NL cash games are dead on the internet.

[a500lbgorilla]

Online poker is for tournies and limit (As far as hold'em is concerned).

Discuss.

-'rilla

[edudlive]

im all in

[lolzzz_321]

You're silly.

[a500lbgorilla]

I said "Discuss."

Then I'll pwn you all.

-'rilla

[lolzzz_321]

THere are plenty of fish in the sea.

[a500lbgorilla]

THere are plenty of fish in the sea.

And where are these fish going?

-'rilla

[Ivory]

possibly at the higher stakes (i wouldn't know i don't play there....yet), where im at theres plenty of action. at the higher levels i could see it drying up as i imagine there aren't as many players

[lolzzz_321]

All levels, watch Bodog 5/10 game?

[a500lbgorilla]

All levels, watch Bodog 5/10 game?

Bodog will become what everyone said Party would never but has.

-'rilla

[Ivory]

are you saying all levels are drying up or theres action at all levels?

[Cocco_Bill]

Thats strange since I'm making more on NL cash games than ever before.

[a500lbgorilla]

Thats strange since I'm making more on NL cash games than ever before.

Which is one of the reasons. The money flows faster to the better players in NL.

And the amount of breakeven players is much larger.

(this is all comparing to a year ago)

I should probably reword. Cash games arn't dead. But they arn't as good as they once were. But tournies and limits are still as soft as always.

-'rilla

In March 2005, my PokerTracker database pegs the average $25 NL full ring player at PartyPoker to be 32% VP$IP.

In August 2005, it was 21% VP$IP.

[biondino]

Rilla, I can't discuss this unless you tell us the argument behind your assertion.

Dwarfman, my PT stats will say EXACTLY that about me!!

[a500lbgorilla]

What I'm trying to say is "If you were winning a few months ago but have gone on long breakeven streaks, or you're just getting to the game, limit and tournies might be a better choice." The NL games are far from unbeatable, but you'll have to work harder at them.

-'rilla

[biondino]

So really this considers that a decent player who is no longer improving will nowadays be making less money from the game? You may be right, though I do think you're (probably) being too vague regarding limits etc.

I, however, feel my game is still improving, and my bankroll, BB/100 and earnings-following graph all reflect this. I'm only one person, obviously - but then's so's every person who could attempt to answer your statement!

[a500lbgorilla]

Reasons why. This is all for low limit online NL. Mainly on the party skins.

The party poker stack change.
Money flows from bad players to good players very quickly.
Money between breakeven players flows back and forth while the good players siphon.

This means that most bad players that were created from the poker boom have either improved to breakeven, busted or moved to a different format.

The structures of other forms of poker allow help slow the flow of money from bad players to good players. This helps perpetually maintain the softness of online games.

Live NL games are still soft becuase live players play far fewer hands than the online players so the good players win and the bad players lose but the rate isn't a deturrent from coming back (since they probably also play fewer times per week)

-'rilla

[Laeelin]

I dont have anything to comapir it to, but I dont see how the games can be much easier than party poker....


My first thought is "500lbs of downswing?"

[a500lbgorilla]

I dont have anything to comapir it to, but I dont see how the games can be much easier than party poker....


My first thought is "500lbs of downswing?"

Nah, I've been playing the limits and the tournies after reflecting on my last few months of low and mid limit NL and chatting with ilikeace86, this is what I came to.

-'rilla

[Bmxicle]

nuh-uhhh

[Bmxicle]

You are right, in NL the money from the bad players goes to the good players much faster, thus making fish leave faster. So from this one could assume that in NL ring a good player has a much larger edge over their opponent than in other forms of poker. So if you, as a winning player, have a larger edge over your opponents, the opponents don't have to be as horrible for you to make a nice profit. With the short stacks that party used to have, people could afford to be much worse i'm guessing. Now they can't afford to do this with the normal deepstacks. However with deepstacks, your decisions become harder and more important, thus giving you a greater edge over your somewhat improved, but by no means good, opponent.

I wasn't even playing poker during the party poker golden age, so i don't have the experience to really say, but Nl ring is far from dead.

