Question for the online elves

[SA125]

Lots of posters here swear by online play. Where's there's smoke there's usually fire, so I figure the masses must be right.

I'd like to hear the opinion of what you think these stats and results say. I think they're contradictory, but I haven't played 20,000 hands like most of you. Only 3000.

I wanted to ease my way in, started with $300 and played a total of 8 sessions.
3-6 won $150
5-10 won $300
5-10 lost $350
5-10 lost $400

In B&M I get on the layup line at 5-10 and go to 10-20 when the horn sounds. I can't remember the last time I was taken down to the felt twice in such a short time, let alone back to back. Lost yeah. Lost every buy-in? Got to get used to online.

5-10 lost $300
5-10 lost $300
3-6 lost $300
3-6 lost $300

No, I don't have trust fund.

I e-mail them and say I stopped going broke at 5-10 a long time ago, let alone 3-6. You've screwed me for the last time.

They respond with these stats. Over the last 2000 hands I saw the flop 265 from the blind and 288 other for 553 flops seen out of 2000. That's 27%. I won 89 out of 197 showdowns, 45%, and 95 without one.

That's 184 pots won out of 553 flops seen for 33%. It looks like I'm seeing less than 1/3 of the flops, inlcuding the blinds, and winning 1/3 of the flops I see. Where is the recipe in there for going broke?

For the elves, here's the best part and believe me it's true. After corresponding with their guy twice, but before getting the stats, I knew I couldn't quit on a loss and played again last night and this morning.

Last night won $150 in 2 hours at 3-6.
This morning won $65 in 1 hour at 5-10.

God's honest truth. God's..honest..truth. Pass the tin foil.

BTW - Here's a sampling of my play from this morning, 5-10. Maybe 1 or 2 loops so far, no real read and I open raise UTG+1 with AKo. MP 3 bets and SB calls.
Flop A99 two tone
ch, ch (I know, looking to c/r may be bad, etc) MP bets and SB c/r!! HELLO. My thought process in a nutshell is some good can probably happen and maybe a lot more bad. I wither away meekly and FOLD.
MP calls. Turn and river xx. SB shows AQ and MP AK. So tight I missed a split. Big sh*t. It could'a been worse.

I was impressed with that SB move but didn't want to get caught in the cross fire with a paired board, draw out there and all cards in the zone. Shoot me.

[CrackerZack]

When you finally figure out that most online players are completely nuts, maybe you'll do better. Then again, maybe highly aggressive to stupidly aggressive games and players don't fit with your natural style and you can't win in those games. If so, play lower online or play elsewhere. I suggest True Poker. In highly aggressive games, going to the felt quickly isn't real hard if you're running bad. Especially when you take a beat and get that tilt twinge. Your sample size is waaaaaaay to small to tell anything. Astroglide probably has 9 million hands online, maybe he can give stats about how frequently he gets hand XX, flops sets, draws, etc.

[Ulysses]

Sounds like you're not very good at online poker.

[Rushmore]

1-800-GAMBLER.

"Couldn't quit on a loss," indeed.

[SoBeDude]

Hi SA,

Stats can't tell the whole picture, and they can be deceiving.

If you're losing huge pots and winning small ones, your stats could completely hide this fact.

There have been huge winning nights where I'm only winning 4-5% of my hands, and losing nights when I'm winning 12% of my hands (although this is not the norm).

Are you ramming and jamming with the second best hand frequently? are you paying off too many turn check-raises and raises with just a pair?

You need to evaluate your actual hands played and find your leaks.

Remember that due to the increased rate of play, leaks become more noticeable online in a hurry.

Best of luck!

-Scott

[Ulysses]

Upon further reflection, I've decided that you rule at poker and online poker is rigged.

[Duke]

A few thoughts.

1. Your results say nothing about your play, other than that you're playing far too many hands.

2. You're weak-loose.

3. Your swings aren't extreme either way given your sample size.

4. I think the main problem is that you're playing more hands than you're used to in casinos so your weaknesses are showing more quickly.

Advice? Tighten up. A lot. Don't dump AK because a guy raised on an A99 flop.

~D

[rory]

27% of your hands is too much for a full ring game. Get it down to at least 18%.

[wateronrock]

I'd start with seeing the flop 27% of the time. I probably see 14%-17% of the flops at 15$-30$. You better be a talented player if you plan on playing that many hands... not many are.

[turnipmonster]

[ QUOTE ]
27% of your hands is too much for a full ring game. Get it down to at least 18%.

[/ QUOTE ]

really? I'm generally always right around 20% or so, and I feel like I play pretty tight.

