For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

Is it as bad as it looks? I just started watching it recently and I basically see the same 10 people every day, all day. These people have some stamina. I assume that almost of them are quite solid to be surviving, and some I know from having played with in the Stars game and at UB.

So the question is, is there any money to be made in this game, even 1BB/100? I'm kind of surprised I'm not seeing more short buy-ins taking "shots" or donking off the rest of their bankroll, but hardly anyone ever seems to get up from the game, so maybe that is why.

Is this game crap, or have I been watching too small a sample?

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

why not just datamine it?

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

too small of a sample.

That and when you get to the higher limits there are players with solid appearing stats who make lots of boneheaded plays. You have to start paying attention to how people play instead of looking at numbers.

And also a lot of the regulars really aren't that great.

1bb/100 is a good target.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

Do you think there is much difference between the 50 and 100 game BK?

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think there is much difference between the 50 and 100 game BK?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't really played the 50 all that much, but yeah i think the 100 is tougher.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

From what I've seen, the 50 looks more filled with donks, basically your typical 30 table. Too bad they have dropped it to one table as this game has been motivation to join Party.

The 100, again only from what I've seen, looks like the same 10-15 players going 24/7. I think a good number of these guys are quite solid which is why I was interested in the opinion of those with some time under their belt in that game.

Nigel

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
too small of a sample.

That and when you get to the higher limits there are players with solid appearing stats who make lots of boneheaded plays. You have to start paying attention to how people play instead of looking at numbers.

And also a lot of the regulars really aren't that great.

1bb/100 is a good target.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks BK.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

I do not consider myself very experienced in this game..few thousand hands. But, BK is right, on average it's tougher than the 50. A few regulars numbers may look good but they don't play very well. The game can be very soft at times.

Donny

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
1bb/100 is a good target.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if someone is making 3bb/100 in the 10/20 6-max game, it's not really that worthwhile to move up?

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1bb/100 is a good target.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if someone is making 3bb/100 in the 10/20 6-max game, it's not really that worthwhile to move up?

[/ QUOTE ]

$200/100 > $60/100

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1bb/100 is a good target.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if someone is making 3bb/100 in the 10/20 6-max game, it's not really that worthwhile to move up?

[/ QUOTE ]

How did you arrive at that?

3bb/100 at 10/20 is somewhere around 60 per hour per table.

1bb/100 at 100/200 is somewhere around 180 per hour per table. that's 3 times more. Also playing higher will make you a much better player.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

I'm nowhere near a 100/200 player, but I've been watching the game lately, mostly to work on my hand reading and trying to watch more TAG play, both to reconsider whether some of my plays are not optimal and to figure out how other TAGs think.

Anyway, the game certainly looks tough and I'd have a hard time staying afloat even if I had the bankroll to play the game. But there were a lot of questionable plays and some boneheaded plays (perhaps these were for shania, what do I know). There was one player who seemed out of their league, playing too passively and pretty easy to read (even for me!).

I've kind of been thinking of posting some of the hands I found most interesting and seeing if we could discuss them. But I am not sure how much of the story we are missing given that these people have huge databases of stats versus one another.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

you can only play 2 100/200 tables at a time so you make 360 per hour.

4tables of 10/20 yields 240. 6 yeilds 360 and 8 yeilds 480.

so, yes, in extreme situations the 2 can be comparable.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
you can only play 2 100/200 tables at a time so you make 360 per hour.

4tables of 10/20 yields 240. 6 yeilds 360 and 8 yeilds 480.

so, yes, in extreme situations the 2 can be comparable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who says you can't add another 4-6 20/40 short handed tables on top of your 100/200? Or play the high games on other sites. I mean seriously. I don't want to sound like a dick but cmon now, this isn't something I should have to explain.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

so youre sayin you can make more money playin other games than 10/20 short. amazing and profound. thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
Who says you can't add another 4-6 20/40 short handed tables on top of your 100/200? Or play the high games on other sites.

[/ QUOTE ]

the original poster that posited that you can make similar figures at 10/20 as 100/200.

your post was clearly incomplete and did not compare correctly.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't want to sound like a dick but cmon now, this isn't something I should have to explain.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you didnt want to sound like a dick maybe you should have left this part out.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
3bb/100 at 10/20 is somewhere around 60 per hour per table.

1bb/100 at 100/200 is somewhere around 180 per hour per table. that's 3 times more. Also playing higher will make you a much better player.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is another reason to consider and it's very important. Playing with thin EV of 1bb/100 means that you will face way higher swings during your game.

