Pool stats say 90% of players lose money so why bother playing
More like 95%+
As for hand, it's a call, even in my "underbluffing" stars nl25 pool i expect call to be profitable, i see almost no equity bluffs with kqo on similar boards, you need read to deviate from calling turn, i like implied on ace and blanks
For starters the idea that 90% of people who play 200z lose money is ridicolous. Most people at 200z are regular who win money. Most of the hands played at 200z are between winning regulars.
.
How does that work? Not saying you're wrong, but for the majority of players to be winning in a pool (particularly if those are the players most likely to play longer hours and more tables), in a negative sum game, those who are losing have to be losing at a ridiculous pace I reckon.
How does that work? Not saying you're wrong, but for the majority of players to be winning in a pool (particularly if those are the players most likely to play longer hours and more tables), in a negative sum game, those who are losing have to be losing at a ridiculous pace I reckon.
Yeah basically, a if you have 5 regulars one fish then for the regs to make 5bb/100 the fish loses 25bb/100. I mean at high stakes and even midstakes like 500-1k on mainstream sites, you only get one fish per table, 5 regs. One fish, 5 regs. The number of fish might be higher because fish put in low volume but overall most hands have 5 regs
Yeah basically, a if you have 5 regulars one fish then for the regs to make 5bb/100 the fish loses 25bb/100. I mean at high stakes and even midstakes like 500-1k on mainstream sites, you only get one fish per table, 5 regs. One fish, 5 regs. The number of fish might be higher because fish put in low volume but overall most hands have 5 regs
Dont forget rake in this calculation. For the regs to make 5 bb/100 do we need the fish to lose 30bb/100?
Preflop could mix call/fold vs the 12bb 3b with 33 at 100bb eff, so doesn't really matter it's going to be really close to 0ev both in solver and in practice.
Post I think you could have some jams vs larger cbet sizings and 50% seems kinda close, vs a 75 or 100 you would definitely have jams, but you'd probably be jamming more a5/a4 type hands rather than 33 exactly so I think you should only be calling the 33 otf as played.
Turn 7s you have a lot of other hands you can be folding here before you start folding a pair with an open ended straight draw... You're likely peeling flop with almost all your AX and broadways with bdfd so you have so many other hands you can be folding on turn before you start folding 33... Hands like AJ/AQ and all your peeled broadways that aren't spade spade... hands like KJhh obviously fold in this spot.... don't think you're really going to be folding any pairs here since most have a straight draw to go with them.
Dont forget rake in this calculation. For the regs to make 5 bb/100 do we need the fish to lose 30bb/100?
It's not difficult to be losing extra 20bb, in the past i had huge blinds leak, sb was like -30bb/100 and bb like -50/100, and i was still solid winner, now imagine micro fish limping 2x more hand utg than you play SB, for fish lossrate sky is the limit, but it's also telling that no matter how good you are your winrates are determined by player pool
It's not difficult to be losing extra 20bb, in the past i had huge blinds leak, sb was like -30bb/100 and bb like -50/100, and i was still solid winner, now imagine micro fish limping 2x more hand utg than you play SB, for fish lossrate sky is the limit, but it's also telling that no matter how good you are your winrates are determined by player pool
Agree completely. My BB/100 winrate on Ignition 25NL Zone is 5x my winrate on 10 NL ACR Zoom. That is certainly a function of player pool
