Two Plus Two Newer Archives

Two Plus Two Newer Archives (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/index.php)

- Small Stakes Shorthanded (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)

- - Move up??? (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=507568)

Should someone playing 3/6 with a winrate of 1/100 on a sample of 80k hands and a 15k$ BR move to 5/10???? Or
try to get a better winrate before moving up stakes???

Start playing 5/10 and good games of 10/20. Or rather, play in good games anywhere from 3/6 to 10/20. Your winrate might be higher at 10/20 because of the smaller effect of the rake.

Move up if you have the bankroll and feel you're ready for it. Or just take a 100BB shot and see how it goes.

Your winrate over the last x hands is pretty much irrelevant. I was a .5 BB winner at 5/10, when I moved to 10/20.

[ QUOTE ]
Should someone playing 3/6 with a winrate of 1/100 on a sample of 80k hands and a 15k$ BR move to 5/10???? Or
try to get a better winrate before moving up stakes???

[/ QUOTE ]

Good lord! Move up!!

Dont wait for good winrates at lower high rake levels.

You have plenty of roll for 5/10 and even 10/20. Those games arent that much tougher than 3/6 when you adjust for the lower rake.

[ QUOTE ]
Your winrate over the last x hands is pretty much irrelevant.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT!!!

jezuz move up. just look for good games at all levels and you'll win.

it's not a one-way ticket. Give it a try. Good luck!

[ QUOTE ]
Should someone playing 3/6 with a winrate of 1/100 on a sample of 80k hands and a 15k$ BR move to 5/10???? Or
try to get a better winrate before moving up stakes???

[/ QUOTE ]

Does that mean you had a $10k roll before you started playing $3/6?

Definitely take some shots at $5/10 if you see games you like. I would be having a look at good $10/20 games ASAP if I were you.

[ QUOTE ]

Does that mean you had a $10k roll before you started playing $3/6?

[/ QUOTE ]

Almost.I had a 9k$ BR.

Basically, one needs a 2 big bets per 100 winrate before one can be happy even at the limit one is at but considering the likely tougher games for the US players at this time and a possible rakeback on could have, you might be doing as good as one can do at 3-6. 80K hands says you are not lacking experience either.

In case one is playing somewhere where there are good 3-6 games, at least when picking tables, and the fish stays away from 5-10 or plays tighter there, then the case would be different.

The rake is not any fun at 5-10 either; the limits from 2-4 (not at every place) to 5-10 are pretty bad from the rake point of view, and 10-20 is no heaven either, additionally that it can be considerably tougher than 5-10 - that one might beat but lose at 10-20.

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, one needs a 2 big bets per 100 winrate before one can be happy even at the limit one is at but considering the likely tougher games for the US players at this time and a possible rakeback on could have, you might be doing as good as one can do at 3-6. 80K hands says you are not lacking experience either.

In case one is playing somewhere where there are good 3-6 games, at least when picking tables, and the fish stays away from 5-10 or plays tighter there, then the case would be different.

The rake is not any fun at 5-10 either; the limits from 2-4 (not at every place) to 5-10 are pretty bad from the rake point of view, and 10-20 is no heaven either, additionally that it can be considerably tougher than 5-10 - that one might beat but lose at 10-20.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not expert, but I think most people here would be happy getting 1BB/100 at 5/10 and 10/20...getting 2BB/100 seems like you would be absolutely destroying the game.

1BB/100 is a very decent sustained winrate at any level imo.

2BB/100 is completely destroying the games. I think anything higher than that is pretty much unsustainable in todays environment.

Your winrate really depends strongly on your site and game selection.
1BB could be "Meh your barely beating the games" to "your crushing the games"

However, your BR is huge... Might as well take a shot at a higher stake.. I suggset playing an hour or so here and there to desensitize yourself to the swings. If you have a big downswing, drop back down for a while.

Moving up is always a great way to reflect hard on your game. I had many epiphanies moving up from 3/6 in regards to blind defense and attacking.

The key to improving your poker game is to be able to strongly recognize good/bad play OUTSIDE of the table... My criteria for playing in any game im rolled in is to be able to see my opponents making FREQUENT mistakes that you are not making.
If they are, this is a good game.

[ QUOTE ]
Your winrate really depends strongly on your site and game selection.
1BB could be "Meh your barely beating the games" to "your crushing the games"

However, your BR is huge... Might as well take a shot at a higher stake.. I suggset playing an hour or so here and there to desensitize yourself to the swings. If you have a big downswing, drop back down for a while.

Moving up is always a great way to reflect hard on your game. I had many epiphanies moving up from 3/6 in regards to blind defense and attacking.

The key to improving your poker game is to be able to strongly recognize good/bad play OUTSIDE of the table... My criteria for playing in any game im rolled in is to be able to see my opponents making FREQUENT mistakes that you are not making.

[/ QUOTE ]

u post goot.

You´re good enough to move up Xerxes.At ongame there is no big difference between 3/6 and 10/20 IMO.
Against me you have shown a leak though.You fold too easily to raises.I don´t know if it´s my tight stats that has fooled you.But I rarely bluff so much as I have done against you.But otherwise you are very solid.