[a500lbgorilla]

You are right, in NL the money from the bad players goes to the good players much faster, thus making fish leave faster. So from this one could assume that in NL ring a good player has a much larger edge over their opponent than in other forms of poker. So if you, as a winning player, have a larger edge over your opponents, the opponents don't have to be as horrible for you to make a nice profit. With the short stacks that party used to have, people could afford to be much worse i'm guessing. Now they can't afford to do this with the normal deepstacks. However with deepstacks, your decisions become harder and more important, thus giving you a greater edge over your somewhat improved, but by no means good, opponent.

I wasn't even playing poker during the party poker golden age, so i don't have the experience to really say, but Nl ring is far from dead.

Where making the same points but comming to a different conclusion.

I'm trying to say that if you're a breakeven NL player or new to the game, go elsewhere.

And you have a huge edge over fish but against breakeven players you don't have an enormous edge. So as this trend continues and the sea starts to noticably dry up, NL will become a more and more difficult game.

-'rilla

[Checkways]

Here's my 2 cents.

It depends a lot on where you're playing. But it's impossible to imagine that the players from the poker boom aren't getting better. They are. It's just a matter of staying ahead of them. Whether or not I can do that, I'm not sure. None of us are sure probably.

I played on Party Poker recently. I multitabled 3 $100NL games to see if I liked it and to collect my bonus. Not only did I not like the software very much, but the games were SUPER TIGHT.

They sucked. It was no good. It was like getting blood from a stone. My monsters wouldn't get paid off and because the blinds are so small, when you make a winning bluff you get chump change. So I quickly cleared my bonus and jumped ship. After one day of playing I came out a little ahead and got my bonus. I'm quite sure that I can beat that game, but why would I even want to try? I can get better action elsewhere.

This is based on just one day, so I'm not an expert on Party Poker at all.

Live games are much different. The action is usually MUCH looser. Why? Because the hands come slowly, you can't multitable, and people just get impatient. They want action and they give action. I get way more variance playing live than I do online.

I don't know what it was like a year ago online. I only played live games. What I do know is that some games just aren't worth your time. A group of Rocks playing in the same game will do nothing but hand their money back and forth until one guy gets trips and the other guy gets a full house. It's bad for us when we look for a game, but it's worse for them. They're wasting their time. The blinds are too small and with the ability to play multiple tables and camp, it just makes for a poor game.

Will all the poker sites turn out this way? I don't know. I hope not, because no one wins. Even the Laggs can't get away with much with such small starting pots.

[Legendash]

I think you're basing all your thoughts about this on party, party is a horrible place to play no limit. I've given up bonus whoring and moved to other rooms where the players are just plain bad, it's just not profitable to play at party even with bonuses. Try stars, they've picked up all the new fish due to their WSOP marketing and have a similar number of players to party now. Also they seem to be running their nice bonuses every 2 months which are worth doing if you play 100NL or higher.

[Irisheyes]

It seems natural to me that loosing players will transverse from ring to tourney simply because it hurts to consistently loose money.

At least with tourneys they can always say 'Oh... came close in that one' and relish the thrill of the competition aswell as the money. Winning one out of ten S&Gs gives motivation to continue trying.

For loosing players in ring games it turns into just 'There goes my $25, oops, there goes another $25.' I know theres thrill in the gamb00l for the fish but how long can loosing money be a thrill when the loosing pattern is so painfully obvious, as it is online.

Live games are less available and less frequent and therefore benefit more from the once off gambler then online games.

Cosidering this I think the fish progression into tournaments will cause ring games to dry up.

[Bmxicle]

Am i just a poker god and because of my l337 sk1llz i think everyone sucks on party, or (much more likely) are there still a hell of alot of fish on pp.

Although i do beleive the term fish becomes relevant as you move up in stakes.

[a500lbgorilla]

I think you're basing all your thoughts about this on party, party is a horrible place to play no limit. I've given up bonus whoring and moved to other rooms where the players are just plain bad, it's just not profitable to play at party even with bonuses. Try stars, they've picked up all the new fish due to their WSOP marketing and have a similar number of players to party now. Also they seem to be running their nice bonuses every 2 months which are worth doing if you play 100NL or higher.

