Graph and stats for FR..

[Chopper]

I am surprised I don't have more variance in here. If you see any glaring holes/weaknesses, go ahead and tell me. If you need more stat type stuff, I may need to dig a little more. I can tell you that I don't appear to respect position as much as I should from other stats. But, I am also subscribing to the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it method" right now, too. The post flop play at this level is really weak, and therefore, allows much more to be played from up front.

Typically, I will loosen up in EP on loose and more passive tables. However, I will also tighten up when it comes to cold-calling raises and overlimping with a couple callers in front with off-suited broadways. I think that is the proper adjustment, but I think it makes my position stats look more balanced when they are not....they are just different ranges of hands.

[elipsesjeff]

You really shouldn't be looking for holes when you're running at 2 ptbb/100 and up 220bb after 10k hands. Move up and dont worry about if you're beating .5/1 or not. Plus its too small a sample anyway, but good results over the course of a month.

[Chopper]

Move up and dont worry about if you're beating .5/1 or not.

this is the part that always concerns me. why dont we worry about beating a particular level? i cant seem to get past this part when i move up and take a cooler on the chin.

i suppose this is enough proof, along with what you know about my play, that you are confident in my game.....even though i may not quite be there yet?

[BennyLaRue]

Your stats certainly do reflect fit or fold (WTSD% and CB% are both below normal). If it's intentional, I'm not going to comment on it except to say that you seem to be doing the same thing when it comes to moving up in levels. You're not seeing the same success and as quickly when you play .50/1 so you're essentially folding on the level. You can't do that...you'll never get comfortable if you give yourself such an easy retreat path.

If I were you, I'd commit to x# of hands playing .50/1 exclusively (howsabout 30K?). After that stretch, then you can reflect on where you should be playing. If it's not fun playing at that level and your $/hr isn't as great as it was at .25/.50, then of course move to where you're having fun, but I think you need to commit to an extended shot. I think when all is said and done you'll see there isn't such a chasm of difference between the levels.

[Chopper]

Your stats certainly do reflect fit or fold (WTSD% and CB% are both below normal). If it's intentional, I'm not going to comment on it except to say that you seem to be doing the same thing when it comes to moving up in levels. You're not seeing the same success and as quickly when you play .50/1 so you're essentially folding on the level. You can't do that...you'll never get comfortable if you give yourself such an easy retreat path.

If I were you, I'd commit to x# of hands playing .50/1 exclusively (howsabout 30K?). After that stretch, then you can reflect on where you should be playing. If it's not fun playing at that level and your $/hr isn't as great as it was at .25/.50, then of course move to where you're having fun, but I think you need to commit to an extended shot. I think when all is said and done you'll see there isn't such a chasm of difference between the levels.

deeeeep post, and thank you. it fits, i agree.

and, yes, WTSD and CB are intentional adjustments made for the fit/fold style that the rest play here, too. stakes are a bit small for a lot of intelligent folds from villains. instead of barreling into them, like i used to, i kind of one-pump chump it now. i dont cbet wet boards anymore for the same reasons. they chase like crazy AND call with middle/top pair. hard to ever tell where you are on whiffed overs....and if oop with 3+ players, its not profitable to cbet that spot anyway, but a lot of people will.

btw, wtf is that op you have posted? $50 and rolling to 25NL in a couple weeks? how much are you considering in your roll? 250? 400? seems as though you had better crank out the volume...running out of time.

[elipsesjeff]

Move up and dont worry about if you're beating .5/1 or not.

this is the part that always concerns me. why dont we worry about beating a particular level? i cant seem to get past this part when i move up and take a cooler on the chin.

i suppose this is enough proof, along with what you know about my play, that you are confident in my game.....even though i may not quite be there yet?

I usually follow moving up/down in limits based on bankrolls. You'll find that even if you go up and give yourself 100bb at 1/2 and drop down if you lose, when you play .5/1 again you'll play with more confidence and that will help your winrate at that level too. It doesn't matter if you can beat .5/1 or not because beating .5/1 is not a pre-requisite to beating 1/2, 2/4, 3/6 or higher. You don't need a large enough sample to tell you that you beat it, you just need to move up when your bankroll allows it.

[LawDude]

If you are rolled for it, go ahead and move up. 50/1 is not much different than 25/50.

[asdpikas]

If you are rolled for it, go ahead and move up. 50/1 is 99% the same as 25/50.

fyp

[BennyLaRue]

btw, wtf is that op you have posted? $50 and rolling to 25NL in a couple weeks? how much are you considering in your roll? 250? 400? seems as though you had better crank out the volume...running out of time.

No, I gave up on that in August. I'm doing a reno so have no time. Maybe I'll get there by the end of the year.

[Chopper]

reno?

just curious since i thought you played higher stakes. thought it was some kind of challenge to yourself.

[BennyLaRue]

reno?

just curious since i thought you played higher stakes. thought it was some kind of challenge to yourself.

When I played LHE exclusively (2006-mid 2008), it was at all limits up to 3/6, yeah, but I didn't ever play NL at anything but the nano limits.

[Chopper]

haha. i was the reverse. i played up to 100NL, but never played lhe higher than 1/2....and that was a total fishfest on party at the time. ahhh, the good ole days.

[asdpikas]

haha. i was the reverse. i played up to 100NL, but never played lhe higher than 1/2....and that was a total fishfest on party at the time. ahhh, the good ole days.

man, party is the toughest site at 1/2 - 3/6 LHE, hands down. Wish I had been there.

