Mystery..

[Praxising]

I don't know where to put this, but since I only play Razz now, and there's as much experience and wisdom here as anywhere....

Without posting a lot of specifics and HHs, does anyone have any ideas why a player would be a winning player by a fairly large margin at short tables and an absolute donk at full ones?

I'm breaking even because everything I win at short game I am losing at full tables. I can't figure it out because I am winning more hands than I am losing but I am losing very big pots, and winning mostly small ones.

While I am on poker break for a while working my way through SoP. I thought I'd try and figure this out. Any ideas?

[Andy B]

Shorthanded games tend to favor looser, more aggressive play.

[RustyBrooks]

* Short tables are higher variance - you may be currently earning more than your true win rate there

* you might be playing too loose, calling too much, in full tables

* Multi-way hands are hard to play optimally

* What's your sample size?

[RustyBrooks]

Also, if you are losing a lot of huge pots, you might be calling or betting/raising with a hand that should really be folded. There are even hands that are ahead on 5th that can't be profitably played multi-way, I think.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
* Multi-way hands are hard to play optimally

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been going over the HHs. I do adjust back for full tables, tight as far as starting hand choice, fast folds if it turns bad. I'm seeing 4th about 27% of the time as opposed to about 40% threeway. But I think what you said here might be the deal - now that I'm back playing micro, I just don't get playing a pot with three, four other players. Pretty sure this copy of SoP will assist there. I hope.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, if you are losing a lot of huge pots, you might be calling or betting/raising with a hand that should really be folded.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying I never do this, I tilt just like anybody. I did the other day when the lowest thing showing besides my 8 was two tens, my 8 was good, too, 368. Both tens called and I blew up and called all the way to sixth, I couldn't believe they both stayed in after 4th when I caught and they bricked....it was stupid. I lost and deserved to.

But most of these are the kinds of pots you lose at the bottom, suck outs. I dunno - I'm thinking now maybe it's just I forgot how extreme the variance is at micro.

And my sample size it pretty small, only four/five weeks of play at Razz.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Shorthanded games tend to favor looser, more aggressive play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup, that's me all over. I do get a lot tighter at full tables, like I was saying, but I'm wondering at a full table if some check/calling might be in order. I was just looking back at my HHs, I seem to win most of my pots on 4th or 5th and lose half my pots at showdown. Last night I played a Razz tourny - I won every showdown but two. So, wtf?

You know what else I noticed? At PStars if you play a Razz tourny, you are playing with the same people you play ring games with. On Full Tilt, in the whole tourny, I played with one guy I saw at cash games.

[RustyBrooks]

What I was saying about folding hands that are ahead has to do with the fact that your opponents, individually, do not have a chance against your hand, but collectively they do, ESPECIALLY if a lot of bets go in on early streets. The reason for this is twofold:
* collectively they may have so many outs against you that you are not a favorite to still be ahead on the end. In situations like this you at the very least want to avoid putting in money on early streets when your opponents are not like to fold (because bet size is small on 4th, plus you "don't even have a hand yet").
* a group of bad players calling together can actually inflate the pot enough to make their bad play correct - Sklansky calls this "schooling". I don't remember if he talks about this in his book "Theory of Poker" or not, but he definitely talks about times where you should be willing to take a risk and let your opponents draw for free if it could set up a more advantageous situation later - on a later street you have a chance to make them call a big bet into a smaller pot, plus you might get a chance to check-raise in position to a better and make people call 2 bets instead of one (that is your check on 4th might be able to induce a bet from a weaker hand in the right position for you on 5th). If your hand deteriorates, then you can now exit the hand gracefully with minimal losses, where if you went nuts on 4th because there were 2 people drawing to Q high, the pot would now be large enough that you'd have to call down.

Anyway, my Sklansky on Poker is on the way too so I still need to read that. The Theory of Poker is a terrific book to read though and has tons of great advice in it. My poker game got a lot better after reading it. I still quite often carry it around and read little bits here and there (the chapters are short and to the point, I sometimes open at random and read bits for a refresher). You may be able to find a copy in a used bookstore (I did) but even if you can't it's worth it.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, my Sklansky on Poker is on the way too so I still need to read that. The Theory of Poker is a terrific book to read though and has tons of great advice in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, I read both these books, and a ton of others when I started playing, (NLHE) but I had them from the library and SoP didn't have Razz, I guess. I might not have read it anyway back then.

I'm glad you're getting it, maybe we can discuss the concepts some as applied to Razz specifically. I know there is something coming up on how multiway pots are idiosyncratic in some way, I just haven't gotten there yet.

I also looked at the hands again and came to this conclusion which relates some to what you wrote: I am in too many hands because my hand is good. When the whole table is showing 8 or better in the door I say to myself, "well, someone has to win....." and then I'm gambling my money away.

Have you ever heard the saying: "Patience is genius?" I may have it inscribed above my screen.