03-06-2002, 05:00 AM
There are 2 home games I routinely frequent that I am going to ask about in
particular. Where I am located, there are no poker rooms/casinos. The only
poker games that are floating around are private ones.
While I no longer question my ability to beat these games, I just wonder
really how good this is.
While I go to many games, I have some questions about my results in these 2
examples in particular.
One game is played Hold'em, and alternating rounds of Omaha eight or better.
The betting structure is $5-$10-$15-$15. With $3 and $5 blinds.
Rake is $1 dollar on $20 to a max of $5 on a $100 pot.
My results over the last few months.......219.5 hrs played....total...
+1764
The second game is played Hold'em hi and hi-lo and also Omaha hi and 8 or
better.
The betting structure is $10-$20. With $5 and $10 blinds.
Rake is $1 on $20 to a max of $5 on a $100 pot.
My results over the last few months......216.5 hrs
played...total...+2548
I have always been an overall winner in these games. I just have wondered
exactly what the "experts" of 2+2 think.
Something else of note......I had never played much if any Hold'em or Omaha
until about 3 years ago as I always considered myself more proficient at stud.
Someone please give me some insight as to how this stacks up against normal
rakes and time charges. And pull no punches please. Also, how would my play
measure up against most average to decent players? I know this really isn't a
very large sample in the scheme of things, its just the most recent data I
could find. I also attribute the better win rate in the $10-$20 game to what is
probably a slightly softer lineup. I also seem to remember winning a little more at both of these games before but perhaps I'm running a little bad.lol
Thanks for the help and comments..........
particular. Where I am located, there are no poker rooms/casinos. The only
poker games that are floating around are private ones.
While I no longer question my ability to beat these games, I just wonder
really how good this is.
While I go to many games, I have some questions about my results in these 2
examples in particular.
One game is played Hold'em, and alternating rounds of Omaha eight or better.
The betting structure is $5-$10-$15-$15. With $3 and $5 blinds.
Rake is $1 dollar on $20 to a max of $5 on a $100 pot.
My results over the last few months.......219.5 hrs played....total...
+1764
The second game is played Hold'em hi and hi-lo and also Omaha hi and 8 or
better.
The betting structure is $10-$20. With $5 and $10 blinds.
Rake is $1 on $20 to a max of $5 on a $100 pot.
My results over the last few months......216.5 hrs
played...total...+2548
I have always been an overall winner in these games. I just have wondered
exactly what the "experts" of 2+2 think.
Something else of note......I had never played much if any Hold'em or Omaha
until about 3 years ago as I always considered myself more proficient at stud.
Someone please give me some insight as to how this stacks up against normal
rakes and time charges. And pull no punches please. Also, how would my play
measure up against most average to decent players? I know this really isn't a
very large sample in the scheme of things, its just the most recent data I
could find. I also attribute the better win rate in the $10-$20 game to what is
probably a slightly softer lineup. I also seem to remember winning a little more at both of these games before but perhaps I'm running a little bad.lol
Thanks for the help and comments..........