My win rate has dropped dramatically since The Bill

[CountingMyOuts]

Adjust or die. "Tight" doesn't always mean "plays well after flop".

[King Kong]

American player: "My win rate has dropped dramatically since Bill."

UK player: "My winrate rocketed since the bill"

US players can no longer fund their account. Europeens can. If you were a poker site, who would you rather see win?

Just sayin' ......

I've been stone cold since popping a tourney for $4,000 two days before the sheet hit the fan.

[StavrosT]

[ QUOTE ]
American player: "My win rate has dropped dramatically since Bill."

UK player: "My winrate rocketed since the bill"

US players can no longer fund their account. Europeens can. If you were a poker site, who would you rather see win?

Just sayin' ......

I've been stone cold since popping a tourney for $4,000 two days before the sheet hit the fan.

[/ QUOTE ]

umm, the "sheet" hit the fan late last year.

[Sciolist]

I have no idea what my winrate was pre or post bill. I have played about 125k hands post bill and about 600k hands pre.

It takes SO MANY hands to determine your win rate that comparing win rate from one month to the next is meaningless. It's also meaningless to compare win rate from one year to another, because the games naturally change, as does the way you play.

[King Kong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
American player: "My win rate has dropped dramatically since Bill."

UK player: "My winrate rocketed since the bill"

US players can no longer fund their account. Europeens can. If you were a poker site, who would you rather see win?

Just sayin' ......

I've been stone cold since popping a tourney for $4,000 two days before the sheet hit the fan.

[/ QUOTE ]

umm, the "sheet" hit the fan late last year.

[/ QUOTE ]

ummm, we were still able to fund accounts until just recently.

[gurgeh]

[ QUOTE ]
American player: "My win rate has dropped dramatically since Bill."

UK player: "My winrate rocketed since the bill"

US players can no longer fund their account. Europeens can. If you were a poker site, who would you rather see win?

Just sayin' ......

I've been stone cold since popping a tourney for $4,000 two days before the sheet hit the fan.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if what you said about not being able to fund our accounts were true, which it isn't, I think your reasoning is still off. I would give the wins to the people who are less likely to put more money into their accounts so that they would be able and ecouraged to continue playing and generating rake.

[Tornado69]

partypoker is still a goldmine imo ... my winrate has been the best it's ever been.

[StavrosT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
American player: "My win rate has dropped dramatically since Bill."

UK player: "My winrate rocketed since the bill"

US players can no longer fund their account. Europeens can. If you were a poker site, who would you rather see win?

Just sayin' ......

I've been stone cold since popping a tourney for $4,000 two days before the sheet hit the fan.

[/ QUOTE ]

umm, the "sheet" hit the fan late last year.

[/ QUOTE ]

ummm, we were still able to fund accounts until just recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow

[King Kong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
American player: "My win rate has dropped dramatically since Bill."

UK player: "My winrate rocketed since the bill"

US players can no longer fund their account. Europeens can. If you were a poker site, who would you rather see win?

Just sayin' ......

I've been stone cold since popping a tourney for $4,000 two days before the sheet hit the fan.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if what you said about not being able to fund our accounts were true, which it isn't, I think your reasoning is still off. I would give the wins to the people who are less likely to put more money into their accounts so that they would be able and ecouraged to continue playing and generating rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, so US players are running out of options to fund accounts, and the ability to even play at the sites is hanging in the balance. Sites are going to want to see money stay at the site(and keep coming), not leave it. Your logic is flawed.

[EGO]

[ QUOTE ]
I was a 2.5Bb/100 player 2/4 to 5/10 with half a million hands but ever since The Bill hit I'm struggling to stay above 1BB/100.

Could be the sites I have to play and the people I'm forced to play against now but it has sure taken the fun out of poker for the time being!

No more 50% flop tables in 3/6. Funny how tight tables kill win rate. Now a good table is 35% flops and they don't last long!

[/ QUOTE ]

How many tables are you playing? If you are multi-tabling, and I don't see any way someone can have 500K hands without it, then maybe you should try dropping a table or two and see how that affects your winrate?

Edit: I realize that you won't be able to make any sort of meaninful decision regarding your actual winrate in a short period of time. I review my hands after each session, and I ask myself if I would have made a better decision if I were playing less tables. I've found that my decision making process is much better when not distracted by multiple tables. YMMV.

You aren't forced to play against anyone. Find a better seat at a better table. Just because there are only four tables going at your limit doesn't mean you have to play at each of them.

Tight tables do decrease your winrate because there's a smaller gap in skill between the best and worst players. The two major mistakes that bad players make, playing too many hands and going too far with them, are not as prevalant as they were pre-bill.

I think a good table is when I have the worst (loosest) player, or the worst two players, a few seats to my right. I don't worry much about the rest of the table. I try not to play at any table that doesn't have at least one fairly loose player, preferably 40 VPIP or higher.