Absolute Regulars Thread

[TheHip41]

[ QUOTE ]
Heartpunch is a total nit. He abandoned our table at the rio when it was perfectly good. Only 5 of the 6 people there were AP regulars and/or props.

I found a video that pans over the table we were sitting at the wsop though... pretty cool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2b1D5w82yU

[/ QUOTE ]


ILP likes 80's music. I bet he can sing along to this one [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ILOVEPOKER929]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heartpunch is a total nit. He abandoned our table at the rio when it was perfectly good. Only 5 of the 6 people there were AP regulars and/or props.

I found a video that pans over the table we were sitting at the wsop though... pretty cool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2b1D5w82yU

[/ QUOTE ]


ILP likes 80's music. I bet he can sing along to this one [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I have already said in another thead that is one of the greatest songs of all time. I dont think that point is debatable. The 80's was the best decade of music, which is also not debatable.

[TheHip41]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heartpunch is a total nit. He abandoned our table at the rio when it was perfectly good. Only 5 of the 6 people there were AP regulars and/or props.

I found a video that pans over the table we were sitting at the wsop though... pretty cool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2b1D5w82yU

[/ QUOTE ]


ILP likes 80's music. I bet he can sing along to this one [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I have already said in another thead that is one of the greatest songs of all time. I dont think that point is debatable. The 80's was the best decade of music, which is also not debatable.

[/ QUOTE ]

but you like ***k, so that doesn't make RA a good singer, or that song a good song. it just means you like it.

[Absolution]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The 45/30 will screw me in the long run, but just burn their money against fishy calling stations.


[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldnt be too sure of this. First, there is a huge difference between various LAGs, some are good and some are just terrible.

By the looks of Schneids video I wouldnt be surprised if he was running at at least 40/30 even 5-6 handed.

It is not entirely impossible for the 45/30 guy to adapt to calling stations and still make a profit from TAGs by out manouvering them postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]


i don't like 45/30s either. For example, I have limited experience playing against Spider at 5-10, 10-20, and 15-30

He has some insane looking PF stats, but he seems to be winning. I could be way off, but I know I won't actively seek out him to sit by him.

I like my VPIP of 60 to have a PFR of like 7

[/ QUOTE ]

Intuitively, it seems that at 45 VPIP could never make a profit in the long run even if they are playing well post-flop, but I could be wrong. It just seems that they can't make up that pre-flop spew post-flop, unless this really affects their Shania against bad TAGs. If I have position on a 45/30, I don't see him/her winning against me in the long run, even if they are better post. Someone said that the calling fish would own them in the long run and I tend to agree since they may be playing close to optimal. A 35/25 type player however could be dangerous if they are good and I would avoid them.

Given the choice of fish, I would of course choose the loose passive over the loose aggressive, but I don't think one is more profitable over the other on a pure theory level. The LAG is just higher variance and more tilt inducing.

Anybody with a VPIP over 50 is gold though, no matter the PFR. Anybody with a VPIP under 20 is just taking up space and I don't mind them at my table.

[WillyT]

I'm not going to comment too much, but I will point out to you that if everyone at table is 100 vpip then the best player is still going to get the money. It's not IMPOSSIBLE to win with any particular style. It is impossible to win (long term) vs. a particular opponent sent with some particular style.

It's all relative...every time you fold you're forfeiting your equity in the pot. Every time you bluff and they fold you win big. Every time you bluff and get called you add value to your good hands. There is likely quite a bit of value to being in a lot of pots even when the other players are very good. There is certainly a ton of value in in when your opponents fold to much.

I'm half asleep and hope there is at least something that makes sense here.

[swollyourroll]

Please reveal your AP screen name TheHip41

[TheHip41]

[ QUOTE ]
Please reveal your AP screen name TheHip41

[/ QUOTE ]


i already have, it's in this thread.
what's yours? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Palomino]

[ QUOTE ]
anyone find decent winners in their db at the 2/4 or 3/6 level? Like I said it was somewhat of a shock the amt of players with neg WR with decent stats otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just looked at my DB and there are very few winners among the better players on AP over several thousand hands. Obviously sample size is a big determinate here. Or else they just lose because I'm at the table taking their money. lol, I wish that were the reason [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[sqvirrel]

[ QUOTE ]
I just looked at my DB and there are very few winners among the better players on AP over several thousand hands. Obviously sample size is a big determinate here. Or else they just lose because I'm at the table taking their money. lol, I wish that were the reason


[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. I notice from HUD that there are very few winners and almost none who have won more than about 50BB. As with you, sample size is an issue in some cases.

[Palomino]

The rake is so brutal at these limits. I think it is hard for even the best players to have a sustainable good BB/100. Not sure if this is a valid way to look at rake BB/100, but I looked in the summary tab of PT and looked at the overall BB/100 for all players. To me this would seem to be the amount of $$ the house has taken. Well, using this method I get 3.23 BB/100 at 3/6 and 2.87 BB/100 at 5/10. That's pretty tough to overcome.