1
|
failsafe   United States. Apr 10 2009 12:06. Posts 1040 | | |
I quit poker a while back for what must have been the third time. I was playing NL50 and doing pretty well over a sample size of around 10k or so. Overall I was pretty happy to have progressed from NL25 to NL50, and to have managed a reasonable win rate at NL50.
More importantly, by the time I quit I could confidently say that I was better than most NL50 players on FTP at the time. Although beating NL50, and having a theoretical advantage at NL50 is not really a point of pride for me, I want to acknowledge that it's possible for me to have run good over the 10k hand sample(or any finite sample size) and achieve a much higher win rate than my actual expectation. Since actual win rate doesn't necessarily reflect expected winnings, and expected winnings are the true reflection of a player's ability, I think that it's important to have some theoretic idea about how your game compares with your opponents' games. Incidentally I think theory is a much more certain and cost efficient way to learn games of uncertainty than to play to whatever you can to consider a significant sample and then compare your win rate to what people suggest is a good win rate. I'd like to hear opinions on gauging your game by theoretic results versus actual results over a long sample. To clarify: I don't mean ALL-IN EV versus winnings because it's possible to run really hot card-wise and of course ALL-IN EV can't reflect the possibility that you're basically playing the top of your range all day long).
Anyway, I quit like half a year ago... Probably some time in September. I'm such a mercurial asshole that I became obsessed with Starcraft for a few weeks and abandoned poker for that. Then when I recognized I hated every job associated with my undergrad in economics, I decided to get a Ph.D... so I studied for the GRE etc and worked up a bunch of applications. In the mean time I pretty much forgot about poker.
I was reading LP about a month ago and I saw the big hand between Greenstein and Durrr in some thread. I bought Ace on the River years ago with my first PS points and finally read it like a year ago, so naturally I'm a pretty big Greenstein fan and automatically had to see the Greenstein versus Durrr pot... I was really impressed by Durrr's ability to take a 500k beat so I watched all the episodes of High Stakes Season 5 and was motivated to start playing again.
I suddenly remembered that I had around 1.3k sitting around on FTP. I'm not rich so I have no idea why I was just letting 1.3k sit for half a year on FTP. Anyway I'm totally irrational so as soon I remembered the money I thought "LOL 1.3k that I didn't remember. Certainly won't care if I lose it all. Let's go play NL50 like I'm Durrr!"
I used to be on the nitty side of TAG so I decided that I would just double my VPIP/PFR. I told myself that if I spewed a few hundred $ I'd probably feel a lot like cashing out the rest. So anyway it's an ongoing experiment but here are my first results:
I've been playing only a couple tables so my volume is low, and of course that makes running a bit under ALL-IN EV to be sort of a bummer, but it's not too discouraging since I'm still winning. My last few sessions have also been gay as I've had to fold way more than I like and my red line has plummeted accordingly. All-in-all though, it's liberating to play a more loose game on less tables because I enjoy the game and that makes up for the lower income per session.
I guess I'm finding that my desire for money (barring a massive windfall) is pretty low so I'm content to play a lower volume. This is sort of a surprise for me as I'd always imagined that I'd want more money as I grew older and "toys" became more expensive. Just the opposite has happened however as much of what I want is actually pretty cheap. Well anyway, I'd love to hear people's opinions on loose play at low stakes and on evaluating play from a theoretic perspective rather than a statistic perspective.
|
|
|
1
|
C Huuustle   Canada. Apr 10 2009 12:13. Posts 83 | | |
its the only way to play... id post my graph but LP wont let me, what kinda file are you uploading? .gif? |
|
|
1
|
k2o4   United States. Apr 10 2009 12:15. Posts 4803 | | |
My initial reaction is that 33/30 is too high. It's the very rare player who can consistently win playing that loose. I think you had a bit of a heaterish 3k hands here. Usually if you're playing that loosely I'd think you'd need at least a breakeven red line if not a red line that was going up, because you need to be winning a lot of non-showdown pots to make up for the fact that when you get to showdown you're gonna have a shitty hand so often. If you've been playing that loose but getting to showdown and having a winning hand very often, then you must be running hot and hitting gutshots and backdoors a lot.