I am basing a lot of this on party becuase it was the largest room with an endless supply of fish that has now shown distinct signs of drying up in NL.

So, I believe that this evolution will occur everywhere for online NL cash games.

If you want to stay ahead of the curve, start playing limit since I believe it'll be the big game a year from now.

-'rilla

[a500lbgorilla]

Am i just a poker god and because of my l337 sk1llz i think everyone sucks on party, or (much more likely) are there still a hell of alot of fish on pp.

Although i do beleive the term fish becomes relevant as you move up in stakes.

1) You're playing stakes higher than are being discussed.
2) You're a poker god.

The party games will be beatable as long as Party Poker exists. They'll just never be as easy as they once were where all you had to be was the tightest player at the table to win an unbelievable amount of money.

You can still beat the games, you just have to work harder to stay 2 steps infront of your opposition. This is why it may be a better idea to move on to tounries or limit.

-'rilla

[Irisheyes]

If you want to stay ahead of the curve, start playing limit since I believe it'll be the big game a year from now.

-'rilla

Because the fish will stop playing NL and start playing limit or because the good NL players (which everyone will become) will move to limit and not be able to play it good?

[a500lbgorilla]

If you want to stay ahead of the curve, start playing limit since I believe it'll be the big game a year from now.

-'rilla

Because the fish will stop playing NL and start playing limit or because the good NL players (which everyone will become) will move to limit and not be able to play it good?

Becuase all the fish will migrate to an "easier game" and you'll be there to take all their scratch.

-'rilla

[biondino]

"If you want to stay ahead of the curve, start playing limit since I believe it'll be the big game a year from now."

That's like saying "stop having sex with beautiful women and move onto the back pages of the Sears catalogue" - you might never get rejected by the brunette on page 284 in the lacy bustiere, but it's a hell of a lot less fun.

At $25NL the fish will keep coming until poker becomes UNfashionable, and that's a fair way away. That's my guess anyway.

[a500lbgorilla]

"If you want to stay ahead of the curve, start playing limit since I believe it'll be the big game a year from now."

That's like saying "stop having sex with beautiful women and move onto the back pages of the Sears catalogue" - you might never get rejected by the brunette on page 284 in the lacy bustiere, but it's a hell of a lot less fun.

At $25NL the fish will keep coming until poker becomes UNfashionable, and that's a fair way away. That's my guess anyway.

Even 25 NL has changed from a year ago. And it's change will be slower compared to 50 NL and 100 NL.

"If you want to stay ahead of the curve, start playing limit since I believe it'll be the big game a year from now." is like saying "Break up with that beautiful woman becuase she's cheating on you." And it's not what's on the outside but really how loose she is when you flop your nuts.

-'rilla

[Rondavu]

Party is no longer the fishiest site out there. There are much worse players in other places (Pacific, Bodog). Party and it's skins have great bonuses though, so it makes it worth it to stick with them IMO. I really don't care how fishy party is, as long as I'm slaughtering it.

Glad I started playing limit and SNG's then.

[arkana]

I think you are jumping the gun.

[a500lbgorilla]

I think you are jumping the gun.

You gotta stay ahead of the curve.

-'rilla

[arkana]

I think you are jumping the gun.

You gotta stay ahead of the curve.

-'rilla

Yes but you have to eat while the food is on the table.

[DaNutsInYoEye]

Better yet learn to play stud. Currently these games are what NLHE use to be on Party. A good HE player with a very solid foundation in general poker theory could literally take a 10 minute 7-CS lesson and pretty easily beat online game up to 3/6, perhaps even 5/10. That is next to impossible to do in LHE. Of course it is harder to find games but pretty much all the games you can find, regardless of site, are soft.

[jukejointroach]

"And it's not what's on the outside but really how loose she is when you flop your nuts. "

that was some funny shit.

[a500lbgorilla]

I think you are jumping the gun.

You gotta stay ahead of the curve.

-'rilla

Yes but you have to eat while the food is on the table.

Better food at the neighbor's house.

