Confusion About Party Conventional Wisdom.

[chicagoY]

"The reason why NL is more likely to wipe out limit is for the reason that for weaker players it is considered a much more enjoyable game."

Good point. I had not thought of that.

"Ive taught a lot of people the game and ive played a lot of home games. Limit is bottom of the list of game choices in dealers choice and the newbies just dont understand how it can be good to only bet small increments when you have 'good' hands."

Good information. I never play in home games but that makes sense.

[chicagoY]

Well, yeah, statistically I'm ahead, but I'd appreciate it if at least one of them would reraise whenI had them, lol.

[chicagoY]

Thanks, that's some math that makes perfect sense. I did have RB at Empire but never had it at Party nor am I a VIP, but 5 bucks rake is foul.

[DrPhysic]

NL will dry up (or at least the fish supply will dry up)

WHEN THEY TAKE IT OFF THE TV!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not going to happen.

Doc [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[PokerStorm]

[ QUOTE ]

#2. There's such a thing as a "full time 2/4 player"?


[/ QUOTE ]


Have you any idea how much money can be made playing 2/4 full time? It's even possible to play .50/1 for a living where 1-2K a week is very doable.

[Chomp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP - Aside from the rake issue and merely on the issue of the wildness of the tables, I play 100NL FR and have to say I have been astounded over the last few days about the madness on show.

Table VP$IPs of 35%+, loads of stacks joining table with like $27.98 or $57.27, 6 callers to 3xBB pfr etc...madness. I am a terrible player, and even I have found it to be particularly easy pickings in the last few days.

It definitely cannot continue like this.*


* Unless of course it's always been this nuts and I've only just twigged it.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, 35% omgomg

please give 6max NL a try. today at one table i had an 85/30, a 70/0 and two 56/15s

[/ QUOTE ]


Dude, I was referring to the TABLE VP$IP, not the VP$IPs of individual players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sample size?

Also...I don't understand, you LIKE seeing players sit down with $25 adn $50 at 100nl?

[/ QUOTE ]


CATerp - Sorry, wasn't meant as a flame, sorry if it came across that way.

I was simply saying that a Table VP$IP at NLFR100 of 35+ is very unusual, even for Party at those stakes.

..........

DWarrior - Sample size: well, the sample size is by definintion limited since we're talking about the tables since Monster started, so it's necessarily going to be in the single-figure thousands.

As for your shortstack question, the answer in this circumsatance is "yes" because these "shortstacks" are not "shortstacks" in the sense you are implying (i.e. tricky, nasty players to play against who gain advantage from their expert play of a shortstack). No, that is NOT what is happening at FRNL100.

The "shortstacks" are short because they presumably have donked off the rest or are just joining with an arbitrary amount not knowing anything about optimum buy-ins. These players are certainly not experts, much less "shortstack" experts.

Apples and oranges.



Cheers.