Question on High Stakes Winrates

[martindcx1e]

Just curious here...not getting any crazy ideas. Say you take a player who handles 100NL pretty easily and move them to 25-50 full ring at stars. Assuming he could handle the game mentally (as in not freaking out b/c of how much money is at stake) how difficult would it be for them to make even like .5BB/100 in the longrun? Also, what is considered an average wr at this level?

[mcatdog]

They would get annihilated if they were a winning player way higher than 100NL. If I remember correctly, a couple of weeks ago a winning 600NL regular named meatcity tried to take a shot at 5000NL and he was everyone's fish there. Gabe can confirm this because I'm not sure I have the details right. But it's definitely another world up there.

[martindcx1e]

They would get annihilated if they were a winning player way higher than 100NL. If I remember correctly, a couple of weeks ago a winning 600NL regular named meatcity tried to take a shot at 5000NL and he was everyone's fish there. Gabe can confirm this because I'm not sure I have the details right. But it's definitely another world up there.

this is about what i figured. but when you sit there and watch those tables for a while and see some of the unbelievable crap that happens you start to salivate lol.

[johnny_fish]

They would get annihilated if they were a winning player way higher than 100NL. If I remember correctly, a couple of weeks ago a winning 600NL regular named meatcity tried to take a shot at 5000NL and he was everyone's fish there. Gabe can confirm this because I'm not sure I have the details right. But it's definitely another world up there.

I can't imagine that a winning 600nl regular is a fish there. Maybe a small loser..

[gabe]

omg i just thought meatcity was a complete fish, didnt know he could beat anything

[Pelion]

To follow up the question How long have you guys been playing and what stakes did you start at?
You are my heros

[gabe]

i should add, with awesome game/seat selection a low stakes player would be +EV in the game.

[gabe]

this is about what i figured. but when you sit there and watch those tables for a while and see some of the unbelievable crap that happens you start to salivate lol.

alot of the unbelievable crap comes from to aggro players that always think their opponent is making a move, so the values of hands going to war arent so good. these battles usually only happen when the players have been making moves though and a .5/1NL wouldnt survive

[gabe]

To follow up the question How long have you guys been playing and what stakes did you start at?
You are my heros

2 years, started playing .25/.50 LIMIT, then $5 sngs, then $50NL. i was playing $200nl in january.

[UG]

To follow up the question How long have you guys been playing and what stakes did you start at?
You are my heros

2 years, started playing .25/.50 LIMIT, then $5 sngs, then $50NL. i was playing $200nl in january.

Yeah, I remember back in January when my BR was actually bigger than yours.

Now you sometimes have *days* where you make more than my entire BR.

{puke}

[martindcx1e]

this is about what i figured. but when you sit there and watch those tables for a while and see some of the unbelievable crap that happens you start to salivate lol.

alot of the unbelievable crap comes from to aggro players that always think their opponent is making a move, so the values of hands going to war arent so good. these battles usually only happen when the players have been making moves though and a .5/1NL wouldnt survive

i see some of the big pots where guys like H@££ stack off with AK TPTK, and it makes me wonder if their opponent is as crazy as they are. obviously H@££ is really aggro but are both parties usually pretty wild when this "unbelievable crap" happens?

i should add, with awesome game/seat selection a low stakes player would be +EV in the game.

so one who beats 100nl regularly could sit behind a maniac at 25/50 and do ok you think? or am i misunderstanding?

[gabe]

h@ll isn't stacking off with TPTK without a reason. there is almost always some history or h@ll has seen opponent make moves.

i wouldn't sit behind a maniac, i would be more inclined so sit behind one of the bad calling stations that show up a couple times a week. maniac might be too much variance for a $100nler to handle. if there was a complete maniac on a full table i would probably sit on his right and limp-reraise him alot though

[Iwind]

For sure, if you sit down there and play tight, there's no way a good player up there will stack off with TPTK. H@ll isn't always too impressive though, watched him loose like 100k(20 buyins) one session last week 4 tabling HU, had the games open cause there was so much action there. He made a lot of bad folds and calls, but it's hard to play your A game all the time after all.

[Pelion]

Yea I watched H@ll today for a little while on stars instead of playing myself. It looks so much different. I wish I had even the slightest of reads in thje same direction as him to start to figure him out. It seems to a lowly $50NL/$100NL player such as myself that people play back at him with crap far too often though. I guess image means alot at these stakes.

edit: I mean total crap like A high

[martindcx1e]

so are there a bunch of regular nits up there too or are they all nuts? i mean, will a nitty game equate to a positive winrate?

