Hasn't he always? As far as I know, Rennwurm ONLY plays fast tables (at least that's what I thought he did last year to get SNE).

I've been gettin 0.46

wtf is this .27vpp per hand at nl100 today

already, just pm me and i'll ship the monies. The 1st of june right, and 125 hours is cool with me.

this... he plays fast tables exclusively...

this!


and wtf is wrong with you penguin?

starting 50BBs tables is awesome!!!

renwurm is def my inspiration

dunno, someone said here it's not possible to play 24 fast etc

Dealer: Game #28756777249: Pickeljoe wins pot ($21)
Pickeljoe: how do you spell nit?
Pickeljoe: R
Pickeljoe: A
Pickeljoe: L
Pickeljoe: P
Dealer: Pickeljoe, it's your turn. You have 8 seconds to act
Pickeljoe: H
Pickeljoe: D
Dealer: Game #28756802952: hilde74 wins pot ($8)
ralphd27: lol




word is getting out apparently....

wrong... quite a few of us do

I never start 50BB tables

shortstackers at 100NL are clueless, which should be obvious because if they knew how to shortstack they wouldn't be at 100NL fullring on Pokerstars

Maybe if you were'nt clueless you wouldnt also be at 100NL FR forever.


50BB tables are making the games better for all the community

No, and you got owned by everyone itt

qft biggie, qft

agree..

If you cannot make monies from the shorties at 100nl then gl gl gl gl at poker
Oh and the 200nl shorties are mostly bad/average with a few probably good/BE

TBH i can think of some plenty good meta / advertising to the fish that can be derived from having a shortie or two at the table

OMG...that is so sick, Coordi.

nobody is afraid of making/losing money to the short stacks at nl100 nl200. that's not even the point. the point is that playing 8 regs, there is still more money to be had.

not all regs are good, a lot of people just assume if you are playing a lot of tables, you are a winning player.

a lot of misinformation itt imo

Hang on, i actually like making money from the shorties AND they provide some really proftable advertising spots versus fishiewishies. Its a bit frustrating sometimes as they introduce some extra variance into the game but its really not the big deal that everyone makes it out to be. Its just you sometimes lose 4-5 flips in an hour versus shorties and then the sky is falling.

Maybe at higher stakes its a bit more frustrating AND tbh on some euro sites its a real problem as there can be 5-6 shorties per table. But at stars i do not pay attention to the BB requirements for tables.

The problem with shortstacks has nothing to do with losing flips and everything to do about your strategy against other deeper stacks at the table.

Agree with that... but i suspect for many people its an emotional response rather than a rationale one. In small numbers 2/3 per tables of the special-needs variety, as compared with a 70-80% chance that the seat would otherwise be filled by a reg that will be either 50% BE, 20% losing, 30% winning variety... I would take the 2/3 shorties as i find that (8 regs + 2 fish) < (6 regs + 2 bad shorties + 2 fish) IMO.

FYP

This.

This.[/QUOTE]

this is going to go on and on so this is my last response but.... assuming they play an optimal strategy then it would be a problem if i had to fold a hand that i have raised and would otherwise have been able to play against a deeper stack. If they played optimally this money would be gone.. but... thats not the truth is it :P Considering them as a whole rather than the one or two slightly frustrating folds or -EV plays that they induce.. then i come to conclusion that they are generally soft spots. In an ideal world they would be replaced with a fish but some monkeys voted for GW Bush TWICE! and so now poker is dead in the US.

me and ryanj ar ein a hand and with one player left to act he types
winning plays by winning players
i said that was bad to type durin g the hand
he called me a loser
fair or unfair?

unfair, although
C***S*CK**R would be VERY unfair

lol ryanj is a joke