-'rilla

[The_Cheat]

Better yet learn to play stud. Currently these games are what NLHE use to be on Party. A good HE player with a very solid foundation in general poker theory could literally take a 10 minute 7-CS lesson and pretty easily beat online game up to 3/6, perhaps even 5/10. That is next to impossible to do in LHE. Of course it is harder to find games but pretty much all the games you can find, regardless of site, are soft.

ya. razz too. razz is making me like 80 percent of my money right now, and i SUCK at razz.

[MannerBoy]

Oh..well , i dont want to wake a morning and see empty NL rooms.
I dont want to lose my job !

Do u see why ?

[Vrax]

Thats strange since I'm making more on NL cash games than ever before.

Which is one of the reasons. The money flows faster to the better players in NL.

And the amount of breakeven players is much larger.

(this is all comparing to a year ago)

I should probably reword. Cash games arn't dead. But they arn't as good as they once were. But tournies and limits are still as soft as always.

-'rilla

Yeah, it's true, that fish from NL will get busted faster than his bro gambling on limit.

Just like 5 card draw - skilled players had better probabilistic advantage - 1:3 is the best odds, usually 1:5 or 1:12 - and fishes were still drawing to shorts.

The same with texas NL vs limit, but slower. NL fish gets busted and thinks the NL poker is devilish, the other players are insane (bet the pot? thats SOOO crazy!), less showdowns and bigger pots relating to blinds.

Constant flow of new players, who fantasize about winning WSOP or other "I will be super master poker player", beliefs like "real players play only no limit", "cadillac of poker", "I wannabe like teddy KGB" etc....and NL tables are still full of loose callers and maniacs.

I'm talking about $25NL.

Thats strange since I'm making more on NL cash games than ever before.

Which is one of the reasons. The money flows faster to the better players in NL.

And the amount of breakeven players is much larger.

(this is all comparing to a year ago)

I should probably reword. Cash games arn't dead. But they arn't as good as they once were. But tournies and limits are still as soft as always.

-'rilla

Yeah, it's true, that fish from NL will get busted faster than his bro gambling on limit.

Just like 5 card draw - skilled players had better probabilistic advantage - 1:3 is the best odds, usually 1:5 or 1:12 - and fishes were still drawing to shorts.

The same with texas NL vs limit, but slower. NL fish gets busted and thinks the NL poker is devilish, the other players are insane (bet the pot? thats SOOO crazy!), less showdowns and bigger pots relating to blinds.

Constant flow of new players, who fantasize about winning WSOP or other "I will be super master poker player", beliefs like "real players play only no limit", "cadillac of poker", "I wannabe like teddy KGB" etc....and NL tables are still full of loose callers and maniacs.

I'm talking about $25NL.

I think that NL cash games will stay online but may or may not be less profitable in the future.

[DaNutsInYoEye]

NL cash games will stay online but may or may not be less profitable in the future.

Awesome contribution... Here is mine: the sun may or may not come up tomorow.

[razen_cain]

i 4 table 50nl on party....approx 8,000 hands a week for the last 2 months.

I average 700 to 1k a week in profits...are you suggesting that these tables are tighter now than they use to be?

[Checkways]

NL cash games will stay online but may or may not be less profitable in the future.

Awesome contribution... Here is mine: the sun may or may not come up tomorow.

The sun will come up tomorrow. Have hope, man.

[Checkways]

i 4 table 50nl on party....approx 8,000 hands a week for the last 2 months.

I average 700 to 1k a week in profits...are you suggesting that these tables are tighter now than they use to be?

Wow, that's freakin' good. Have you thought about moving up to $100 and increasing your profit? Or do you think 50NL is so easy that you should just stay there and own it?

[Checkways]

Better yet learn to play stud. Currently these games are what NLHE use to be on Party. A good HE player with a very solid foundation in general poker theory could literally take a 10 minute 7-CS lesson and pretty easily beat online game up to 3/6, perhaps even 5/10. That is next to impossible to do in LHE. Of course it is harder to find games but pretty much all the games you can find, regardless of site, are soft.

I can totally see this being true. But are the fish going to be playing Stud? Stud ain't on TV.

So if the fish ain't there, and I learn it, then that means I'm your fish! I see where this is going. Nice try.

[razen_cain]

Have you thought about moving up to $100 and increasing your profit? Or do you think 50NL is so easy that you should just stay there and own it?