[Al4As]

Yes. wait for AA/KK, double up. Repeat as needed

[Seasider]

H@ll isn't always too impressive though, watched him loose like 100k(20 buyins) one session last week 4 tabling HU

Is this not also part of the problem playing these guys - that there rolls are just soooo huge that they can afford to do this and stay in the game. It also means that they can exploit finer edges whilst at the same time being very hard to bluff as you know that whilst betting hundreds/thousands of $$ may seem like a lot to you H@££ just, to be honest IMHO, doesnt care in the short term anyway. He can just say 'good for you double thru, see you again tomorrow '.

Basically is it not the case that normal bankroll guides go out the window in the face of a huge 'roll that a player is willing to gamble with. And the sheer amount of money held by a player can become a weapon at the table itself?

Players like this dont exist at the 100 level where the fish buy in one go at a time and you know that the regulars probably have 20-30 buy ins backed away but still probably will be pissed if they get stacked. This is as at low levels people move up as their money increases wheras for the lucky few at the very top there is no where else to go!

[spino1i]

25/50 full ring on Stars is pretty nasty. I doubt a winning 100 NL player would do very well there; he would be incapable of handling the shear amount of aggression and 3-betting pre-flop. He wouldnt know how to bluff well and how to play against people bluffing well. He's probably just used to nut-peddling. I play 10/20 full ring on Bodog and thats very hard as it is, people are constantly making moves on each other all the time.

[pokerroomace]

would playing this style of play at lower stakes destroy the game? or would the high stakes players tighten up a lot to win at lower stakes (eg 200nl)?

also, why doesnt hall play the high stakes fulltilt games if he has such a big roll? also, the pros at these tables are apparently donkament winners that suck at cash games.
why play at stars where the level of play is really tough?

also, could gabe or someone write about their rise to the top and what it takes to get there?
is there a post on this already?
also, what is ur winrate gabe? and how much do u earn per year from poker?
do you play 25/50 because its the highest stakes at stars or because you only have a 100k BR

thnx

[martindcx1e]

25/50 full ring on Stars is pretty nasty. I doubt a winning 100 NL player would do very well there; he would be incapable of handling the shear amount of aggression and 3-betting pre-flop. He wouldnt know how to bluff well and how to play against people bluffing well. He's probably just used to nut-peddling. I play 10/20 full ring on Bodog and thats very hard as it is, people are constantly making moves on each other all the time.

would all of the move-making get one's monsters paid off a lot though? seems to me that one could make a pretty penny off of their monsters - maybe not stacking but still getting paid pretty well through the constant push-off attempts.

[jackvance]

would playing this style of play at lower stakes destroy the game? or would the high stakes players tighten up a lot to win at lower stakes (eg 200nl)?

I don't think this style would work at lower stakes. From what I gather the high-rollers are mainly adapting to the other players, so I'd expect them to play vastly different at other stakes where the competition plays more straight-forward.

also, why doesnt hall play the high stakes fulltilt games if he has such a big roll?

He prolly found his comfort zone there. He might not do that well on FT facing the likes of aba20 (who is up over $500k in januari already, sick)

also, the pros at these tables are apparently donkament winners that suck at cash games.

Not true at all..

[martindcx1e]

also, the pros at these tables are apparently donkament winners that suck at cash games.

Not true at all..

ya that's def not true.

[spino1i]

25/50 full ring on Stars is pretty nasty. I doubt a winning 100 NL player would do very well there; he would be incapable of handling the shear amount of aggression and 3-betting pre-flop. He wouldnt know how to bluff well and how to play against people bluffing well. He's probably just used to nut-peddling. I play 10/20 full ring on Bodog and thats very hard as it is, people are constantly making moves on each other all the time.

would all of the move-making get one's monsters paid off a lot though? seems to me that one could make a pretty penny off of their monsters - maybe not stacking but still getting paid pretty well through the constant push-off attempts.

The players arent as stupid as you might think. If they think your a nit they aren going to be careful when they make moves with you. They arent going to bluff away their stack into your monster.