Just be ready for a crash. I remember the first time I tried playing loose and I jumped from like 16/14 to about 30/27 or something, and I ran really well but just thought it was cause I was awesome at playing loose. When the good run ended all the spewy loose shit I was doing caused my BR to crash quickly and painfully. =) |
|
|
|
1
|
failsafe   United States. Apr 10 2009 12:31. Posts 1040 | | |
yeah i think you're possibly right. i'm thinking i'll do this for like 10k hands or so, and then from whatever i learn i'll try to play a more optimal style. definitely i'll be more loose than my old style but i won't be playing 33/30... i'll probably opt for something nitty like 30/25 |
|
|
1
|
YoMeR   United States. Apr 10 2009 12:36. Posts 12438 | | |
if you're playing 33/28 or something real loose then your red line needs to FLYYYY
otherwise you're just spewing. |
|
|
|
1
|
CrownRoyal   United States. Apr 10 2009 12:53. Posts 11385 | | |
i disagree with you yomer, if he's playing that many hands its gonna be pretty hard to have a "FLYING" redline.
when i play 30/25 my redline is break even for what it's worth jeff. |
|
|
|
1
| |
I'd say cash is king. Of course theoretical understanding and shit is important but every half-retarded dwarf outta some random RPG (and probably said dwarves' mothers) think they understand poker. |
|
|
1
|
Fudyann   Netherlands. Apr 10 2009 15:07. Posts 704 | | |
When you are running 33/28 are you doing things like triple barrel with air? |
|
|
1
|
vegable   United States. Apr 10 2009 15:15. Posts 2453 | | |
YOU GONNa WRITE 8 PaRaGRaPHS EVERY 2500 HaNDS MaNG???!!! |
|
|
|
1
|
k2o4   United States. Apr 10 2009 15:42. Posts 4803 | | |
| On April 10 2009 14:15 vegable wrote:
YOU GONNa WRITE 8 PaRaGRaPHS EVERY 2500 HaNDS MaNG???!!! |
hahahah |
|
|
|
1
|
chris   United States. Apr 10 2009 16:06. Posts 5503 | | |
whats your FTP name? when you playing again? is this 6max or FR?
|
|
5 minute showers are my 8 minute abs. - Neilly | |
|
|
1
|
YoMeR   United States. Apr 10 2009 17:17. Posts 12438 | | |
| On April 10 2009 11:53 CrownRoyal wrote:
i disagree with you yomer, if he's playing that many hands its gonna be pretty hard to have a "FLYING" redline.
when i play 30/25 my redline is break even for what it's worth jeff. |
when i mean flying i mean flying as in higher than what it's showing atm. about break even is good for full ring and higher is preferable for shorter handed games. Playing looser implies that you have a significant edge on the opposition and can outplay them in most situations thus the whole reason why we play looser, to gain more value out of those situations. If you aren't or can't play in that exploitative manner then you are teh spewing. pretty simple concept imo.
Now it's much easier to play the standard TAG ABC game where it more relies on showdown winnings than non-SD winnings. aka less decision making and even more importantly less decision making in tough spots. |
|
|
|
1
|
YoMeR   United States. Apr 10 2009 17:18. Posts 12438 | | |
but wat does it matter. we are looking at a really small sample size ;o |
|
|
|
1
|
Cro)Deadman   Croatia. Apr 10 2009 17:39. Posts 3943 | | |
this is obviously 6max cuz stats that high in FR are unprofitable unless your PU or Thor...
Anyways,if ur gonna play lag style you really shouldn't be playing NL50 with 1.3k since LAG is high variance and unless ur a discipline monster after one bad session u ll start tilting like a motherfucker wont really notice it cuz thats similar to the style ur trying to play and go broke.
Try to play solid ABC poker and get really comfortable in "standard" spots,after you achive that try to develop as a player...Trying the fastlane you'll only go broke in 95% cases.
|
|
|
|
|