I recently read (in this forum I think) that you can expect win rates at shorthanded games to be higher than win rates at fr games, is this true?
thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
I recently read (in this forum I think) that you can expect win rates at shorthanded games to be higher than win rates at fr games, is this true?
thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]
The theory goes that short handed = you need to play more hands = more decisions = more room for mistakes for the bad players.

Also, when you're short you get to play more hands vs donks (easier to isolate).

OP, I played with you on UB a long time ago. Move up, you have the game and the bankroll. The lower rake will also help a ton.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I recently read (in this forum I think) that you can expect win rates at shorthanded games to be higher than win rates at fr games, is this true?
thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]
The theory goes that short handed = you need to play more hands = more decisions = more room for mistakes for the bad players.

Also, when you're short you get to play more hands vs donks (easier to isolate).

[/ QUOTE ]

Much of that is offset by the fact that you have to pay blinds more frequently correct? So in the end, with all other things being equal, is the winrate at sh games higher than or equal to that of a fr game?
thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
You´re good enough to move up Xerxes.At ongame there is no big difference between 3/6 and 10/20 IMO.
Against me you have shown a leak though.You fold too easily to raises.I don´t know if it´s my tight stats that has fooled you.But I rarely bluff so much as I have done against you.But otherwise you are very solid.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure about this since my screenname on Ongame has no xerxes in it. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

You probably just need to ratio it out to see which one is more profitable over time. You compare your BB/100 in 6 max to FR adjusting for the amount of hand plays and see which one shows to be more profitable.

This is really frustrating because most of the players I played against on different sites say I'm solid and should move up but the results aren't there. I have had a 600BB downswing recently and am down to 1/2 to avoid tilt and gain back confidence. I sure have leaks in my game and I'm working on them but I seem to go on big swings very often even though I don't play that LAG (28/20).

[ QUOTE ]
This is really frustrating because most of the players I played against on different sites say I'm solid and should move up but the results aren't there. I have had a 600BB downswing recently and am down to 1/2 to avoid tilt and gain back confidence. I sure have leaks in my game and I'm working on them but I seem to go on big swings very often even though I don't play that LAG (28/20).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying you didn't have leaks back then, most of us do. All I'm saying is that if you beat a level for 1BB/100 for as many hands as you have and you have a 1500 BB bankroll for the next level there's no question about it, you should move up. As Oink said your goal here should be to get out of the rake hell at small stakes as quickly as possible. When you first move up be sure to exercise very good table/seat selection, you'll be put in way way fewer tough spots this way and will help your confidence as well as your winrate. Also have someone go over your hands to see if they can find obvious leaks, either a coach or someone in the hand swaps.

600bb downswing.lol.i got 250bb this month and i can say,i hate loosing

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I recently read (in this forum I think) that you can expect win rates at shorthanded games to be higher than win rates at fr games, is this true?
thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]
The theory goes that short handed = you need to play more hands = more decisions = more room for mistakes for the bad players.

Also, when you're short you get to play more hands vs donks (easier to isolate).

[/ QUOTE ]

Much of that is offset by the fact that you have to pay blinds more frequently correct? So in the end, with all other things being equal, is the winrate at sh games higher than or equal to that of a fr game?
thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

The other players pay the blinds more often too. A stronger player has more of an edge SH and I dont its close.

[ QUOTE ]
The other players pay the blinds more often too. A stronger player has more of an edge SH and I dont its close.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. SH has a lot more difficult decisions and you can't just nut peddle for a decent win-rate like in FR.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure about this since my screenname on Ongame has no xerxes in it. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No but if I´m right your screename is starting with a D.
Mine is starting with Fe.
It is nothing wrong with your game.You should bet/fold a little less though.You´re a bit too aggressive sometimes.
But we all have some leaks.I have tons of them but I am still able to beat the games easilyy and that despite having huge downswings.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure about this since my screenname on Ongame has no xerxes in it. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No but if I´m right your screename is starting with a D.
Mine is starting with Fe.
It is nothing wrong with your game.You should bet/fold a little less though.You´re a bit too aggressive sometimes.
But we all have some leaks.I have tons of them but I am still able to beat the games easilyy and that despite having huge downswings.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha I see I think we talekd about this awhile back but I wasn't sure about your 2+2 screen name. Yeah I see what you are talking about my agression factor is high I probably raise too much especially on the flop. How come you haven't moved up yet??? If I rememebr correctly you were beating 3/6 for around 2/100 last time we talked.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure about this since my screenname on Ongame has no xerxes in it. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No but if I´m right your screename is starting with a D.
Mine is starting with Fe.
It is nothing wrong with your game.You should bet/fold a little less though.You´re a bit too aggressive sometimes.
But we all have some leaks.I have tons of them but I am still able to beat the games easilyy and that despite having huge downswings.