[spino1i]

would playing this style of play at lower stakes destroy the game? or would the high stakes players tighten up a lot to win at lower stakes (eg 200nl)?

also, why doesnt hall play the high stakes fulltilt games if he has such a big roll? also, the pros at these tables are apparently donkament winners that suck at cash games.
why play at stars where the level of play is really tough?

also, could gabe or someone write about their rise to the top and what it takes to get there?
is there a post on this already?
also, what is ur winrate gabe? and how much do u earn per year from poker?
do you play 25/50 because its the highest stakes at stars or because you only have a 100k BR

thnx

Hall doesnt play higher than 25/50 because I dont think he has the skill level to beat a game higher than 25/50. I mean he's good, but he's not as good as aba (sbrugby)or cts (MUCKEMSAYUHH) or jman (OMGClayAiken). Thats who he has to deal with if he plays 50/100 and its a daunting task to beat these players for any sort of money.

Im at 10/20 (still a ways off from moving up to 25/50) and it took me 2 years to get there. 10/20 is proving to be very difficult just by itself and is signifigantly harder than 5/10. I am still trying to survive it though ive now logged about 5k hands at 10/20 or so.

If I were to try to beat 200nl I would change my style dramastically. For full-ring I would mostly camp with the occasional semi-bluff and 1 to 2-barrel bluff thrown in. I would rely a lot on stats which are much more useful at that level than 2000 NL. For 6-max I would do a lot more bluffing and bully the other players around. I think 6-max is where you'd really see a higher stakes player shine and completely dominate the game. Full ring is much harder to dominate.

[pokerroomace]

Hall doesnt play higher than 25/50 because I dont think he has the skill level to beat a game higher than 25/50. I mean he's good, but he's not as good as aba (sbrugby)or cts (MUCKEMSAYUHH) or jman (OMGClayAiken). Thats who he has to deal with if he plays 50/100 and its a daunting task to beat these players for any sort of money.

how is it possible for these guys to make a profit if they are playing against such stiff competition?
where is the money coming from? aren't there a few "not so good" players at the 10kNL+ tables?
how is it possible to even win 1BB/100hands over the long run playing against these guys?

also, i'm not saying all the fulltilt pros are bad players. but a lot of the players on this site seem to suggest that a lot of them are guys that won 1 big tourney and that's all theyve ever done at poker.
watching high stakes poker on tv you see players making bad plays. eg sam farha. players like matusow and hellmuth tilt. gus is too wild. eli elezra, negreanu making loose plays.
i saw sam farha call an allin by DN with a nut flush draw on the flop when he clearly didn't have the odds to go for it. a mistake like this is amateur and can't really be justified

[martindcx1e]

Hall doesnt play higher than 25/50 because I dont think he has the skill level to beat a game higher than 25/50. I mean he's good, but he's not as good as aba (sbrugby)or cts (MUCKEMSAYUHH) or jman (OMGClayAiken). Thats who he has to deal with if he plays 50/100 and its a daunting task to beat these players for any sort of money.

how is it possible for these guys to make a profit if they are playing against such stiff competition?
where is the money coming from? aren't there a few "not so good" players at the 10kNL+ tables?
how is it possible to even win 1BB/100hands over the long run playing against these guys?

also, i'm not saying all the fulltilt pros are bad players. but a lot of the players on this site seem to suggest that a lot of them are guys that won 1 big tourney and that's all theyve ever done at poker.
watching high stakes poker on tv you see players making bad plays. eg sam farha. players like matusow and hellmuth tilt. gus is too wild. eli elezra, negreanu making loose plays.
i saw sam farha call an allin by DN with a nut flush draw on the flop when he clearly didn't have the odds to go for it. a mistake like this is amateur and can't really be justified

a lot of the guys that play the highest level cash games there are pros who have been around a while like matusow, ivey, hansen, flack, etc... i don't think the 1-time tourney donks sit down on a regular basis.

[gabe]

yea the style would work at lower games. the style include sick hand reading skills. if someone using this style read that you were a huge calling station they wouldnt try the huge bluffs against you.

h@ll does play higher than 25/50; ive seen him do it in the last couple weeks actually.

to get to the top you have to put alot of time in studying the game. this includes playing lots of hands, reading everything you can, and thinking about the game analytically.

on a side note, some of the names mentioned here ive met this past week in the bahamas. last night i hung out with h@ll and cts. i spent more time talking to cts and consider him one of my online friends now. h@ll talks like a goofy european but seemed like a very nice guy. we were playing flipcup with him and he was very confused as to why we would want to flip our cups upside down..

[pokerroomace]

what were you doing in the bahamas? is there a poker event going on there?

do you ever play toruneys gabe? are you any good?
also, what is your winrate and BR? (don't answer if you don't want to)
are you a pro?

also, how do you make a profit when you play against such tough competition (do you all feed off the occasional fish that pop up?)

