unbeatable game?

[Lucky Clubs]

A Plus and Paul,

You're both right. I wouldn't challenge that you could win money in this game if you can stick out the swings and, yes, the arguments for a large bankroll are only to alleviate the blow of a large downswing.

I think I may have partially caused the argument to digress when I posted about my bad beats, and it was taken out of context by several posters to suggest that I was whining that the game couldn't be beat.

The only statement that I would make unequivocally is that I and players like me should avoid these games... NOT because they're not profitable (with the right gameplan, they certainly are), but because I prefer to try to outplay my opponents mentally rather than exercise my patience by waiting for premium hands.

That was my only point... if not being able to bluff frustrates you, or if your bankroll can't afford big swings, then many-handed limit games aren't your best option. I don't think anyone would argue that if pick your spots and get the best hands in the pots, they will pay you off in the long-run. But is it satisfying? Theoretically, you could have an IBM sit in your seat and make your money for you, simply by programming it to exercise more prudence with starting hands than your opponents do.

[DeezNutz3]

You're friend tried to bluff a person who calls with anything? sounds like he needs to adjust his game

[Hermlord]

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of people in this thread have been saying the game is only beatable if you have a large bankroll.

The size of a player's bankroll has absolutely nothing to do with whether that player can beat the game. Either the game is +EV or it isn't. Changing the size of the BR does not change the EV of the game.
Paul

[/ QUOTE ]

Theory of Poker gives Expectation as "the average profit or loss of any bet over the long run." Let's agree "the bet = sitting down at a game like this" (as opposed to any one hand). We all agree that this game has a very high variance. Therefore, a large downward fluctuation is highly likely. If your bankroll is small, you have a much higher risk of going bust, and by definition of "bust" you cannot buy back in and keep playing--going bust is an unrecoverable loss. (I'm not going to calculate your risk of ruin as a function of bankroll and variance, but of course it could be done.) So an insufficient bankroll does in fact negatively change your EV.

With a bankroll sufficient to avoid going bust, you are right that the only benefit is psychological.

[Hermlord]

[ QUOTE ]
The only statement that I would make unequivocally is that I and players like me should avoid these games... NOT because they're not profitable (with the right gameplan, they certainly are), but because I prefer to try to outplay my opponents mentally rather than exercise my patience by waiting for premium hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm of two minds about this. I fully understand what you mean, of course I want to play an exciting thinking game when I can. But ultimately I play poker for one reason only: $$$$$$. Games like this are soooo juicy, if the opportunity to play one comes up I will play until my ass melds to the chair.

Just my opinion.

[Beavis68]

I would play this like omaha, your big pairs are just draws at trips and you trips are just draw and boats or quads.

The game would be very tedious to play profitably, but is definitely profitable to a player that knows all his outs and his pot equity, and builds pots with good draws and slows down with the vulnerable hands.

Most people play their big pockte pairs too strongly and bluff too much in these games. There is more to out-playing an opponent than just getting him to fold to your bluff.

[reubenf]

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer to try to outplay my opponents mentally rather than exercise my patience by waiting for premium hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waiting for premium hands actually -is- outplaying -these- opponents mentally. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] It's just all done before you site down at the table. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[Lucky Clubs]

[ QUOTE ]
Waiting for premium hands actually -is- outplaying -these- opponents mentally. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] It's just all done before you site down at the table. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true, but that's why I suggested that you could plop a computer down in your seat. I would venture to say that these games don't require as much (if any) adaptability and variance in play. In fact, variance in play would probably work AGAINST you in a game where everyone calls to the river without strategy.

I don't presume to be much more than a slightly above-average player; the fact that I don't have the patience to sit at these games, where money is, and wait for the slow and steady payoff is probably testament to this. By "outplay mentally," I mean that I take comfort in knowing that I have the opportunity to win a pot with any given hand based on testing my opponent's strength. For my purposes, an hour at a sit-n-go tournament has a higher rate of return than several hours in limit games.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
You can play a few more hands than this.

If by "a few" you mean "a ton". [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see which ton of hands that can be added when it's capped preflop on every hand. When are you going to play 98s for 4 bets?

You'll play the top 10-15 hands and nothing else. You can add the next 10-15 hands if you like to, it's small profits and huge swings. But atleast you won't go mad with boredom.

Or?


And to OP: These games are beatable. But they aren't much juicier than they were when there were just 2-3 live ones in the game. I'm totally with Mason on my dream table being 2-3 utterly live ones and the rest weak tighties. People who pretty much only add variation without adding profit aren't my cup of tea.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
3 long sessions and 3 different very solid players losing a lot of money

[/ QUOTE ]

Sample size too small. This would be a great game.

[Jedi Flopper]

This kind of game is beaten by playing good multiway hands. Suited aces and suited connectors are great to see a flop with. Pocket pairs become almost worthless unless you hit a set if there is a draw to a str or flush on the board. You have to adjust to the texture of the table. I would love to play at this table.