[/ QUOTE ]

Haha I see I think we talekd about this awhile back but I wasn't sure about your 2+2 screen name. Yeah I see what you are talking about my agression factor is high I probably raise too much especially on the flop. How come you haven't moved up yet??? If I rememebr correctly you were beating 3/6 for around 2/100 last time we talked.

[/ QUOTE ]

I´ve been playing some 5/10 since the beginning of 2007.But I usually play more 3/6 tables.Since I´m 3 or 4-tabling I almost never play more than one or two 5/10 tables at a time. I also devote half of my time for playing NL 0.5/1 and 1/2 which is much more profitable and without the downswings.

The downswings have been the major reason for not playing higher. I have a personal goal of making 150 000 dollars before 2010 (including rakeback)and I would hate having a 500 BB downswing at higher stakes (without being sure that I can beat that level) since it would make me have to fight longer for my goal.Once I have earned those 150 000 dollars I will apply normal bankroll management and play whatever level I have 600BB for.I really long for that day.But discipline is my middle name.
But for anyone who does not have any special goals I would recommend moving up as quickly as possible because of the rake.But one must not forget that one can earn more than enough money by multitabling 3/6.

The 2BB/100 you´re talking about turned out to not be my true winrate sadly enough.If I recall right that was after my first 100K 3/6.Now my winrate has stabilized around 1.5 BB/100 after 250K.
At 5/10 I don´t have more than 30K hands and it is around 0.7 BB/100. But for what I can see the player standard is only marginally better at 5/10. I think my lower winrate at 5/10 is due to variance and the fact that I´m playing a little bit scared.
But despite my winrate I have had huge downswings. I had one of +600 BB in the beginning of this year and a couple of 300:s also.It doesn´t matter because you always bounce back and the upswings are even more wild.You can´t let the downswings get to you.If you´re 1BB/100 during 80K just keep reminding you that it is almost statistically proved that you´re a winner and that is all you have to know.

I see that you have played a few 5/10 hands too (I had 15 of them in my database).I hope you don´t mind that I show a hand.Because I think it shows that your aggression costed you some bets.
Most 2+2:ers probably thinks that I played it poorly also but my reputation is down at the bottom anyway after my "play passively preflop OOP posts".So I don´t mind.

But doing a couple of these highly aggressive plays must add a lot of variance to your game and can be a reason to why you´re suffering some times.

Results in white

Poker Room skin
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $5/$10
5 players
Converter
Pre-flop: (5 players) Hero is BB with A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
2 folds, Button raises, SB folds, Hero calls.
Flop: 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (4.5SB, 2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets, Hero raises, Button calls.
Turn: J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (4.25BB, 2 players)
Hero bets, Button raises, Hero calls.
River: 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (8.25BB, 2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets, Hero calls.
Results:
Final pot: 10.25BB
Button shows KC 6C 
Hero shows AH JD

Yeah I played some 5/10 won good money especially on UB and this is when my 600 downswing began. I began losing on Ongame so I moved down back to 3/6 and it kept going to 600BB.

About the hand you posted I don't think I played it badly. The only thing that might be questionable is the river bet but I think I made that because I thought you could call me down with Ace high or a worse 6 since the 9 paired.

I don´t necessarily think you played it that bad either.But you played it very aggressive.And pretty much put your money on that I was on a Ahigh flush draw.
And I think the hand breaths a little bit of risk taking and that it is leading to a higher variance.
If I 3-bet turn would you have folded?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I recently read (in this forum I think) that you can expect win rates at shorthanded games to be higher than win rates at fr games, is this true?
thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]
The theory goes that short handed = you need to play more hands = more decisions = more room for mistakes for the bad players.

Also, when you're short you get to play more hands vs donks (easier to isolate).

[/ QUOTE ]

Much of that is offset by the fact that you have to pay blinds more frequently correct? So in the end, with all other things being equal, is the winrate at sh games higher than or equal to that of a fr game?
thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

The other players pay the blinds more often too. A stronger player has more of an edge SH and I dont its close.

[/ QUOTE ]

You also have some equity in the blinds you post, having to "pay" the blinds more often is a frequent misconception. The rake is higher, however.

[ QUOTE ]
I don´t necessarily think you played it that bad either.But you played it very aggressive.And pretty much put your money on that I was on a Ahigh flush draw.
And I think the hand breaths a little bit of risk taking and that it is leading to a higher variance.
If I 3-bet turn would you have folded?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup that's a fold for me if you three bet. Actually against an agrressive lag it's probably better to call this since it will be hard to fold to the three bet but you are not an agrressive lag [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]

Yup that's a fold for me if you three bet. Actually against an agrressive lag it's probably better to call this since it will be hard to fold to the three bet but you are not an agrressive lag

[/ QUOTE ]

I am sure that calling is better on this turn. You get to save money when you're behind, and preserve your chance of catching something on the river. Sure you fail to charge him if he has a diamond draw but if he does, it's most likely a strong draw with 12 or 15 outs to beat you so the money you gain from the raise is far outweighed by the money he'll bluff at you on the river if he misses.