|
|
|
|
#2
11-30-2007, 02:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $10k at the 27s in 1 month challenge
[ QUOTE ]
no he's 20 tabling right now.. he's at -1100 for the challenge right now. Made a very nice run, then had another little downswong. [/ QUOTE ] Ya, i was going to advise him not to 20 table because it looks like he's a losing player playing that many tables, but at this point 12 tabling will be impossible to get there so this is the only shot he has. If you're able to run really good and get near back on track tho i would advise you to cut down the tables and play more hours. GL, this would be crazy to make a comeback, hang in there. 
|
|
#3
11-30-2007, 02:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $10k at the 27s in 1 month challenge
Hey runhot, are you using scripts? 20 tables is more doable with the AHK scripts. I modified the one so when a table pops up the mouse is always over fold, gives me more time to think...
|
|
#4
11-30-2007, 03:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $10k at the 27s in 1 month challenge
This post has tl;dr written all over it, but...
I've moved up to the $27s in the last few weeks and played a few SNGs with runhot. He's not playing poorly. A little too tight, at times, perhaps. But not poorly. There've been several situations where the structure forces him to shove (e.g. AT, <7 BBs, 4-handed, UTG) and he runs into a bigger hand. I sent Runhot an IM a few days ago to let him know he was having some timing/connectivity issues in a few of his SNGs, and thought it might have something to do with the number of tables. I haven't seen him time out since. The downswings in turbo SNGs can be brutal. Hell, most of you think regular SNGs are crapshoots. Imagine having the blind levels cut in half. He hasn't exaclty had a heater yet, but it's bound to happen sooner or later. For his sake, I hope 'sooner.' One last thing I think is important to take note of is that Sharkscope isn't entirely accurate. The difference between my PS balance over the last four days is $250 more than Sharkscope has it at. Lastly, it's cool to see so many of the regulars @ $16's on PokerStars. I played them for a couple of months (13% ROI, 4100 SNGs, 12-tabling) and ran into most of them at one time or another. For example, I've played nearly 300 SNGs with The_Venetian.
|
|
#5
11-30-2007, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $10k at the 27s in 1 month challenge
[ QUOTE ]
This post has tl;dr written all over it, but... I've moved up to the $27s in the last few weeks and played a few SNGs with runhot. He's not playing poorly. A little too tight, at times, perhaps. But not poorly. There've been several situations where the structure forces him to shove (e.g. AT, <7 BBs, 4-handed, UTG) and he runs into a bigger hand. I sent Runhot an IM a few days ago to let him know he was having some timing/connectivity issues in a few of his SNGs, and thought it might have something to do with the number of tables. I haven't seen him time out since. The downswings in turbo SNGs can be brutal. Hell, most of you think regular SNGs are crapshoots. Imagine having the blind levels cut in half. He hasn't exaclty had a heater yet, but it's bound to happen sooner or later. For his sake, I hope 'sooner.' One last thing I think is important to take note of is that Sharkscope isn't entirely accurate. The difference between my PS balance over the last four days is $250 more than Sharkscope has it at. Lastly, it's cool to see so many of the regulars @ $16's on PokerStars. I played them for a couple of months (13% ROI, 4100 SNGs, 12-tabling) and ran into most of them at one time or another. For example, I've played nearly 300 SNGs with The_Venetian. [/ QUOTE ] And one of these days I'm going to give you credit for having a hand. Maybe after 500 SNG's. Sample size and all. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#6
11-30-2007, 06:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $10k at the 27s in 1 month challenge
I won't go in to details, but over the first 7 or so I've been over, he can play much better. I think it has to do with the amount of tables.
|
|
#8
11-30-2007, 09:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $10k at the 27s in 1 month challenge
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This post has tl;dr written all over it, but... I've moved up to the $27s in the last few weeks and played a few SNGs with runhot. He's not playing poorly. A little too tight, at times, perhaps. But not poorly. There've been several situations where the structure forces him to shove (e.g. AT, <7 BBs, 4-handed, UTG) and he runs into a bigger hand. I sent Runhot an IM a few days ago to let him know he was having some timing/connectivity issues in a few of his SNGs, and thought it might have something to do with the number of tables. I haven't seen him time out since. The downswings in turbo SNGs can be brutal. Hell, most of you think regular SNGs are crapshoots. Imagine having the blind levels cut in half. He hasn't exaclty had a heater yet, but it's bound to happen sooner or later. For his sake, I hope 'sooner.' One last thing I think is important to take note of is that Sharkscope isn't entirely accurate. The difference between my PS balance over the last four days is $250 more than Sharkscope has it at. Lastly, it's cool to see so many of the regulars @ $16's on PokerStars. I played them for a couple of months (13% ROI, 4100 SNGs, 12-tabling) and ran into most of them at one time or another. For example, I've played nearly 300 SNGs with The_Venetian. [/ QUOTE ] And one of these days I'm going to give you credit for having a hand. Maybe after 500 SNG's. Sample size and all. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] You probably shouldn't. Just keep doing what you're doing, because I'm getting owned in SNGs with you. -1% ROI. Thanks buddy.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