And you also must play WAY more hands to be confident you're at least positive player.

As there are not that much high games running in Internet and they need more attention then routine 30/60- playing (agreed?) - such games become dangerous at least in terms of long run profitability.

As full-time pro I really can't afford myself routinely playing higher limits and it's not because i haven't enough money - this is because i _need to be sure_ shortly that im positive player and making money on this current level. And as time needed to know it at say 100/200 is way longer then at 30/60 or lower. So i don't like to try them until they become _popular_ over Internet and there will be at least 10 tables running in peak hours.


For myself i have another rule which means - if your EV is lesser than 1.5bb/100 after 50K hands than you should either reconsider your play seeking places to improve or quit this game for a lower game (in case you need money for a living from poker).


That doesn't mean i vote for everybody not to play high online games, just make sure you prepare for big and what is more important _long_ swings even if you almost sure you beat this game at 1bb/100.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]

your post was clearly incomplete and did not compare correctly.


[/ QUOTE ]

My post was only incomplete if you're a moron who can't figure the most simple things out. You would think in a mid-high stakes forum people would have the intelligence to infer you can play other games. And the original poster wasn't even close. He said 60/100 is equal to ~200/100 I don't know where you people come up with this stuff.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

I agree with you and that's part of the reason I took 3 weeks off from higher stakes.

It was probably the best thing I've ever done. I've since had a 250bb downswing and totally didn't care, felt great and pulled myself right out of it.

It will give you higher variance, but it will also make you a better player since you have to play so many hands vs other tough opponents.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
My post was only incomplete if you're a moron who can't figure the most simple things out. You would think in a mid-high stakes forum people would have the intelligence to infer you can play other games.

[/ QUOTE ]

man [censored] you. ive done my best to contribute correct poker advice ever since ive been here. i have asked at least somewhat interesting questions and dont clog the place with garbage. i am nearly never arrogant nor do i belligerently continue to push my point of view when wrong (i am not sayin you do either.)

there is absolutey no reason to attack me and for you to actually call me a moron is totally unacceptable. you are a respected poster and you should act as such.

save your flames for txman.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

i was just comparing the 2 games in terms of HOURLY earn. they are close in this respect if you are a freak who can 6-8 table at 3/100. i never implied or suggested that one was better (for someone as a player) than the other.

i am done with you and this thread.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
i am done with you and this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

aight me too.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

sry for bein a dick. beer wasn't helping. my bad.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

its cool. i was out of line as well.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think there is much difference between the 50 and 100 game BK?

[/ QUOTE ]the 1/2 is significantly tougher.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

Sorry for causing such mess. I was comparing the 10/20 to 30/60, obviously I forgot that the thread was about 1/2 but what the heck... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

here: (Actual stats

Random guy
21,224 hands
VP$IP: 31.18
PFR: 19
BB/100: 2.90
Sessions: 126 (seems like he's playing short-handed alot)
Winnings: $120K+

This guy is the biggest winner on my datamine of 100/200.
There are people with winrates of 5-6 BB/100 over 6-8K hands though, so yes 1BB/100 is quite possible.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

here: (Actual stats

Random guy
21,224 hands
VP$IP: 31.18
PFR: 19
BB/100: 2.90
Sessions: 126 (seems like he's playing short-handed alot)
Winnings: $120K+

This guy is the biggest winner on my datamine of 100/200.
There are people with winrates of 5-6 BB/100 over 6-8K hands though, so yes 1BB/100 is quite possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why you think the data you have presented says anything about what win rates are quite possible.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
its cool. i was out of line as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

awkward hugs?

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

here: (Actual stats

Random guy
21,224 hands
VP$IP: 31.18
PFR: 19
BB/100: 2.90
Sessions: 126 (seems like he's playing short-handed alot)
Winnings: $120K+

This guy is the biggest winner on my datamine of 100/200.
There are people with winrates of 5-6 BB/100 over 6-8K hands though, so yes 1BB/100 is quite possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why you think the data you have presented says anything about what win rates are quite possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

21K hands with a 2.9BB/100 winrate seems like he is a winning player.

Here's his stats:

VP$IP From SB: 44.66
Folded SB to steal: 55.49
Fold BB to steal: 43.87
Attempt to steal blinds; 43.36
Won $ WSF% : 39.05
Went to SD%: 44.11
won $ at SD% : 51.38

AF:
Flop: 1.53
Turn: 1.32
River: 1.29

Folded to river bet: 31.89% (450/1411)
C/R: 619 times (3.15% of possible action)
Flop: 78.19
Turn: 17.29
River: 4.29

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

Your post is [censored] Great!

