|
|
#41
01-09-2005, 09:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ultra high buy-in SnG...beatable?
[ QUOTE ]
nope sorry you are wrong and wrong. In current game conditions with good table selection winrates at 2-4 and 3-6 can be close to one big bet an hour. AND if you put Phil Ivey at those games he destroys them. Maybe not 3BB per hour, thats the upper bound of what anyone can make in any great loose passive game. But 2BB? without a doubt. In fact, If I may reference Barry Greenstein he rates the majority of players who at least semi regularly may be in the big game. He mentiones that a lot of these people who may not even be beating the game or may be close to break even are killing the limit just below. And that limit is everything above 3-6 and below 4k 8k. Several years ago, 3-6 was the big game. Things have changed. 3-6 is now often a joke just like all the other games. [/ QUOTE ] Did I run over your cat or something? No matter, your argument is COMPLETELY off base. #1, I don't remember saying ANYTHING about 2-4 and 3-6. I said 300-600. TOTALLY different game And MANY people beat 2-4 and 3-6 for 2 BB's an hour, and 3 BB's is likely too,(I;m talking live play, not online; lots higher is possible live.). Buut, if you were paying attention, you would notice I said the top players are not going to be doing 2 and 3 times better than the current top players already in that game, period. Ivey ain't popping off 9 BB's an hour in ANY game the best players there aren't already beating for more than 3. OK, I just realized you are using 2-4 and 3-6 as shorthand for 200-400 and 300-600. Not really proper posting, but whatever. Point stands there. But you are very wrong about how much people make at the high limits. 2BB's an hour would be almost impossible to sustain unless a VERY soft continous field, and again, getting back to the original point, the structure of PP's SNG's dictate what is earnable. As many others have stated, if you were to deepen the stacks and lengthen the rounds, top players edge become that much bigger. But they aren't, and they haven't, so they can't. 
|
|
#45
01-09-2005, 09:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra high buy-in SnG...beatable?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Party has $1000 buy in singles. A lot of people buy directly into the step 5 and some even multi table them. [/ QUOTE ] don't you mean 2-Tables? [/ QUOTE ] They have both 1- and 2-tables now. eastbay
|
|
#46
01-09-2005, 09:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra high buy-in SnG...beatable?
[ QUOTE ]
OK, why exactly is David Schwimmer holding a basketball trophy in yer avatar? [/ QUOTE ] I see a Yugoslavian who just found the Holy Grail, and appears to be quite happy with it.
|
|
#47
01-09-2005, 10:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra high buy-in SnG...beatable?
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with what you say, but then, I did in the first place. I guess the best way I can explain it is by saying if you have a guy who is a top 300-600 ring player who is making 1 BB an hour long term (highly unlikely, from what I hear about high limits, but either way..), [/ QUOTE ] So you Dont play that high.... [ QUOTE ] OK, I just realized you are using 2-4 and 3-6 as shorthand for 200-400 and 300-600. Not really proper posting, but whatever. Point stands there. But you are very wrong about how much people make at the high limits. 2BB's an hour would be almost impossible to sustain unless a VERY soft continous field, and again, getting back to the original point, the structure of PP's SNG's dictate what is earnable. As many others have stated, if you were to deepen the stacks and lengthen the rounds, top players edge become that much bigger. But they aren't, and they haven't, so they can't. [/ QUOTE ] How about this. I do play that high. Several years ago 300 600 was the highest game and you could not make that much money. Today the situation is completely different. A great player can make close to 1BB an hour at 300 600 mixed games. What I was saying was that Phil Ivey would make 2BB an hour at the 300 600. This is certainly accurate. He would destroy the game. When I said 3BB per hour is the upper limit I was generally referring to lower limit holdem ring games. Again 3BB an hour is a theoretical earn in the best game conditions. I am not saying that anyone regularly makes anything like that. But 2BB can be done at a lot of middle limit holdem. And if you think Phil Ivey wouldnt make twice as much as you at party sngs if he wanted to then you are seriously delusional about how good a player you are AND how much the structure limits a truly world class player.
|
|
#48
01-09-2005, 10:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra high buy-in SnG...beatable?