I've tried 100 and 200 nl, both show a higher skill level of players

For me at least, 50nl is the soft underbelly of no limit.

[Bmxicle]

once you get to 100nl/200nl i reccomend changing to 6max.

[Laeelin]

once you get to 100nl/200nl i reccomend changing to 6max.

I'm making 3.6 BB/100 at $100NL, I read that with limit 3BB is crushing the game so I see no reason to move to limit..

6-Max is intresting though....

I know a lot of people swear by 6-Max... and that I would get a lot more rakeback at 6-Max (assumeing that can still play at 4+ tables)

6-Max have a lot more fish in it?

once you get to 100nl/200nl i reccomend changing to 6max.

I'm making 3.6 BB/100 at $100NL, I read that with limit 3BB is crushing the game so I see no reason to move to limit..

6-Max is intresting though....

I know a lot of people swear by 6-Max... and that I would get a lot more rakeback at 6-Max (assumeing that can still play at 4+ tables)

6-Max have a lot more fish in it?

Yes, because fish don't lose money as fast so they keep playing.

[a500lbgorilla]

3.6bb/100 is not a great winrate for NL. Anything >0 is good, though.

For limit it's annhiliating the game. It's NL equivalent is 17~20bb/100.

6-max is still juicy becuase players who do deposit to have a fun time are swamping to 6max. So it's stock pond is a lot larger than full table.

-'rilla

[r8ed]

Now I know why there are long waiting lists for the tables with high average pots at $25NL. Then I go on an available table and after a while I realize the VP$IP is 20% or less. I know I fall under the break-even players right now. When I am on tables with VP$IP of 30%+ I tend to do well. I'm looking to improve but maybe I'll try some 6max. I guess I'll need to loosen my starting hands a bit as my VP$IP is 15% - 20%.

"3.6bb/100 is not a great winrate for NL. Anything >0 is good, though.

For limit it's annhiliating the game. It's NL equivalent is 17~20bb/100.

6-max is still juicy becuase players who do deposit to have a fun time are swamping to 6max. So it's stock pond is a lot larger than full table."

-'rilla


Fnord claims to have 4.5BB/100 in 2/4 and I believe him.

[a500lbgorilla]

"3.6bb/100 is not a great winrate for NL. Anything >0 is good, though.

For limit it's annhiliating the game. It's NL equivalent is 17~20bb/100.

6-max is still juicy becuase players who do deposit to have a fun time are swamping to 6max. So it's stock pond is a lot larger than full table."

-'rilla


Fnord claims to have 4.5BB/100 in 2/4 and I believe him.

Fnord does more than just annihilate the game. But he is truely one in a million.

-'rilla

[Laeelin]

"3.6bb/100 is not a great winrate for NL. Anything >0 is good, though.

For limit it's annhiliating the game. It's NL equivalent is 17~20bb/100.

6-max is still juicy becuase players who do deposit to have a fun time are swamping to 6max. So it's stock pond is a lot larger than full table."

-'rilla


Fnord claims to have 4.5BB/100 in 2/4 and I believe him.

Fnord does more than just annihilate the game. But he is truely one in a million.

-'rilla

What I was trying (and failing) to say is that, at NL I make 3.6BB/100, and feel I have lots of room for improvement....

However, IF I move to limit, that same 3.6 would be KILLING the game.

Basically, I wasnt claiming that I'm crushing the game, but instead I was claiming that IF I moved to limit, I would need to crush the game to maintain the same profit.

PS: That at $100NL BTW, Not sure whats great at $100nl, but I dont think 3.6BB/100 is bad at all for multitableing... I guess that if that game is about the same as hard at $1/$2 limit as it is at $100NL then it would be worth moveing...

[arkana]

If you compare the bankroll requirements of NL with limit then you will see that you cannot directly compare BB/100 because someone who is bankrolled for $100 NL will be bankrolled for higher than $1/0.5 limit.

Laeelin few players are winning players so that is an achievement in itself. Your winrate will increase as long as you are working on your game.

[Cocco_Bill]

If you compare the bankroll requirements of NL with limit then you will see that you cannot directly compare BB/100 because someone who is bankrolled for $100 NL will be bankrolled for higher than $1/0.5 limit.

