Effect of new Absolute Bad beat rules?

[joeblack]

Wow, there are many wrong comments in this thread IMO. Here's my take (I play on AP 30K hands a month anywhere from 100NL to 400NL - mostly 200NL).

1) The BBJ has made AP looser. The VPIP has increased across the board (especially when they first instituted the BBJ).

[ QUOTE ]
I have to think a $.50/$1 NL game in virtually unbeatable with this extra rake.

[/ QUOTE ]
2) While the extra .50 cent rake sucks it does not make 100NL unbeatable by any means. 100NL is a cake walk and anyone with half a brain should be able to beat it for minimum of 3ptBB/100.

[ QUOTE ]
But I have never had quad-anything beat before over a million hands played.

[/ QUOTE ]

3) While it is ultra-rare, I had quads get beat with only 90K hands in my PT database. It happens but I would'nt count on hitting the BBJ - ever.

[Niediam]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Absolute put in the bad beat a couple of weeks ago, but recently they changed their terms. Now any pot in which more than 4 people were dealt cards that sees a flop gets jackpot dropped for .50. Also, to hit the jackpot, quad 8s need to be beaten.

For one, I haven't noticed any change in the game quality as a result of the jackpot at .5/1NL. My question is, I'm a very aggressive and "small-ball" player at NL, so I take down a lot of pots per hour, probably more than any other player at my table on average.Is this jackpot absolutely devastating my winnings? Anyone else have this problem?

I went into PT to check out the actual effect. I found my "Saw flop all hands" stat and multiplied it by my "won money when saw flop." That translates to my winning 10.705% of the hands I am dealt. thus, 10.705 hands per 100 hands I am losing out on .50. In short, $5.35.

My PTBB/100 is negatively affected by 2.17BB/100. Total horsecrap. For an hourly figure, that's almost $22/hr that I am losing. If anyone can show what the EV of the jackpot is at a 6max, that would be helpful.

As of this calculation, I am extremely pissed off.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are assuming thatthe size of the pots are the same as before the BBJ. According to my PT, the avg pot size at 1/2 has increased by about 60% (from $6 to $9+). The softness in the games seems to have made the game more profitable for me than what it was before.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that even with an $10 average pot an expert can probably only win at like 1.5bb/100 while the BBJ is costing them around 2bb/100 extra in rake...

[grouchie]

[ QUOTE ]

The problem is that even with an $10 average pot an expert can probably only win at like 1.5bb/100 while the BBJ is costing them around 2bb/100 extra in rake...

[/ QUOTE ]

how much of that is recouped in Rakeback?

and, I know that the BBJ drop is not used for RB, but just curious how much RB offsets the effects.

[1huskerfan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Absolute put in the bad beat a couple of weeks ago, but recently they changed their terms. Now any pot in which more than 4 people were dealt cards that sees a flop gets jackpot dropped for .50. Also, to hit the jackpot, quad 8s need to be beaten.

For one, I haven't noticed any change in the game quality as a result of the jackpot at .5/1NL. My question is, I'm a very aggressive and "small-ball" player at NL, so I take down a lot of pots per hour, probably more than any other player at my table on average.Is this jackpot absolutely devastating my winnings? Anyone else have this problem?

I went into PT to check out the actual effect. I found my "Saw flop all hands" stat and multiplied it by my "won money when saw flop." That translates to my winning 10.705% of the hands I am dealt. thus, 10.705 hands per 100 hands I am losing out on .50. In short, $5.35.

My PTBB/100 is negatively affected by 2.17BB/100. Total horsecrap. For an hourly figure, that's almost $22/hr that I am losing. If anyone can show what the EV of the jackpot is at a 6max, that would be helpful.

As of this calculation, I am extremely pissed off.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are assuming thatthe size of the pots are the same as before the BBJ. According to my PT, the avg pot size at 1/2 has increased by about 60% (from $6 to $9+). The softness in the games seems to have made the game more profitable for me than what it was before.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that even with an $10 average pot an expert can probably only win at like 1.5bb/100 while the BBJ is costing them around 2bb/100 extra in rake...

[/ QUOTE ]

But if said expert was already winning 1-1.5BB/100, when the pots were averaging $6, then their EV would be going up with the current conditions. I find these games actually beatable now with the higher vpip. I wouldnt touch the old AP tables with the 13/8 stats. Now you see tables that are aas soft as 35/3 all the time.

[Niediam]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The problem is that even with an $10 average pot an expert can probably only win at like 1.5bb/100 while the BBJ is costing them around 2bb/100 extra in rake...

[/ QUOTE ]


how much of that is recouped in Rakeback?

and, I know that the BBJ drop is not used for RB, but just curious how much RB offsets the effects.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm really not sure how much RB more people get since they swtiched to weighted contributed...

[Niediam]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Absolute put in the bad beat a couple of weeks ago, but recently they changed their terms. Now any pot in which more than 4 people were dealt cards that sees a flop gets jackpot dropped for .50. Also, to hit the jackpot, quad 8s need to be beaten.

For one, I haven't noticed any change in the game quality as a result of the jackpot at .5/1NL. My question is, I'm a very aggressive and "small-ball" player at NL, so I take down a lot of pots per hour, probably more than any other player at my table on average.Is this jackpot absolutely devastating my winnings? Anyone else have this problem?

I went into PT to check out the actual effect. I found my "Saw flop all hands" stat and multiplied it by my "won money when saw flop." That translates to my winning 10.705% of the hands I am dealt. thus, 10.705 hands per 100 hands I am losing out on .50. In short, $5.35.

My PTBB/100 is negatively affected by 2.17BB/100. Total horsecrap. For an hourly figure, that's almost $22/hr that I am losing. If anyone can show what the EV of the jackpot is at a 6max, that would be helpful.

As of this calculation, I am extremely pissed off.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are assuming thatthe size of the pots are the same as before the BBJ. According to my PT, the avg pot size at 1/2 has increased by about 60% (from $6 to $9+). The softness in the games seems to have made the game more profitable for me than what it was before.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that even with an $10 average pot an expert can probably only win at like 1.5bb/100 while the BBJ is costing them around 2bb/100 extra in rake...

[/ QUOTE ]

But if said expert was already winning 1-1.5BB/100, when the pots were averaging $6, then their EV would be going up with the current conditions. I find these games actually beatable now with the higher vpip. I wouldnt touch the old AP tables with the 13/8 stats. Now you see tables that are aas soft as 35/3 all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

My number was with the $10 pots. Sounds like the games now are about what they were back when they had a good bonus structure and then it seemed like the best players were winning around 1bb/100 at 1/2 so I was assuming that a true expert could be up in the 1.5 range.

And of course everything is even worse if you are playing shorthanded because you are probably winning 12-14% of the hands then.

[cmstaab]

One thing to consider is that this change was made right around the time when they switched the bonus from $10 at 75 points to $5 at 20 points. Is that bonus change enough to offset a good portion of the extra rake?

Although that doesn't mean much unless they give more frequent bonuses, but it should atleast help defray the extra costs a bit.

[JPFisher55]

I play on Vegas Poker 247 where I receive rakeback. It is an Absolute Poker skin, but does not carry the jackpot tables. I noticed a shortage of tables at $.5/$1 NLHE. So I opened an Absolute program and noticed all the jackpot tables.
Then I read the rules and the $.50 take. I realized that this would effectively raise the rake on this level to an unacceptable level. I am hoping that the players realize that such tables are like playing the lottery not poker.
There are a few $.50/$1 NLHE non-jackpot tables on the Absolute Poker network. But I have played more at Cake Poker where there are plenty of such tables.