[Chopper]

haha. i was the reverse. i played up to 100NL, but never played lhe higher than 1/2....and that was a total fishfest on party at the time. ahhh, the good ole days.

man, party is the toughest site at 1/2 - 3/6 LHE, hands down. Wish I had been there.

in 2005-2006ish, i didnt have a clue what i was doing. i was smashing 25NL on SunPoker for about a 10 ptbb/100 by raising KTo in ep and taking 3 cold callers in a NL game. i would flop the K and bet/bet/push and win the majority of the time. i had no idea how to do much but count some basic outs and calculate pot odds to draw to flushes. i had no idea about sc's, balance, set hunting, implied odds, reverse implied odds, table selection, etc, etc. just your basic "i have TP, how do i felt this hand?" i was bonus whoring like crazy on top of all of this.

i switched over to limit, on a whim one friday night, and started bet/bet/betting my TP hands. sure, i got sucked out on by J8s and other decent hands, but i thought they were all fish. i was routinely dragging $30 pots at 1/2. i kept saying to my wife, as she watched tv next to me, "there's another $30." i must have gone on a 15bb/100 rush over about 1500 hands (i only 2 tabled then, so it felt like forever). and, i lost it all just as fast when the J8s hands caught up and dragged $60 pots....that i bloated.

long story short, my first foray into LHE was a short roller-coaster ride of about 4k hands.....that took over a month.

i began to understand that there was a science to the game....and a "difference" between NL and LHE. i went back to NL for a couple of years, but started reading up on LHE a little more. the reading most definitely helped my NL game, too, but i kept coming back for small dabbles with LHE.

i just like LHE better for some reason. now that i think about it, i guess it's always been that way.

its funny you say that party is the toughest now. when i played Sun, i found that Euros were tighter on LHE tables. i hypothesized that Euros liked LHE better, and likely played more of that game "across the pond." you have me wondering if i wasn't right after all.

[LawDude]

Coming over from live poker, my story is quite different. I got sick of playing live no limit really fast, because even though there is technically less variance over time, no limit played against a bunch of fish (which is what live low limit tables in California are like) presents a peculiar type of short term variance where you end up losing your whole buy-in quite often. Limit was actually better for my sanity-- I could handle longer downswings; for some reason those didn't tilt me as much as seeing some fish run off with a huge stack of my money in a single hand.

When I played NL, I wasn't very good. I was basically doing things I picked up from poker books and on TV. I did know about suited connectors, but I wasn't paying nearly enough attention to stack sizes and I certainly wasn't putting players on ranges or controlling the size of the pot.

When I moved to limit, though, I immediately started making money, because it turned out that at the lower stakes live tables, all you needed to know to make money was how to play a standard tight-aggressive game, indeed almost a nitty game, pre-flop. The other players never adjusted to your style of play anyway, so it didn't matter that you came in and raised with AK after 30 minutes of folding everything. They still paid you off.

To this day, it is possible to make at least $15 per hour just playing 4-8 on tables in Southern California and knowing how to play starting hands pre-flop. You'll make a little more at Indian casinos were the rake is lower.

It was only when I moved up in levels that I started figuring out how to play post-flop. And I came to the online poker world very late indeed-- I started playing it mainly as a form of practice, and I tried to pick levels and tables that played fairly consistently with what I experience playing live. I've made some money playing online, but that's not really the point. The real money is in the casinos, where some very bad players throw some very large sums of money around.

[Chopper]

The real money is in the casinos...

unless you multitable w/ rakeback.

plenty of players, even here at FTR, make well over 15/hr playing online. in fact, i would venture that 30/hr is not "great" for some of the guys here. and, lucky for you, they dont want to play live....they would have to put clothes on.

[LawDude]

The real money is in the casinos...

unless you multitable w/ rakeback.

plenty of players, even here at FTR, make well over 15/hr playing online. in fact, i would venture that 30/hr is not "great" for some of the guys here. and, lucky for you, they dont want to play live....they would have to put clothes on.

I make more than 15 an hour in casinos. My point was, you can beat live 4/8 with only rudimentary poker skills. Better live players can make more money playing higher limits.

[Chopper]

i was being a smartass. and, yeah, the parentheses part was my point.

funny about your numbers. with me at your table, you were a loser over 3k hands up to last night. you went on some hella rush somewhere because while i was watching my shit, you raged to a 3.63/100 on the positive. for about 500 hands, that is really crazy hot. i have you up about $24 now.

[LawDude]

i was being a smartass. and, yeah, the parentheses part was my point.

funny about your numbers. with me at your table, you were a loser over 3k hands up to last night. you went on some hella rush somewhere because while i was watching my shit, you raged to a 3.63/100 on the positive. for about 500 hands, that is really crazy hot. i have you up about $24 now.

Yet another demonstration that you need at least 10,000 hands before you have a statistically significant sample for poker analysis.

[Chopper]

sure. i havent believed in less than 10k in a long time. however, that first 5k of FR was so crazy hot, i wondered just how hot.

i think a 4, though, is easily sustainable over any sample. the play at 25c/50c is just THAT bad.

[asdpikas]

its funny you say that party is the toughest now. when i played Sun, i found that Euros were tighter on LHE tables. i hypothesized that Euros liked LHE better, and likely played more of that game "across the pond." you have me wondering if i wasn't right after all.

LHE is not played much in Europe. I've never actually seen it in a casino.

What i think is most euro donks are playing NL cause it's the fad, and LHE players are mostly serious grinders of the abundant strategy-gamer-thinking type. Wait! That's me too! LOL

[LawDude]

Finally figured out how to do this:

[/img]

[Chopper]

cool. i will get october up soon.

[Chopper]

here is october, fwiw...

[ponyboy]

Is it worth posting a garph with only 1500 hands? I don't think so because it is such a small sample. FWIW, I'm running 6.9BB/100 hands between .10/.20 and .25/.50. It was higher but I ran into some problems when I started playing on Stars for some reason.

[LawDude]

Ponyboy-- 10,000 hands is pretty much the minimum, especially in limit, because the variance is so sick.