Laeelin few players are winning players so that is an achievement in itself. Your winrate will increase as long as you are working on your game.

0.5-1.0 limit has blinds of 0.25-0.5 so of course its not comparable to 100NL!

I agree that the money and fish are in 6-max. Playing 4 tables of it at my current 8-10BB/100 it becomes a nice income. I don't see any reason to learn limit or play sit n goes at this time.

[a500lbgorilla]

If you compare the bankroll requirements of NL with limit then you will see that you cannot directly compare BB/100 because someone who is bankrolled for $100 NL will be bankrolled for higher than $1/0.5 limit.

Laeelin few players are winning players so that is an achievement in itself. Your winrate will increase as long as you are working on your game.

0.5-1.0 limit has blinds of 0.25-0.5 so of course its not comparable to 100NL!

I agree that the money and fish are in 6-max. Playing 4 tables of it at my current 8-10BB/100 it becomes a nice income. I don't see any reason to learn limit or play sit n goes at this time.

Of course, the idea of this thread was geared towards those of us who are winning -3~3bb/100

-'rilla

[Laeelin]

Thanks arkana

I am working hard at improving my game, and as anyone can see from past posts, I'm not scared of asking stupid questions

I have made poker my full time job as of this month (+$1700 so far), so learning 6-Max is a big deal to me. even a small increase in profit adds up to a lot of money over time.

With a start of 114BB/100 i'm killing 6-Max (after 93 hands)

The problem is that untill I hit 25K+ hands i'm not going to feel even slightly secure in my win rate, so really trying 6-max is basically like taking off a week of work without pay, so It's a scary thing to do. Even more so when your trying to depend on this for your income. I am still thinking about doing it though, in fact i'm trying right now.

[bdawg56kg]

Since I started playing poker online (about 6 months ago) I pretty much 4-tabled 25NL and 50NL 9-max on Pokerstars. However, in the last month or so I started getting sick of the rock-filled full tables and decided to try out 50NL 6-max. I can tell you right now from my short experience that 6-max is really where the fish and dead money is. You will see what a calling station really is. It is not uncommon to have a player at the table that literally sees 95% of the flops, and will call you down w/absolutely nothing (so be careful about bluffing). I have only been playing one table just to get used to 6-max, and I am making just as much if not more than 4-tabling 9-max. I can only imagine what my profits would be if I did 2, 3, or even 4 tables. I think you should definately give it a shot Laeelin, and don't be surprised if you don't return to full ring.

[arkana]

If you compare the bankroll requirements of NL with limit then you will see that you cannot directly compare BB/100 because someone who is bankrolled for $100 NL will be bankrolled for higher than $1/0.5 limit.

Laeelin few players are winning players so that is an achievement in itself. Your winrate will increase as long as you are working on your game.

0.5-1.0 limit has blinds of 0.25-0.5 so of course its not comparable to 100NL!

I agree that the money and fish are in 6-max. Playing 4 tables of it at my current 8-10BB/100 it becomes a nice income. I don't see any reason to learn limit or play sit n goes at this time.

I meant $2/$1 limit, sorry... Point is that if you switch to limit you will be bankrolled for a game with much higher blinds than your NL game and therefore you cant compare the winrates in BB/100 really.

[BIGandRICH]

Since I started playing poker online (about 6 months ago) I pretty much 4-tabled 25NL and 50NL 9-max on Pokerstars. However, in the last month or so I started getting sick of the rock-filled full tables and decided to try out 50NL 6-max. I can tell you right now from my short experience that 6-max is really where the fish and dead money is. You will see what a calling station really is. It is not uncommon to have a player at the table that literally sees 95% of the flops, and will call you down w/absolutely nothing (so be careful about bluffing). I have only been playing one table just to get used to 6-max, and I am making just as much if not more than 4-tabling 9-max. I can only imagine what my profits would be if I did 2, 3, or even 4 tables. I think you should definately give it a shot Laeelin, and don't be surprised if you don't return to full ring.