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

here: (Actual stats

Random guy
21,224 hands
VP$IP: 31.18
PFR: 19
BB/100: 2.90
Sessions: 126 (seems like he's playing short-handed alot)
Winnings: $120K+

This guy is the biggest winner on my datamine of 100/200.
There are people with winrates of 5-6 BB/100 over 6-8K hands though, so yes 1BB/100 is quite possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. I wouldn't think that game runs short very often being that there are only 2 tables with long lists to get on it.

His stats seem extra DERBish to me for full table play, making me just scratch my head. I assume he is just on a heater, as it's a pretty small sample size. Nevertheless, there are a lot of these DERB types surviving/winning so maybe I need to relearn poker. BTW, not trying to open that can of worms again, but just find it interesting.

Thanks for the post.

why so many 100/200 players from brooklyn?
 

Anyone know why there are so many players in the 100/200 game that are from brooklyn? Chances of collusion or teaming at pp?

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

here: (Actual stats

Random guy
21,224 hands
VP$IP: 31.18
PFR: 19
BB/100: 2.90
Sessions: 126 (seems like he's playing short-handed alot)
Winnings: $120K+

This guy is the biggest winner on my datamine of 100/200.
There are people with winrates of 5-6 BB/100 over 6-8K hands though, so yes 1BB/100 is quite possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. I wouldn't think that game runs short very often being that there are only 2 tables with long lists to get on it.

His stats seem extra DERBish to me for full table play, making me just scratch my head. I assume he is just on a heater, as it's a pretty small sample size. Nevertheless, there are a lot of these DERB types surviving/winning so maybe I need to relearn poker. BTW, not trying to open that can of worms again, but just find it interesting.

Thanks for the post.

[/ QUOTE ]

So how many hands does it take where you can say that you are a winning player. I mean, I know that 20K hands is like a drop in the lake/ocean when it comes to varience in Limit hold-em, but it should give you some clue on how well you play.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

here: (Actual stats

Random guy
21,224 hands
VP$IP: 31.18
PFR: 19
BB/100: 2.90
Sessions: 126 (seems like he's playing short-handed alot)
Winnings: $120K+

This guy is the biggest winner on my datamine of 100/200.
There are people with winrates of 5-6 BB/100 over 6-8K hands though, so yes 1BB/100 is quite possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. I wouldn't think that game runs short very often being that there are only 2 tables with long lists to get on it.

His stats seem extra DERBish to me for full table play, making me just scratch my head. I assume he is just on a heater, as it's a pretty small sample size. Nevertheless, there are a lot of these DERB types surviving/winning so maybe I need to relearn poker. BTW, not trying to open that can of worms again, but just find it interesting.

Thanks for the post.

[/ QUOTE ]

So how many hands does it take where you can say that you are a winning player. I mean, I know that 20K hands is like a drop in the lake/ocean when it comes to varience in Limit hold-em, but it should give you some clue on how well you play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you understand that you purposely picked someone out of the pool that was doing very well? The selection bias alone makes the data meaningless. If you don't know what selection bias is, you should read up.

Re: For those of you that play the Party 1/2 (low content)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

here: (Actual stats

Random guy
21,224 hands
VP$IP: 31.18
PFR: 19
BB/100: 2.90
Sessions: 126 (seems like he's playing short-handed alot)
Winnings: $120K+

This guy is the biggest winner on my datamine of 100/200.
There are people with winrates of 5-6 BB/100 over 6-8K hands though, so yes 1BB/100 is quite possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. I wouldn't think that game runs short very often being that there are only 2 tables with long lists to get on it.

His stats seem extra DERBish to me for full table play, making me just scratch my head. I assume he is just on a heater, as it's a pretty small sample size. Nevertheless, there are a lot of these DERB types surviving/winning so maybe I need to relearn poker. BTW, not trying to open that can of worms again, but just find it interesting.

Thanks for the post.

[/ QUOTE ]

So how many hands does it take where you can say that you are a winning player. I mean, I know that 20K hands is like a drop in the lake/ocean when it comes to varience in Limit hold-em, but it should give you some clue on how well you play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you understand that you purposely picked someone out of the pool that was doing very well? The selection bias alone makes the data meaningless. If you don't know what selection bias is, you should read up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I picked him because I have the most hands on him at the 1/2 game. I would have still picked him if his winrate was -BB/100.