Define "Average" 2+2'er..... further to SlickPoppa's poll

[adamstewart]

Furher to SlickPoppa's poll, please fill in the blank by answering the follwing question:

Note: Let's restrict this to those who are actually *regular* posters - any forum - not just anyone who has ever registered here.

Also note that this poll strictly applies to limit Hold'em.

[sfer]

Me.

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
Me.

[/ QUOTE ]


hmm... i think most would put you at above average.


Adam

[La Brujita]

My two cents: if you think the "average" twoplustwoer crushes the 3-6 for 2+bb you are crazy.

Edit to say not directed at Adam, but rather at responders.

Also, whoever said 15-30, pass the pipe.

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
Define "Average" 2+2'er..... further to SlickPoppa's poll [ QUOTE ]
Me.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absurd. And it's not close.

[bicyclekick]

probably somewhere between .5/1 and 2/4...but not 1/2.

The average 2+2er can't beat 2/4 for 2bb/100, yet can beat the .5/1 for better than that I would guess.

[La Brujita]

I voted 1-2 btw but I think I agree with bk, better than .5-1 but not quite 1-2.

For those who haven't play a lot of limit he, 2bb is an excellent win rate at any level.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Define "Average" 2+2'er..... further to SlickPoppa's poll [ QUOTE ]
Me.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

This is absurd. And it's not close.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not. I just happen to post more. I can name 20 without hesitation and 50 with minimal thought--all much better than me.

[BottlesOf]

That may be, but there are more than 100 members of this forum.

[bicyclekick]

Since I'm a bad reader it's closer to 2bb/100 at 2/4 than I originally stated. I still dont think it's quite it, but not toooo far off.

[adamstewart]

honestly,

who put 15/30?

Don't be an idiot.

And if you were serious: First of all, back up your rationale. Secondly, you're wrong.


Adam

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
That may be, but there are more than 100 members of this forum.

[/ QUOTE ]

I pretty much thoughtlessly name 50 better players which implies that there are more that don't come to mind immediately. There are maybe 200-250 posters in the limit HE forums.

[Equal]

[ QUOTE ]
honestly,

who put 15/30?

Don't be an idiot.

And if you were serious: First of all, back up your rationale. Secondly, you're wrong.


Adam

[/ QUOTE ]

Third, it was obviously someone dicking around.

[La Brujita]

There are also plenty of regular posters on the internet, OOT forums, 1 table forums etc.

The poll as I read it is not for regular posters on the three main limit forums.

[skoal2k4]

[ QUOTE ]

And if you were serious: First of all, back up your rationale. Secondly, you're wrong.


[/ QUOTE ]

rofl... nice

I put 2/4

[BottlesOf]

That seems too many to me. Significantly too many. Regardless, there are are way more than 500 members.

[geormiet]

Isn't the rake at .5/1 too high to beat it for very much at all?

just imagining a 100/200 game with a $50 - $100 drop...

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't the rake at .5/1 too high to beat it for very much at all?

just imagining a 100/200 game with a $50 - $100 drop...

[/ QUOTE ]

No. The play at that level is horrid. I would not be surpised to hear that it could be consistently beaten for 4+ BB/100. I havn't played there for awhile, but I remember 9 way capped flops pre-flop, etc.

[goodguy_1]

$1-2

I doubt the average 2+2'er can beat more than $1-2 for 2.00+bb/100.

[maldini]

[ QUOTE ]
$1-2

I doubt the average 2+2'er can beat more than $1-2 for 2.00+bb/100.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow. i dont even play limit HE. im a SSNL player. im guessing i could do this with no thought whatsoever...and i dont even no the game.

anyone wanna give me odds on a small bet? i literally have never sat at a limit table.

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
$1-2

I doubt the average 2+2'er can beat more than $1-2 for 2.00+bb/100.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow. i dont even play limit HE. im a SSNL player. im guessing i could do this with no thought whatsoever...and i dont even no the game.

anyone wanna give me odds on a small bet? i literally have never sat at a limit table.

[/ QUOTE ]


this is very tempting...


Adam


FWIW, there is no way I would think that I could sit down right now and beat the NL 50-100 games for any substantial amount.

[The_Bends]

Going from NL to limit without previous experience is a nightmare, you'd take a while to adjust. I do think this would be an interesting experiement though.

[chief444]

I think one could make an argument that 5/10 SH on party is beatable for more than 3/6. Although the average poster probably struggles in short handed games.

I choose 2/4 though. But who knows. I think I'm around average so maybe 3/6. Probably less though. But then if Sfer is below average I should probably just give up poker.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't the rake at .5/1 too high to beat it for very much at all?

just imagining a 100/200 game with a $50 - $100 drop...

[/ QUOTE ]

No. The play at that level is horrid. I would not be surpised to hear that it could be consistently beaten for 4+ BB/100. I havn't played there for awhile, but I remember 9 way capped flops pre-flop, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would be surprised if there are very many players beating .5/1.00 for 4 BB/100 over any significant amount of hands although surely it can be done. [For the record I've been playing a lot of .5/1.00 to clear bonus's after work and my win rate is incredibly anemic--I'm hoping its because I'm typically playing while tired and under less than ideal circumstances rather than that my game has deteriated since I became a 3/6 player].

One player posted his screen shots of 180,000 hands of .5/1.00 at 4.8 BB/100 which, while it begs the question of why he's not moving up, is still an incredibly impressive thing. Anybody remember who that was?

--Zetack

[poker-penguin]

[ QUOTE ]
probably somewhere between .5/1 and 2/4...but not 1/2.

The average 2+2er can't beat 2/4 for 2bb/100, yet can beat the .5/1 for better than that I would guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really?

I consider myself a below average 2+2er, and I can beat 2/4 for I'd say at least 3BB/100 (current rate 5.4 but only 20K hands I think - it has included some -50BB downswings though).

[bottomset]

[ QUOTE ]
I would be surprised if there are very many players beating .5/1.00 for 4 BB/100 over any significant amount of hands

[/ QUOTE ]

mainly because they move up

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
current rate 5.4 (BB/100)

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif


[ QUOTE ]
it has included some -50BB downswings though

[/ QUOTE ]


/images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif





....must....refrain......from.....being....cruel.. .


Adam

[twowords]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
current rate 5.4 (BB/100)

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
it has included some -50BB downswings though

[/ QUOTE ]


....must....refrain......from.....being....cruel.. .



[/ QUOTE ]

Setting people straight could be helpful ya know, not cruel. With 20k, don't count on being above 3BB/100......or 2BB/100......etc. You are "due" for a downswing, hehe.

[poker-penguin]

Oh yeah, I know, "50BB is nothing" "I wipe my ass with 50BB", "this one time at poker camp..." :P

But seriously, I probably am "due" (not that there's any such thing, except in people's heads) for a downswing. It'll happen.

20K hands *in poker tracker* probably another 20K that are on non tracker sites (where I bleieve do better, in general because opposition is weaker but selective memory is a wonderful thing).

But, anyway, I've just decided to guesstimate that I am 2 or 3 BB / 100 better than the games I play in. As more evidence comes in, I will revise this expectation. Since my main evidence is that my opponents make many more mistakes than I do.

Ahh screw it.

I sounded like a dick, and probably still do.