Niether is poker multiway. The point is solvers aren't going to ruin poker or chess.

It's the combination of people playing in a more similar fashion and the rake. If poker didn't have a rake, I would be dead wrong and if chess had a rake, it would have died a very long time ago.

Several years ago, before the demise of Limit Holdem, the Poker Room at Horseshoe Southern Indiana started spreading $2-2-4-8 Holdem. $2 increments PRE, $2 increment on the flop, $4 increments on the turn and $8 bets on the river.

The old nits loved the game, they could play every hand and they could see the flop for $2. One of the primary edges a good player has in limit holdem, is knowing the pot odds so you only play profitable hands and only call when you are getting the right odds and you bet/raise for one of three reasons, to gain information, for value or to steal. (Before someone jumps in to mention semi-bluffing as if they got me, semi-bluffing is a combination of all three.)

One of the biggest mistakes my opponents made was chasing a gutshot straight draw with insufficient odds. The $2-2-4-8 structure, eliminated the possibility of making this mistake. Everybody limped in every had (10 handed game) so as soon as the first person bet the flop, they now were getting 11-1 on their $2 call which is the minimum required to correctly continue with a gutshot. Because the bet doubled on the turn and the river and the pots were always tiny, they were also incentivized to make better folds on the turn and river.

This betting structure forced everyone to play in a similar manner. The bad player's mistakes were now correct play and because I was getting the right odds to continue, I had to play the same way.

I believe the rake at that time was 10% with a $5 cap and $1 promotional drop. The rake didn't get capped in most hands so you had a game with a large rake, tiny edges and small pots. Eventually, even the old Nits that loved the game stopped playing. If ten of us played for more than about four hours, often times, all ten would be stuck. Primarily because very few if any had of us had a big enough edge to beat the rake.

The higher limit games suffered and died because there were no longer any winners at the lower limits to move up to a bigger game.

This is why NLH (Cash Games) are in trouble, as playing styles converge, fewer players will be able to overcome the rake in the micros so fewer bankrolls are being built and fewer new players moving up.

I believe that history is repeating itself. I just turned 60 yrs old so I might be dead before NLH but I am absolutely convinced, based upon past experience, the process has started the conclusion is inevitable.

Man. If you have played any NL on Global Poker dot com at all and think that the game is dying I don't know what to tell you.

You are obviously just not good. There are many winning players on Global and elsewhere. And the games on Global are the best I’ve seen since Absolute Poker was around.

LOL for reading comprehension, I didn't say it was dead. I clearly stated it might outlive me.

Are games that are better than before a sign of decline? If the same was solved, and you knew it was, maybe you would have the skill set to beat 2NL.

Your logic is as sound as your posts that call out envelope writers in one thread and encourage everyone and their mother to write envelopes elsewhere.

Please direct my attention to the thread where I am negative about envelope writers. Aside from where I said they shouldn't have been surprised to be banned after hitting and running with thousands of dollars per month. That wasn't negative, it was common sense.

You sound upset.

Maybe you're getting a little senile. Rake has been around for ever and its not going to kill NLH.

If someone is playing chess for money in a United States Chess Federation sanctioned event, there is an entry fee that is almost always a lot higher percentage-wise (wrt the prize fund) than the rake in poker.

I self monitor for hypocrisy. It is one of the things I am actively trying to eliminate in my life. If you could kindly direct me to the place, where I was hypocritical, I would consider it a personal favor.

What were you doing up so late?

Early, I routinely wake up around 3 am. I was already done with the 3 S's and out in my garage with a cigar and coffee.

High effective rake at the micros is counterbalanced by low skill opponents in micros. It has always been this way.

There are two options available:

1: Taylor your game to exploit weak opponents (this is most profit short term).

2: Taylor your game to be most profitable when you move up and effective rake is lower (this is still profit short term but less so).


Going with option 1 will be lots of fun as a hobby. However, the regs at the next stake up from you are ready and waiting to counter your exploits.

Going with option 2 is still fun, but the fun is in learning. When you move up you will still have leaks and ways to improve, but you are less likely to be smacked down by regs.

Full discloseure: I was option 1 for quite a while and could not make the jump from (.10/.20) to (.25/.50) and did not understand why.

I am upwardly mobile.

It's Global so I can't provide stats. I have a simple spreadsheet that tracks hours played and W/L per session. It doesn't separate by stakes just, did I win or lose this session and how long did I play.

So far this month, I haven't lost more at PLO50 than I have won at PLO10 & PLO20. So based upon that and about 40 hrs of play this month, I believe I crush PLO10, beat PLO20 by a little and a total fish at PLO50. I don't play well enough to beat PLO50 but I am working on it.

The spreadsheet is my anti-ban plan. I will know at the end of each month if I can request a sweeps redemption without taking any of their sweeps coins.

In my opinion, you should pick one stake and crush it for months. Build up a bankroll of 1k, and then try the PLO50. If you lose 500, go back to PLO20 and do it all over again.

Also, not just my opinion, is that rake is worse at PLO20 than PLO50 by quite a bit. So, rake is not hurting you in your mobility.

Finally, you should not need any $2 envelopes to make any of this happen, if you are indeed upwardly mobile.

My advice is to learn why you are so fishy at PLO50, and put that to the test at PLO20. What I am saying is that you are naturally exploiting the smaller .20 fish but that style won’t work vs the .50 regs.

relax you PLO maxi

I have sufficient bankroll thanks to the $5 envelopes so that I don't need to move down unless I get tired of losing. I choose a game from the lobby based upon average pot size, not the buy in or blinds.

I had a bad session at PLO50 yesterday and lost 3 buy ins. The first two, I am okay with, I got all in PRE with strong AA hands and lost both, that is just poker. The third buy in I lost, I played bad. I should have been able to find a fold. I was pretty much destined to lose about $20 but I shouldn't have lost the last $30.

That session put me about $30 in the red for the month. The other advantage of the spreadsheet, it let's me know if I am winning or losing separate from sweeps credits.

Maybe if instead of spending your time filling out envelopes you spent your time studying and learning poker you wouldn't lose.

Maybe filing out the envelopes, allows me to actually practice the things I am already studying.