On stars i started playing full ring.. rocks = minimal profit
I had a go at 6 max.. fish = $$$$$

what you say about them calling down with nothing is very important to remember.. i dropped alot to start with because i played too Laggy, got stacked by middle pairs

Now finding that at 6max I get a nice healthy load of.. Calling AI on gutshots, plays any A, K, Q.. calls AI on flush draws, pays off big hands most of the time.

example.. i am dealt AA, raise to 5BB.. one caller, flop.. 348, no flush draw. bet pot.. called, turn is 5.. flush draw appears.. i push.. he calls with 10/6..

this is the stars 50NL

[lolzzz_321]

While clearing Multi Bonus...

** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to ji99lypuff [ Ac Ad ]
Grannixx folds.
cjcope calls [$0.25].
kobayashi1 folds.
rollinheavy5 folds.
antshood15 folds.
nhermand raises [$0.50].
SMYTHA calls [$0.50].
ATUMH05 folds.
ji99lypuff raises [$1.90].
lakaemoi calls [$1.75].
cjcope folds.
nhermand raises [$3].
SMYTHA calls [$3].
ji99lypuff is all-In [$22.75]
lakaemoi is all-In [$9.25]
nhermand is all-In [$20.95]
SMYTHA is all-In [$6.30]
** Dealing Flop ** [ 4s, 8d, 4c ]
** Dealing Turn ** [ Th ]
** Dealing River ** [ 5d ]
nhermand shows [ Kh, Kd ] two pairs, kings and fours.
SMYTHA doesn't show [ Ah, 6h ] a pair of fours.
ji99lypuff shows [ Ac, Ad ] two pairs, aces and fours.
lakaemoi doesn't show [ 9h, 9d ] two pairs, nines and fours.
ji99lypuff wins $0.30 from side pot #3 with two pairs, aces and fours.
ji99lypuff wins $25.55 from side pot #2 with two pairs, aces and fours.
ji99lypuff wins $4.15 from side pot #1 with two pairs, aces and fours.
ji99lypuff wins $37.50 from the main pot with two pairs, aces and fours.
lakaemoi has left the table.


We got some live ones.

[a500lbgorilla]

One wave does not properly represent the ocean.

-'rilla

One wave does not properly represent the ocean.

-'rilla

But it does prove we have some body of water to speak about.

[lolzzz_321]

Dealt to FTRVecchioni [ 9d Js ]
avund folds.
FTRVecchioni folds.
nuhusky111 has joined the table.
azcelica94 is all-In [$9.60]
andyjn calls [$9.60].
Pastis151 folds.
jffdmd folds.
nielsd90 folds.
itburns69 folds.
** Dealing Flop ** [ Ts, 5d, 5h ]
** Dealing Turn ** [ Qd ]
** Dealing River ** [ 5s ]
azcelica94 shows [ Jh, Ad ] three of a kind, fives.
andyjn shows [ Kh, Ah ] three of a kind, fives.
andyjn wins $18.60 from the main pot with three of a kind, fives with king kicker.
azcelica94: goddamn andy everytime i have something so do you, youre too lucky
azcelica94 has left the table.
andyjn: not usually

[a500lbgorilla]

Triptanes, hands like that use to happen every 15 minutes.

-'rilla

[lolzzz_321]

oh

[jmontis]

Online poker is for tournies and limit (As far as hold'em is concerned).

Discuss.

-'rilla

all i can say is, i agree 100%

I switched to limit poker, SNGs, and MTTs a while back.

[Laeelin]

After some time at 6-Max, I must say that they blow full ring away.

how about changeing that statement to Limit, MTT, SnG, and 6-Max?

[aislephive]

6 max is the most profitable poker as far as I'm concerned, although you need to be a solid player to turn a profit. Since you will be in a lot more pots and will make many more decisions than you would at a full ring table, your decisions get magnified. If you play your best game playing 6 max NL you can make a lot of money regaurdless of your cards. At a full ring table, the cards are more of a factor.

[bencathers]

You have all made me overjoyed to be playing omaha hi/low where NL players come when tilted/ready for a change and feel two pair is the nuts.

I really thought I was the only one who felt this way.... NL just became not much fun... and I play limit when its hold-em... but I just found omaha to be even better