|
|
#21
10-03-2005, 03:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: You don\'t have to wrestle with the b\'ar.(long)
Hi Bob T,
I have an interesting question after reading this post... If my goal is to earn an income... How do I get a rakeback and play in a manner that is as profitable as these rocks you've detected? Can I get a rakeback instituted onto my current Party and Poker Stars accounts somehow? 
|
|
#22
10-03-2005, 05:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You don\'t have to wrestle with the b\'ar.(long)
for rakeback, check the affiliates/rakeback forum found on the left tabs
|
|
#23
10-03-2005, 05:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You don\'t have to wrestle with the b\'ar.(long)
[ QUOTE ]
Great post Bob. Another stat that tells your story is the following. The conventional wisdom states that only 20% win while 80% lose. My PTracker stats nullify this cliche - at 2/4,3/6,5/10, and 10/20. The breakdown is more like 45%/55% over a year and a half's collection of hands. The players are better than they're purported to be. My adaptations: (1) Choose games with much higher than expected average pot sizes. That's where the Live Ones live; (2) play B&M more frequently because the games are much looser. Thanks again for your excellent post. [/ QUOTE ] You're pokertracker is lying to you. Many more losers are there. This on-going thread discusses it: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...=1#Post3561085
|
|
#24
10-03-2005, 05:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You don\'t have to wrestle with the b\'ar.(long)
Its a two part question.
First Rakeback. You can get it by signing up with an affilitate. But, you have to do it on a new account, and you can't do it, where you had an account previously. Remember, bonuses are nice, but rakeback is forever, or at least I hope it is. Second, to earn an income. In my example, the supertight player was playing 8 tables, and earning about .03$/hand at 600 hands/hour. Or .5BB/100 from rakeback. He was also earning .25BB/100 from his play. I don't know if those players actually make that much, but it was a guess. So that means that total, he was making .75BB/100 * 8 tables. If the tables were each going at 75/hands/hour, that works out to about 4.5 BB/hour for playing that way. But there is another way to approach the game. Lets say you only played four tables at a time. You get the same .03/hand in rakeback, but you beat the games for 1.5BB/100 at the same time. That means that you would make about 2BB/100 times four tables, or About 6BB/hour. I think that with a little study, beating online 3/6 for 1.5BB/100 is a fairly reachable goal for anyone with reasonable intelligence and reasonable discipline. By playing that way, you make more money/hour, you probably learn more poker skills, that will enable you to play higher later on, and you probably have a lot more fun, because you get to play some suited connectors, small pairs, and other hands that you can't play if you are playing 8 tables at once, because they require attention and some skill to handle properly. I think for most players, playing a small enough number of tables so that they can make at least 1.5BB/100 at whatever limit they are playing is probably the best approach to long term profitability. For a long time, I was a two table player, and now I've moved up to playing four. But, I still am comfortable playing four, and if I'm involved in a couple of other hands, I probably pass on some marginally profitable situations, but at the same time, I can still get involved and try and play my way into a profit with some marginal hands. (and those hands usually really are a lot more fun and more interesting to play than AA). Anyway, I think the best way to earn money from playing poker is to learn how to beat the game, and then remember to apply that. Part of my motivation for making this post, was that I wanted players that play that way to have a harder time. If everyone who reads this forum is constantly pounding on these guys blinds, they probably are going to be making a lot less money, and eventually will either have to come out and play the game, or get a real job.
|
|
#25
10-04-2005, 06:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You don\'t have to wrestle with the b\'ar.(long)
Hi Bob T.,
Points well taken. However, despite reading plenty of 2+2 and Hilger... I find I am still a -EV to break even player at absolute best. No idea why that is. I've read 2+2 stuff on and off since 1999. Along with doses of everything from Super System to Mike Caro. Well, fact is, I've never recoved the cost of the books, even, as true profit, over and above my starting bankroll. So can't say what I'm doing wrong. But it "ain't" workin'. I keep reading "anyone can read the books and do it"... Ed Miller wants us to "crush the game"... all the fish on Party, "With a little study" etc. Never seems to work. No doubt it's me. Ed for example, dumped Microsoft to do it. Dynasty says he did it starting with just 19 hours under his belt. Now, I don't know *how* they've done it. And therein lies the rub. I'd say lifetime (started playing for the first time in '99) I'm probably in the red a few thousand plust books and the time spent. (Went on a long hiatus from playing for a few years, didn't have the time, career and all that.) But anyway, you read about this quick successes and have to wonder where you're going wrong. So to me. To make back what I've lost already, would be great. Even if it was rakeback gaming or whatever. LOL! Perhaps I just need to pay Ed, Dave, and Mason to just beat me about the head and shoulders with this stuff until it sinks in. LOL!
|
|
#26
10-12-2005, 01:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You don\'t have to wrestle with the b\'ar.(long)
the reason you see this at 3/6 is because you can play tighter and be profitable.
3/6 - 2/3 BB per orbit 5/10 - 7/10 BB per orbit 10/20 - 3/4 BB per orbit 15/30 - 5/6 BB per orbit The less BB per orbit you pay in blinds, the tighter the optimal strategy is.
|
|
#27
10-13-2005, 02:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You don\'t have to wrestle with the b\'ar.(long)
[ QUOTE ]
I personally made my own excel spreadsheet for all 169 starting hand combinations and calculated their expected frequencies. I then added up the different starting hand recommendations--SSHE tight, SSHE loose, WLLH, and HPFAP groups. IT was a very worthwile expreience. I suggest you do it yourself and play around with it. [/ QUOTE ] how did you do this? can you post this on a website or a server for everyone to see....seems very educational thanks
|
|
#28
10-13-2005, 05:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: You don\'t have to wrestle with the b\'ar.(long)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I personally made my own excel spreadsheet for all 169 starting hand combinations and calculated their expected frequencies. I then added up the different starting hand recommendations--SSHE tight, SSHE loose, WLLH, and HPFAP groups. IT was a very worthwile expreience. I suggest you do it yourself and play around with it. [/ QUOTE ] how did you do this? can you post this on a website or a server for everyone to see....seems very educational thanks [/ QUOTE ] Doh...I don't have such access. If someone wants to PM me their email address who is willing to post this, I can fire off a copy to them. It will even force me to clean it up a bit for presentation stylie points.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
