Would someone be interested in a study partner for the low spins on .es?
Im looking for someone with a really good 3 handed game. Im not sure whats possible on the 5s but I think it should be 30+ (mine is arround 20-22).
My heads up chipev is arround 90, so maybe I could help you out there in exchange

Hello me and my buddy are currently playing spin and go and have no experience with real money yet ,but my buddy he's been playing spin and go with play money for 3 years.
We share an account and play alternately at the beginning 100x 0.25€ games to gain experience.
After 100 games we won almost every 2 games with a first deposit of 10€. Our strategy is to play together because we have two different personalities and we talk about missplays .
So, after 100 games we start to play with 3€ and increased our bank account to 108€, we won the most money from games where the winnings are doubled like 3€ pool is 6€ since most of them lose their incentive and don't have the stamina to play the game as if it were 18€. I think at 150€ we will play with 5€ buy in.
I apologize for my grammar, but English is not my native language .

1. I suggest you play on separate accounts, because this will not be in accordance with the rules of the poker site.
2. You can discuss the hands another time, after the game, it gives the same. Each one has to learn their own style of play.
3. The Spins have a terrible variance. I don't recommend getting stake/level up even with BR. You need a sampling of 3-5k games, to get a little sense of how your game level is. The cEV is the main stat of your game level! Each stake requires a minimum number to be profitable in the long run
4. Look for more information on the forum on subjects like cEV, variance and spins strategy.

Best Regards!

Two days of "play", 50 buyins under EV. Had three 10x and bunch of 6x, most lost at heads up.
And when I think I wasn`t even playing optimally and low key tilting during the 2x ones.

So glad I`ve got special 2% rakeback offer to soften the blow.

Haven`t played at Amaya during 2018, guess I won`t during 2019.

Well fwiw Amaya seems to be the only place that really does anything at all against bots and collusion. I dont like what they did by basically removing rakeback and increasing rake at the same time. But I dont think stars is the main problem. Even if they lowered rake drastically, stables would just increase their player base and flood the games with even more regs. The amount of stable horses grinding spins in low and micro and even super micro games is just a joke. That shouldnt even be allowed. Stables are the only real winners besides pokerstars obviously. They maximize their profit by cutting everyones winrate, their players included. Wish they would do something about that but thats just my opinion. I dont mind small stables that have a very personal,close group of people. But those huge, slave stables are just ruining the game imo. Have a good day lol.

The faster u realize and stop playing this mongo game called spingo aka rakeidiottrap on stars the better for you and poker overall.

Sadly they are still the best available games for a lot of people. The only other option is playing MTTs and that is probably even worse. Hourly sucks for mtts..

Well i see more people profitable in mtts and a lot of " grinders"" on spins which are with 1-3% roi i dont know how much hourly is this but the volume is big .

MTTs have an absurd amount of winners bias and the amount of mediocre grinders putting in 200+ hours a month for nothing is probably way bigger than people think, sure you get to hear about it when people finally bink something but somehow the rest of the year usually goes silent and then their actual playing hourly trickles down to a single digit number for most people

MTT also has plenty of soft money in it (like Spins) because a lot of poor players just want to "get rich quick" and are blinded by jackpots in both games.

MTTs have always been one of the more attractive games for players, they always have a healthy supply of poor players.

Rake in both games is a major factor, and competition at certain stakes/on certain sites is obviously an issue too.

I don't know if they are better than Spins, but there is a good crossover of skillsets from online MTT to live MTT, which is at least a small bonus.

PLO is a nice game too, slightly different reasons (the extra complexity for the average person means plenty of people that play it stay poor at it, there's plenty of variance and plenty of interested soft money).

About the rake on Spin&Go.

I'm playing Spin&Go for something more than 6 months from now, and saw alot of regs complaining about the big RAKE on this kind of game. So I wondered... Does the rake makes any (or that much) difference on Spin&Go?

I'll try to explain myself.

In a 3H STT where players put in $X buy-in and are fighting for a prize of $3X, rake makes a total difference in the EV of playing this tournaments.
If you play those 3H STT in a room that gets 5% rake and one that gets 7% rake, this 2% difference in the prize pool would clearly affect the WR.