[ QUOTE ]
And if you think Phil Ivey wouldnt make twice as much as you at party sngs if he wanted to then you are seriously delusional about how good a player you are AND how much the structure limits a truly world class player. [/ QUOTE ] Have you played a few K PP SnGs? eastbay
|
|
#49
01-09-2005, 11:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra high buy-in SnG...beatable?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I agree with what you say, but then, I did in the first place. I guess the best way I can explain it is by saying if you have a guy who is a top 300-600 ring player who is making 1 BB an hour long term (highly unlikely, from what I hear about high limits, but either way..), [/ QUOTE ] So you Dont play that high.... [ QUOTE ] OK, I just realized you are using 2-4 and 3-6 as shorthand for 200-400 and 300-600. Not really proper posting, but whatever. Point stands there. But you are very wrong about how much people make at the high limits. 2BB's an hour would be almost impossible to sustain unless a VERY soft continous field, and again, getting back to the original point, the structure of PP's SNG's dictate what is earnable. As many others have stated, if you were to deepen the stacks and lengthen the rounds, top players edge become that much bigger. But they aren't, and they haven't, so they can't. [/ QUOTE ] How about this. I do play that high. Several years ago 300 600 was the highest game and you could not make that much money. Today the situation is completely different. A great player can make close to 1BB an hour at 300 600 mixed games. What I was saying was that Phil Ivey would make 2BB an hour at the 300 600. This is certainly accurate. He would destroy the game. When I said 3BB per hour is the upper limit I was generally referring to lower limit holdem ring games. Again 3BB an hour is a theoretical earn in the best game conditions. I am not saying that anyone regularly makes anything like that. But 2BB can be done at a lot of middle limit holdem. And if you think Phil Ivey wouldnt make twice as much as you at party sngs if he wanted to then you are seriously delusional about how good a player you are AND how much the structure limits a truly world class player. [/ QUOTE ] Ok, I get it. Pissing match because you play high limits and I don't, gotcha. Well, I play $200 SNG's for a living, and, given your lack of understanding of the difference in it, YOU don't. Your lack of understanding of how badly games can be beaten by differing skill levels makes me think you didn't gring your way up to 300-600. I know plenty of guys who have played there after running up a 50K BR, go fully broke in 3-4 months, and say they play 300-600. Doesn't add to their credibilty. I guess you could say the same about me being broke online at the moment, but it wouldn't be true; I am a proven, long term winner in SNG's. I'm not delusional. I am VERY good. The structure DOES limit truly world class players, of which in these, I feel I can make a strong case of being one. I would bet any amount of money that if PI and I both played 5000 SNG's at Party's 200+15 structure over the same timeframe he would not double my earnings.
|
|
#50
01-10-2005, 12:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultra high buy-in SnG...beatable?
The picture is of Peja Stojakovic (basketball player for the Sacramento Kings) holding the NBA championship trophy (he hasn't actual won one but posed with it for NBA commercials I think).
The reason it is my avatar is because Peja is how I got the nickname 'The Yugoslavian.' When I haven't shaved for a few days I look very very similar to him (looking at my avatar is a bit eerie b/c it could easily be me) except I'm not really really tall and have a smaller nose. Anyway, my friends in college noticed the resemblance and started calling me The Yugoslavian as Peja is from Serbia (formerly Yugoslavia). I'm sure I have some Yugoslavian ancestory too but have never verified it as I'm adopted and don't know my biological parents. BTW, your avatar has always sort freaked me out a bit. I'm a big fan of the Simpsons and in that respect is' quite cool but it's just a bit twisted enough to throw me off when I see your posts. Why this particular Simpsons image?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