--turnipmonster

[turnipmonster]

seeing 1/3 of all flops sounds like a great way to get broke. when you're not winning a lot of showdowns, it makes me wonder if you're paying off too much with a second best hand. at any rate, sounds like you need to find some leaks. remember that in games like the 3/6 everyone is a calling station, so betting nut no pair into 5 players who call you down with any pair is not a recipe for success.

[SA125]

Thanks for all the responses.

Online poker. I'm terrible. Talk about a rude awakening.

I know with so many people playing and winning it must be beatable. I joke but I'm really not too big on the blame game.

Even though I was usually tightest guy there, I thought I still might be playing too many hands.

In B&M your only real stat is your stack and mine goes up and down but rarely disappears.

I thought the hand was were I'd really get killed though. That's why I put it out there. My ch wasn't terrible. It was TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE AND TERRIBLE. Trying to be too cute.

I thought that was a classic example of how going for c/r as the open raiser with a strong hand in a raised, shorthanded pot just gives the reins over to whoever wants them.

The SB should have been looking at 2 bets instead of making it 2. Either that, or MP should have been looking at my cap.

Oh well, that's why I usually get on the lay-up line first. Shake the cobwebs. Learn from the mistakes.

1-800-Gamblor? Trust me, I'm no GA. Obssessive, a little. Addictive, no. Many years of mouths to feed and still feeding. Online poker? Same game, different game obviously. I cashed out. Thanks for the tips.

[SA125]

"seeing 1/3 of all flops sounds like a great way to get broke"

13% of the flops seen came from the blinds, 14% from other, so that 27% - 1/3 figure is misleading.

There's no defense for such poor results, but trust me, I saw many flops from BB as ch's or completed SB's in unraised pots with decent hands. Good advice though.

[CrackerZack]

I know this reply wasn't meant for me, but holy crap is that tight. I hope you aren't including the blinds.

[DeucesUp]

Yes, a lot of people are beating the online games, but don't get the impression that it is trivial to do. I think most people accept that in general online games are much tougher than B&M games at the same limit. Yes, there are a lot of crazies on these tables, but a good fraction of the people you're playing against on the 3-6 and 5-10 tables online are semi-pro grinders who play up to 6 or even more tables simultaneously with an extremely tight, very aggressive style. These same players would be playing much higher in live games, but by virtue of being able to play multiple tables can make a good win rate at low stakes tables. If you go down to the 0.50/1 and 1/2 tables, most of these good players disappear, and you'll probably have more success.

[Inthacup]

Unless the 15-30 games is really loose passive, his numbers seem in line with mine, including the blinds.


Cup

[SA125]

A friend of mine asked me why I would put out something that would invite an avalanche of criticism and make me look bad. Simple. To get good responses. Like the one here from Dueces about how different the caliber of opponent might be at the same stakes in B&M's. The best lessons are learned from your mistakes.

Bill Parcells always says that when you compete, in the end, you'll be judged by your record. That's true in poker also.

I think we sit at one of 4 seats in poker and should take a realistic look at which one we sit at -

Seat 1 always loses and, unless you play with monopoly money, you should stop. It'll just get worse.

Seat 2 isn't that bad and it's close, but seems to lose more often than he wins. He should study the game more. He'd probably end up in seat 3.

Seat 3 is pretty good and consistently wins more often than he loses. He should keep reading and working at his game and might end up in seat 4 someday.

Seat 4 is smiling. He's in a small group of excellent players and life is good.

Alan Schoonmaker said that most poker players view themselves like most drivers. Equal or better than the other guy.

Ask the average guy walking into a casino if he plays as good as everyone else and he'll probably say yeah. Ask him who he could beat up in the casino and he'll probably take a quick look around and give a realistic answer of "probably somewhere around half, give or take a few each way."

I've been in seat 3 a few years now and took up the same fight in a different arena. I found myself in Seat 1 and was smart enough to stay on the stool after the 8th round.

Maybe some other guys in this forum who have had the same success and failure, and there have been a few crys for help here, maybe shouldn't keep answering the bell. It's not the same fight.

[Rushmore]

[Ulysses]

Good post. Maybe you would have gotten different responses had it not been for your recent series of messages about online poker being fixed (which you hint at in this thread).

It's not. Lots of people win. Everyone I know who I consider to be a good player wins online. If you want to play online, start playing lower stakes. Post in Micro-Limit or Small Stakes. Figure out how to beat the game. Then move up. Good luck.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone I know who I consider to be a good player wins online.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some people that I consider to be poor players win consistently online.

~D