But... As it happens on Spin&Go, the prize pool isn't BUY.IN*NUMER.OF.PLAYERS-rake.
The prize pool of every match is random and rake doesn't affect it at all.

So, that said, how the rake influence on Spin&Go negatively?
I'm also a defender that bif rakes can, in some aspects, be good because they generate a larger RB.

The only thing I can think that could argue against rake is that all the buy-ins go to a bigger prize pool (jackpot) and THAT MONEY is only used to give us the high multipliers, but it can't be truth as the high multipliers are based on % only, and not the jackpot prize pool.

If any experienced player could answer me, please.

Greatings.

Lower rake is usually reflected by having more 4x multipliers and fewer 2x multipliers. The average prize pool is slightly bigger with lower rake and the game will have slightly less variance.

Effective rake is what matters. Use a tool like SwongSim to calcualte it. Remove the top 3 or 4 multipliers from the calculation and you'll get a realistic idea of the actual rake. Alot of regs seem to now know about effective rake and assume their ev based on hitting all multipliers which is obviously pretty silly.

treating jackpots as 0 ev is not the way to go either

Think it's reasonable to 0ev the top multi and assume you'll hit 100x/200x as a reg, or at the very least count half or 2/3 of that ev. Just my opinion, room for discussion here but seems fair to think you'll realize some of that ev when doing long-term calcs.

I was talking about that with some friends that plays 60+ and one of them told me that he likes calculating the real EV based on x2-x25 and treat x100+ as a PLUS.
Like the bonuses no expected that employees gets from their companies.
On his opinion x100/x200 could only count as EV for 30k+ spins.

I have like 7k and never SAW one of those and only few x25.
Remembering that we besides finding one, we need to win one. If we have something like 37% ITM we need to find at least 3.
Pretty hard, no?

And thank you both by answering about the rake.
I had this doubt on how the prize pools were made, but think I got it now.

I mean you are supposed to hit them 1/20k or 1/10k time.
I would never add them. Exclude the top 3 for a realistic estimated winrate. Everything else is a lucky bonus..

look at pokerstars 7 and 15 dollar spin and go where rake is 7% and 6% respectively. the 2 lowest multipliers together are happening 918894 times in one million games in both buy-in levels. but at 7s you get a 4x 199.506 times and at 15s you get the 4x 214.506 times. that is huge and has nothing to do with "bonus" for higher multipliers. with higher rake you just get a 2x multiplier more often and that will heavily impact your winrate.

the second part about rake increasing rakeback, well first of all there is no real rakeback on pokerstars and even if there was, it just means that you get some amount, lower than the additional rake you pay, back, which means that it decreases the impact of the rake increase but doesn't nullify it.

link: https://www.pokerstars.eu/de/poker/spin-and-go/

A grinder playing 2k games/mo would expect to hit 2.4 100x + 1.25 200x/yr. A grinder playing 3k games/mo would expect to hit 3.5 100x and 1.75 200x, so it makes even less sense. A guy like freeqz is gonna hit a bunch of 100x+ multis this year guaranteed. When something is an expected event multiple times per year, as a grinder it makes no sense to just ignore them in your calcs. On the flip side, it does make sense to remove the top multi (on ps, anyway) as that's a once-in-decades event even if you were to play sick volume and the games ran forever.

for what its worth, i have played probably >70k spins lifetime, have hit >= 100x on 6 occasions and am 0/6 for winning them, despite having >50 cEV lifetime

thus i would definitely recommend not including the top multipliers in any sort of realistic calculations that you might be doing

U probably play scared in 100+, thats why u got 0/6. I played roughly 200K games and have won a lot of 100x, one time 3000x. U have to put pressure in big mps.

Confirmed impossible to run bad in a massive sample like six games

Yea dozer, if acbaraone even says so it must be true. Play better in 100x+ dude

I agree. Open atleast 4-5x the bb to put them in tough spots and risk their tournament life, a good sizing to the flop is 3/4. Leaving enough for you to spin it up when he shoves !