe DERB was a alias for this player because the OOP didn't want anyone but 30/60 regulars to know who he was speaking about. Also, if Lojzka is DERB then that isn't really speech. Maybe his program tells him to smile whenever the word "cheating" is used.

next time you're at his table just type "cheating" over and over and see how many times he smiles.

I think if i spent tons of hours building a bot then i'd also be clever enough to not have the bot smile when someone says cheating.

I don't play in high or even middle stakes and I haven't been able to read this whole thread because it is so volumnous. I wanted to point out though, that in all the discussions about this guy working with someone else, you all seem to be looking for a player who has comparable horrid stats. What if he's working with a TAG?
This is an awesome thread. Real meat and potatoes stuff.
X

Ah, but what about the programmar thinking about what would need to be done if someone accused it of being a cheating bot? He would probably program the bot to use the smile emoticon whenever the word "bot" or "cheating" was used and then have it promptly leave the table thus not causing suspicion about it's non human charachteristics.

Has anyone actually emailed party poker to have them look into this? I know their customer service is terrible, and the people you deal with don't understand much about poker, but at least if they keep their eye on this guy, if he's a bot he might be more likely to get caught.

I told myself I was done with this thread a week ago, but I'm obviously not. I considered posting a new thread, but didn't want to annoy people - I'm sure people are sick of looking at this mangled mess.

Some things I find interesting. DERB is getting beat badly by the better players. That means he's torching the weaker players, just like Paluka said. He must be eating alive the weakest and tightest. I don't think he'd do that well against the bad 25 VIP type players who call too much.

I don't get to play with this guy much anymore because my sleep schedule has changed and there are so many more 30 games. I certainly don't this players win rate will continue in the full games and imagine that he will continue somewhere around break even. I'm waiting for my next database update to check. I'll probably start a new thread entitled DERB update as long as people aren't death sick of this topic.

Certainly my eyes have been opened somewhat to the idea of lagging it up at the higher limits. Floater and DERBS might be able to thrive up here and certainly adds some dimension to limit holdem.

It harkons back to a famous Phil Ivey quote about the difference between 30-60, 400-800, and 4k-8k (paraphrasing) where he suggests you don't know what you don't know until you've put serious time in at these limits.

After talking to some successful 300-600 players, I realized they had some blind ideas that I hadn't considered heavily and players were making plays, I thought no one was making. I guess this sort've outside of the box thinking goes up to the highest limits.

And lasty, specifically related to this thread, this DERB sucks and 30 17 cannot be sustained for any reasonable winrate, IMO .

"
I told myself I was done with this thread a week ago, but I'm obviously not. I considered posting a new thread, but didn't want to annoy people - I'm sure people are sick of looking at this mangled mess."

yes

Care to share?

Don't open the thread anymore.

So, uh, what happened to this guy?

ssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....

i'm curious as well. is this guy still winning?

said victim pumped the pot in on the of the largest I've ever seen in the 30 that I happened to lose. Don't see them very often though.

Doesn't this include mostly shorthanded play?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
Don't ever run bad. Party 30/60 player:

{{Hands 73,824 - VIP 30 - R 17 - NF 21 - ag 2.0
Total winnings: $114,281

Routinely 3 bets small pocket pairs from bb, caps certainly dominated hands.

Fishy?

[/quote]

Doesn't this include mostly shorthanded play?

[/quote]

No, he has only recently become a SH player. These stats are from back in the day.

Is he stilling using the same screen name? I play his buddy all the time and confuse them...

Ryan's got his finger on the pulse of the IGC.

damnit! what is the friggin screenname? someone just say it, god this is so dumb.

Lojzka:

Summary for $30/60 Limit
Hands Played 31128
VP$IP 29.47%
BB/100 1.01
Preflop Raise 18.02%
PreflopAggression 1.57
PostflopAggression 2.78
Folded SB to Steal 70.26%
Folded BB to Steal 33.98%
Attempted to Steal 45.4%

Screename changed. Now it's Brizganc.

One of the many clowns that manages to hit 2 or 3 outers on me every hand I'm in with him. That, or go runner runner while raising the whole way.

In fact, ever since exactly the day the tables got restricted to 25, all I am doing is winning money off of the solid players (fortunately) and losing it to the clowns as fast as I make it. That seems backwards of the way it should be. My "loss to" column in PT reads like a who's who of Slovenia.

I don't want to be Dan Druffesque, but I'm just saying...

Nigel