Party Limit Hold Em, What Happened?

Hello all,
I have been playing SNG's for a while now, 6$ and 10$ levels full table and 6max about equally. I had not played limit hold em in a while on Party Poker, and decided to change things up for a bit. When I played about a year ago, the .5/1 limit tables were wild, with 5-7 people taking a flop unraised, and 3-6 taking it raised. Lots of fish, and money could be made. Over the last two days I have been shocked at what i have seen. Most tables I can find at .5/1, all people fold to the blinds 7 out of 10 hands. The only hands played are AA thru 10-10, A-K, and maybe A-Q, A-J in late position. No money moves anywhere at all. The only hand I made more than a couple of bets on was a set of 9' on an A-9-K flop, and I knew the other guy had A-K. Any thoughts on why the low limit tables are tighter than all get out at party? Anyone else notice this? Thanks for the input. Shocked

Don't play at party but if you find that they are a bunch of tight wads you can take advantage of that. Make up for not being able to win big pots by bluffing more would be my first tip.

Look about 6 threads down, someone else posted the same post as you titled "Where is the money gone?". The answer is it went to 6-max.

6-max, you will get 4-6 people to the flop quite often at.50/1.00. It can lead to some nasty suckouts, but it they will really pay you off when you make a nice hand.

Given the current rake, online small stakes limit is pretty fucked until sites decide to make it plausable to play a wider range of hands without a god-like post-flop edge over medicore tight players.

I don't think the software is too terrible when you are playing, I get some bugs with the cashier window occasionally. Sometimes after I make my action, it lags a bit.

I agree, there can be improvements (taking off the table limit, improving sng structure (if you actually wanted to play sngs there), and getting more players), however I actually like the interface better than Party (in a month at Party I had more misclicks than a year at Stars, who probably has the best all-around software I've played with.)

I think you may have run into some tougher than usual tables--I looked at .50/$1 a little while back and the quality at Party was weak. It was tough not to win 6+BB/100. Average VP$IP there of 27% (hmm--thought it was higher than that, but that's was PokerTracker tells me), PFR around 6.5%... so somewhat loose, fairly passive, lots of calls to the river with bottom and middle pair. OTOH the play at $1/2 did seem pretty solid, though...

It was tough for you not to get 6+BB/100 at .50/1.00 with Party's rake? How big was the sample?

5oo hands last month when I was taking a break, and about 8000 hands four months ago when I was just getting started. I'm not claiming to be an expert by any means, but the typical .50/$1 has been VERY beatable, in my experience.

Rofl. Good luck keeping that winrate, arki.

Really? Hmm... Well, like I said, I'm not claiming to be an expert, but let's say your win rate at a typical, halfway decent game is 2bb/100. For that to reach 6bb/100 all you need is a random donkey to twice call you down on the turn and river with lame hands rather than fold immediately following the flop... My stats seemed pretty ordinary for that level: VP$IP of 20% (I stretched a little here as there's not much pf raising so 87s and 55 ep are often playable, PFR of 8.5% (I stretch a little here too since people cold call with the most godawful stuff), WtSD 36%, W$SD 53%, and I don't recall much in the way of startling bad beats or great luck...

I think if we single tabled .5/1 we might be able to pull a 3 to 3.5 bb/100 by playing a shorthanded style and lagging it up preflop with superior postflop play.

It wouldn't be worth the effort, though.

There's only been one guy I know that was able to multitable the 3/6 full game for an above average winrate of like 3.5 BB. His name began with an F and ended with nord. 6 BB/100 is not sustainable and its foolish to think you can.

euphoricism--it's possible you're underestimating how poorly .50/$1 players can play especially if you, the predator, exercise solid table selection skills. Then again, it's possible my experience and data are skewed by factors I can't isolate.

And yes, I'm sure we'd all agree $3/6 would likely be quite different.

Fair enough. The rake's kind of like that weird mole on your otherwise scintillating ex-girlfriend's back. You only think about it if you really, really have to.

Thats a huge problem with rake at 1-2 to 3-6 at 6 max. Rake kills you if you are very agressive, especially if players are not an Absolute donkeys (which starts to be the case at these limits. Of course there are idiots and bad player, but much fewer). It is difficult to pay 2.5 BB to a site and have something left. I consider myself a decent player but always hitting this ceiling moving from
0.5/1 to 1/2 and 2/4 where at best I can sustain the same rate as at 0.5/1 with much higher variance, which also tilts me up sometimes. Should I jump to 10/20 as such? Smile

P.S. I play at PS

no idea, really--I can't handle the variance either since my girlfriend and I are buying a house, and what I need to do is work on my game as a part-time job while making as certain as possible that I can pick up about 1o,ooo a year at it. We just need the cash, otherwise I'd love to take the risk and dive into 10/20. Probably a few people on this site who can give you a better answer.

Ask in the shorthanded forum.

Poker Forum

Join Our Poker Community!

Poker Forum Index

Limit Hold'em

Party Limit Hold Em, What Happened?

Poker Forum Index

Limit Hold'em

Party Limit Hold Em, What Happened?