[gabe]

-there is a WPT event here. i busted first day when i flopped a set and someone else flopped a flush.

-i used to play tourneys but got bored with them. if i committed myself to them full time i would be one of the top 50 online tournament players for sure. this is true for alot of highstakes cash players. the reason they dont do it is because theres so much more money in cash games.

-my goal for 2007 is to make $500k playing poker. im a student right now but dont plan on ever getting job using my degree. im praying online poker lasts.

-some of the regulars arent as good as others. for example, twin-caracas is stars has been around for years, and at first glance people think he must be pretty good. the truth is he is terrible.

[pokerroomace]

-there is a WPT event here. i busted first day when i flopped a set and someone else flopped a flush.

-i used to play tourneys but got bored with them. if i committed myself to them full time i would be one of the top 50 online tournament players for sure. this is true for alot of highstakes cash players. the reason they dont do it is because theres so much more money in cash games.

-my goal for 2007 is to make $500k playing poker. im a student right now but dont plan on ever getting job using my degree. im praying online poker lasts.

-some of the regulars arent as good as others. for example, twin-caracas is stars has been around for years, and at first glance people think he must be pretty good. the truth is he is terrible.

wow. what a life. a student and hoping to earn 500k! incredible. and playing wpt in the bahamas. wow

if you are a top tourney pro you have the added benefits of the media and sponsorship if you win some big events - which you are unlikely to get if you are a top cash game player. doesnt this appeal to you?

[gabe]

the more i think about it i realize that less exposure is better.

when i was moving up in stakes i always was making friends here and liked to post all my crazy hands and stuff so people would see how good a player i was. ive realized this is pretty stupid and pointless so im posting less and less nowadays.

[jyms]

the more i think about it i realize that less exposure is better.

when i was moving up in stakes i always was making friends here and liked to post all my crazy hands and stuff so people would see how good a player i was. ive realized this is pretty stupid and pointless so im posting less and less nowadays.

Hence the reason for a "POOP BAH" type posting format. It would be nice to get the wisdom before all our regulars go the way of 4 word posts and riddles. I would like to see you post some great wisdom for the lowly SSNL player. It wasn't that long ago, you must remember.

[martindcx1e]

It would be nice to get the wisdom before all our regulars go the way of 4 word posts and riddles.

this is gold

[martindcx1e]

25/50 full ring on Stars is pretty nasty. I doubt a winning 100 NL player would do very well there; he would be incapable of handling the shear amount of aggression and 3-betting pre-flop. He wouldnt know how to bluff well and how to play against people bluffing well. He's probably just used to nut-peddling. I play 10/20 full ring on Bodog and thats very hard as it is, people are constantly making moves on each other all the time.

would all of the move-making get one's monsters paid off a lot though? seems to me that one could make a pretty penny off of their monsters - maybe not stacking but still getting paid pretty well through the constant push-off attempts.

The players arent as stupid as you might think. If they think your a nit they aren going to be careful when they make moves with you. They arent going to bluff away their stack into your monster.

so again i ask, are all of the regulars up there crazy aggro maniacs or are there regular nits as well (who of course read hands well)? you high-stakes guys make it sound like a nit couldn't get a positive winrate longterm, is that true?

[gabe]

there are maniacs and nits, some maniacs better than some nits and some nits better than some maniacs

[martindcx1e]

there are maniacs and nits, some maniacs better than some nits and some nits better than some maniacs

k. thanks gabe for satisfying my curiosity

[WildBobAA]

How many hands did you play last year gabe?

(thread was a great read btw)

[johnny_fish]

the more i think about it i realize that less exposure is better.

Probably true.

when i was moving up in stakes i always was making friends here and liked to post all my crazy hands and stuff so people would see how good a player i was. ive realized this is pretty stupid and pointless so im posting less and less nowadays.

Crazy hands are fun to read though

[pokerroomace]

the more i think about it i realize that less exposure is better.

when i was moving up in stakes i always was making friends here and liked to post all my crazy hands and stuff so people would see how good a player i was. ive realized this is pretty stupid and pointless so im posting less and less nowadays.

i mean worldwide exposure. players like negreanu probably make millions
just for doing a few tv shows. that's why he can afford to lose. he's getting paid to play.
you're not getting a lot of exposure by posting on FTR. and the reason you would post your hands is to get others opinions on it so you can improve your game.

[gabe]

i know what you were talking about, and i was showing as an example how exposure gets bad