Losing at low limit or step it up to high?

[12AX7]

Well,
I'm very interested in what your partner *has* found that works. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

That being said..

I've run some analysis using this player profile:

Will play all pairs, any ace, any king, any suited connector.

Ok, not a great model, but best I can do with the software I have at hand.

I ran matchups on all hands from heads up to 7 handed.

AA had the highest EV for any number of opponents. And the EV went *up* as number of opponents increased.

But, here's the rub that explains your subjective observation...

As number of opponents increases, so does the odds of losing.

Here's the numbers:


Opps..EV...Odds Against
1.....0.72......0.16:1
2.....1.22......0.35:1
3.....1.56......0.56:1
4.....1.80......0.78:1
5.....1.80......1.08:1
6.....1.80......1.50:1

(Sorry 'bout the periods, only thing I could think of to keep the columns straight.)

So typically you're going to get cracked about half the time, just as a guesstimate.

But, since the EV stays relatively level from 6 down to 4 players... there's some value in trying to limit the field with a raise since the EV is the same, but the pot is bigger *and* you win more often.

Then again, you could argue that raising out even more players is beneficial because though the EV is larger, the pot is bigger. 1.56 against dead money and few players might be advantageous, right? While also winning more often. So seems with PP's, limiting the field has the effect of reducing variance. A good thing in my book.

Though I haven't worked the numbers out, it would seem that if the odds of winning rise quickly enough, or the EV drops slowly enough, you may actually win more money, though the EV is less, because the pots are bigger. (Again, with hopefully reduced variance.)

However, if you didn't manage to reduce the field, you're still on mathematically favorable ground, right? And from the other direction, if occasionally you do let a donk in when you get AA UTG, and get cracked, you're still likely on good ground long term, I'd tend to think.

Anyway, just what my impromptu analysis shows. Not certain if my conclusions represent fuzzy thinking or not.

[ QUOTE ]
Pocket Aces are not worth much against 6 players. Following SSH guidelines you will only get a playable hand fairly rarely.

As a side note, my ex business partner has been playing professionally for about 5 years and has built a 6 figure BR--not bad. When I was starting out and told him that I was reading this or that book and that I was going to crush the low limit games, he patiently (as if I were a 2 year old) explained that "the book doesn't work in those games"

Just my .02

[/ QUOTE ]

[MathEconomist]

The only reason to move up is rake/tip beneftis. Once you get up to about 6/12 the rake +tip is pretty reasonable and more or less in line with the rake you see online. I'd imagine that 1/2 live might be almost unbeatable because with 3 bucks rake + 1 buck jackpot drop + 1 buck tip you are losing 5 bucks from the table per hand at an average casino game. So move up past 1/2 and 2/4 but there's no reason to jump into 10/20 if you can't beat 5/10 or 6/12.

[DrVanNostrin]

[ QUOTE ]
...i cant consistently win...

[/ QUOTE ]
Allow me to shed some light on this; you're playing poker. No one at any level ever wins consistently. Unless they're playing a few thousand hands per session and even then it is unlikely.

If you want to make money consistently I recommend a job.

[exalted]

If there are consistently many players in the pot, you can play more hands with high implied odds (suited connectors and pocket pairs).

[PokerCad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have been playing high school basketball games that are full of complete donks. 3 players not boxing out for rebounds, a total messy game. No matter how I play I can't consistently get to the ball, and I believe I am a decent player, and am a winning player when playing against solid players. I have just had trouble keeping a solid dribble and jumpshot while being in college with actual defenders and such. I am a student of the game and work very hard at it.

my question would be: should I wait and actually learn the game, or keep playing the high school games that are pretty much a crapshoot?

I've scouted the NBA games well and believe I could do well at that game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Try some critical thinking and logic. Then get back to us.

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]



Sorry for the bump of an old thread,,,but I love this,,NH dogmeat

[Colonel Kataffy]

Ahh...posts like these always bring a smile to my face. You just made my day.

[iagainsti]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have been playing high school basketball games that are full of complete donks. 3 players not boxing out for rebounds, a total messy game. No matter how I play I can't consistently get to the ball, and I believe I am a decent player, and am a winning player when playing against solid players. I have just had trouble keeping a solid dribble and jumpshot while being in college with actual defenders and such. I am a student of the game and work very hard at it.

my question would be: should I wait and actually learn the game, or keep playing the high school games that are pretty much a crapshoot?

I've scouted the NBA games well and believe I could do well at that game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Try some critical thinking and logic. Then get back to us.

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh, the false analogy, I love it. What other manner of sophistry will we employ to ridicule this poster.

Try taking Critical Thinking and Composition and get back to us.

[lgkeeper]

It kills me that you have to weed through 70% sarcastic posts to get to the 30% that actually help the OP. There's a reason so many non 2+2ers think we're all snobs here.

[MikeRand2000]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been playing B&M low NL games that are full of complete donks. 6 players per flop, a total messy game. No matter how i play i cant consistently win and i believe i am a decent player, and am a winning player when playing against solid players. I have just had trouble keeping a solid bankroll while being in college with bills and such. I am a student of the game and work very hard at it.

my question would be: should i wait and build up a bankroll, or keep playing the low games that are pretty much a crapshoot?

ive scouted the 20/40 limit games well and believe i could do well at that game.

[/ QUOTE ]

A few things:

1) Do you have enough sessions against the donkeys to be sure that you are not profitable? What is the 95/99% confidence interval around your win rate?

2) Do you have enough sessions against solid players to be sure that you are profitable? What is the 95/99% confidence interval around your win rate?

3) Why are there still 6 players to the flop? Are you raising enough? Are you just putting in 3x-5x even when there are limpers in front and you have a premium hand?

My advice is to learn how to beat low limit first. As a limit player, I'd salivate at all the chances you have to protect large pots / make potents make incorrect calls because you can size your bets properly.

[Dazarath]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been playing B&M low NL games that are full of complete donks. 6 players per flop, a total messy game. No matter how i play i cant consistently win and i believe i am a decent player, and am a winning player when playing against solid players. I have just had trouble keeping a solid bankroll while being in college with bills and such. I am a student of the game and work very hard at it.

my question would be: should i wait and build up a bankroll, or keep playing the low games that are pretty much a crapshoot?

ive scouted the 20/40 limit games well and believe i could do well at that game.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
"move up so we can take your money"

[/ QUOTE ]