Foxwoods 10-20 vs. 20-40 - Page 2

BarronVangorToth · #11 09-19-2005, 06:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]

3-6 , 4-8 The players suck, while that can be good if there are only a few that suck playing at a table where they all suck is bad for a good player IMO (advanced skills are useless) and you can't beat the rake

[/ QUOTE ]

For purely financial reasons, I would rather play against 9 horrible players than 9 good ones or against a few good and mostly bad. More bad = more better. Why do you think the opposite is true?

As far as "beating the rake" goes, while the net amount is far from what one would require to make a living, myself, and a number of people that I know from those limits of yore, even when I was nowhere near as studied in the 2+2 doctrine as I am now, I still beat the low-limit games for 1+BB/hour on average.

I can only imagine what a SSH-wielding 2+2'er could do on one of these tables these days where veritable metric tons of players are flocking to the casinos eager to give up their money.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

PokerCad · #12 09-19-2005, 06:32 PM

I here what you are saying and do not totally dis agree but here is my take, no I would not rather play against 9 bad players if you are a premium card player my first choice is to play with 4 or 5 bad players as I believe this is more +ev in the long run I find variance to high with too many bad players. from a strictly financial standpoint though the amount of hands won at the higher limits is less due to playing with mostly better players your hourly rate is much higher because of the limit, I would much rather average 1BB/H at 20-40 than 3BB/h at 3-6. As far as rake, at a 3-6 with a $4 rake that equates to 125% of the BB, the same $4 rake at 24-40 equates to only 20% of the BB,i.e more starting money going to the players.

Although there is much soft money on the lower limits my BB per hour description is probably why most skilled 2+2ers do not play the lower limits

any thoughts?

Barry · #13 09-19-2005, 08:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure we've played together. You're the one that made fun of my mother, I believe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that I have ever made fun of anyone's mother at the table. Well, unless she was at the table... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
I here what you are saying and do not totally dis agree but here is my take, no I would not rather play against 9 bad players if you are a premium card player my first choice is to play with 4 or 5 bad players as I believe this is more +ev in the long run I find variance to high with too many bad players.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have much to learn young Padawan.

[ QUOTE ]
Although there is much soft money on the lower limits my BB per hour description is probably why most skilled 2+2ers do not play the lower limits

[/ QUOTE ]

We all played there on our way up but as we could beat each game and our skills and bankroll improved we moved up. Not because the bad players are always sucking out on us. But if any decent player who plays higher goes and plays well in the 4/8 (not donking around like we sometimes do) they will have a much higher expectation in terms of BB/HR then at the higher limits.

BarronVangorToth · #14 09-19-2005, 08:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Although there is much soft money on the lower limits my BB per hour description is probably why most skilled 2+2ers do not play the lower limits

any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

The rake is obviously a more significant reality of the smaller limits than the higher ones BUT the competition is such that I think that if you took someone who is a winner of X BB at a higher limit they would win X+ BB at that lower limit, despite the rake being more.

My point was simply noting that you CAN beat the rake ... but, no, not as much as you can beat the rake at a higher limit ... that is, IF you took the same low-limit competition and moved them to the higher-low-limit games.

But is that theoretical world reality...? No.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

PokerCad · #15 09-20-2005, 10:57 AM

Yes, I have much to learn, tis why I surf these posts to gain to suck the wealth of knowledge from all of the expert players who post on 2+2http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/images/icons/smile.gif
smileand I agree with what you say however does the higher expectation equate to higher earnings? and in all honesty I am still trying to figure this out. I do think playing the higher limits increases my desire to become a better player tough I have a long way to go.

Barry · #16 09-20-2005, 11:50 AM

I'm not entirely sure that I understood you here. But at any rate the expectation in terms of BB/Hr in the 20 game is going to be less than at the 10 game. However, if you play well it isn't going to be 1/2 as much, so your actual earn in terms of $$ should be higher.

Again you haven't talked about your bankroll, but 1 day when your feeling rested and ready to play your A game, sit in the 20 game for a couple of hours and see how you feel about it.

I tried seachring for for the post that I made a while back on my 1st foray from 10/20 to 20/40, but for some reason the search function doesn't find it.

Anyway my conclusion at the end on the post was "There are still plenty of fish in the 20 game, but there are also more sharks feeding off of them."

PokerCad · #17 09-20-2005, 12:21 PM

Hello Barry,
What you say makes sense, I have never thought in those terms regarding expectation. A bit of history so you might further assist me, started about 2.5 years ago at 2-4, worked through th 3-6 and the 4-8 settled into the 9-18 (commerce mostly, although I love the 15-30 at bellagio and the 20-40 kill at resorts in east chicago, my son goes to school there) my BR increased the most playing the 9-18 averaging around 2BB/hr through 1 year consistant. In my quest for higher $$'s I have been playing 20-40 as my regular game at commerce and have struggled to consistantly reach my goal of 1.5BB/hr at this level. BR currently about 30K. So I guess the big question is if one desires to either make a career from poker (would be a dream come true) or more realistically derive a good second income from poker is it better to strive to improve your game to compete at the higher levels with a lower expectation with the goal of improving your expectation or to troll the poorer players at the lowere limits and I guess I am stuck. I win more cosistanly at the 9-18 but find myself wanting to chase the occasional 2K wins at the 20-40. Should I flip flop back and forth? and if so what is a good ratio? how do you treat this dilema?
Thanks

jba · #18 09-20-2005, 01:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Two guys in particular own decent size businesses and dropping 2K in a weekend is no big deal. Both of them happen also to be nice guys and we are always chatting it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

just curious if I know who you're talking about - pizza and dry cleaning??

BarronVangorToth · #19 09-20-2005, 02:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]

just curious if I know who you're talking about - pizza and dry cleaning??

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't own a pizza joint or dry cleaning establishment, do you...?

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

jba · #20 09-20-2005, 02:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]

You don't own a pizza joint or dry cleaning establishment, do you...?

[/ QUOTE ]

no sir.

the reason I'm ask is because barry said they "really suck". If the pizza guy "really sucks", it changes my opinion about this 10 vs 20 debate, cause he seems a lot better, trickier, and more aggressive than the typical 10 player that "really sucks". not to say that he's a great player but you get my point.