Low limit beatable? or impossible! (short non-bump)

[sfer]

In the future posts like that need a single reply that says simply, "Yes." That's it.

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
In the future posts like that need a single reply that says simply, "Yes." That's it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So I guess you are filling in for bisonbison in his absence. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Chris Daddy Cool]

k

[Michael Davis]

Yes.

You are an effing moron who obviously can't play. I have been beating 0.50-1.00 for 82.8 bb/100 over the last 400,000 hands and if you can't beat the game it just means you suck. Or you don't have a pattern mapper.

-Michael

[pokerrookie]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes.

You are an effing moron who obviously can't play. I have been beating 0.50-1.00 for 82.8 bb/100 over the last 400,000 hands and if you can't beat the game it just means you suck. Or you don't have a pattern mapper.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

That is unsutainable in the long run. Come back when you have 4,000,000 hands.

[mistrpug]

I recommend the same thing for the online poker is rigged threads.

[2planka]

Lighten up, Francis. Mike was using what we call "sarcasm."

[madcaller]

I've got 10,000,000 hands logged on PS .05/.10 and so far my winrate is only 99.356BB/100 and std/100 is 0.0835BB/100.... I know its not the long run but I'm getting close

I know the $/hr isn't great but I normally play at 10 tables at a time. So I make it up in volume!!!!

[MRBAA]

I've found one low limit game I don't think was beatable: $1-3 spread stud with no ante and a $4 rake. That game no longer is spread at Foxwoods -- now it has a .50 rake and is very, very beatable.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
I've found one low limit game I don't think was beatable: $1-3 spread stud with no ante and a $4 rake. That game no longer is spread at Foxwoods -- now it has a .50 rake and is very, very beatable.

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you say a .50 rake?! That's insane. How can they possibly afford to spread that game? I've played the 1-3 and 1-5 stud games at fw and they get out approximately four hands per hour.

[MRBAA]

oops, my bad. I meant .50 ante. Rake is still up to $4.

[Danenania]

Where bison at?

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
oops, my bad. I meant .50 ante. Rake is still up to $4.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why would an ante make it more beatable? Everyone in that game is super-loose. All the ante does is make their play more correct. I think it was much more beatable with no ante because you could sit there and wait for a good hand and pay nothing, except for a $1 bring once in a while, and when you finally did get a good hand, you would be up against their terrible hands since they played anything. That's a profitable enough situation to cover the rake and the bring-in you pay once in a while. I would go so far as to say that it's likely that the game was beatable before and is now unbeatable.

[bernie]

How about just not answering the post? Remember back when you first got on the forum? How many posts we see like this. Put yourself in the newbies shoes. He hasn't gotten to the point yet of understanding that. A simple yes doesn't do much.

If you notice, this goes in cycles. All of us longtime posters have had to go through this. Which is why many times we don't answer those questions because there are 'newer' posters who aren't burned out on the same questions who will gladly take the time and answer them or point them in the right direction. It's part of the growing process of posting.

Longer-time-ago posters did it for us.

Remember where you were at one time.

Now if we can just get the beginner questions out of the mid stakes...

My, times have changed.

b

[Emmitt2222]

I still just like pointing him to the old JoeTall fish rant and leave it at that.