"Rocks" unprofitable at 3/6

[Bob T.]

This is probably at least partly due to sampling error. The players that you have that see less than 15% of the flops, might not be that tight, but during your sample, they might have not caught very many cards, so they haven't played many hands, and they also haven't won many pots.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i am sure that a losing player who loses with a vpip of 15 increases his vpip to 18, not changing anything else, will lose even more money. how can someone who loses money with his big hands extract money from marginal hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

From 15-18, I'm fairly sure you can still just ride the strength of your hand and be above break even.

[/ QUOTE ]

you think the 15 - 18 hands are strong enough to make a profit for someone who loses with the 1 - 15 hands???

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a flawed question. We're not saying they're losing money with hands 1-15. Those hands are profitable; the problem is those players aren't making enough money on those hands to make up for the blinds they're paying. Add in the 15-18 hands (which should be profitable when looked at independently) and these rocks should end up with a better win rate.

[jjacky]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i am sure that a losing player who loses with a vpip of 15 increases his vpip to 18, not changing anything else, will lose even more money. how can someone who loses money with his big hands extract money from marginal hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

From 15-18, I'm fairly sure you can still just ride the strength of your hand and be above break even.

[/ QUOTE ]

you think the 15 - 18 hands are strong enough to make a profit for someone who loses with the 1 - 15 hands???

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a flawed question. We're not saying they're losing money with hands 1-15. Those hands are profitable; the problem is those players aren't making enough money on those hands to make up for the blinds they're paying. Add in the 15-18 hands (which should be profitable when looked at independently) and these rocks should end up with a better win rate.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, technically the "correct" question would have been "you think the 15 - 18 hands are strong enough to make a profit for someone who loses with the 1 - 15 hands minus blind money???". the problem with this question is that, unlike my previous question, the answer is not obvious. but i strongly believe that the answer for this question would be "no" if i asked myself. imo the 15 - 18 hands show only a modest profit even if an expert plays them say in a tight (about 22% VPIP) 3/6 party game.

[Webster]

Don't forget about rake at these low levels. perhaps those extra hands are the ones that fill in the the money lost by rake.

[meep_42]

Someone ran an analysis like this several months ago in Micros. The conclusion was that it wasn't tight or loose that was the important criteria, it was passive versus aggressive. Every single aggressive type was better than any passive type, but there were only a couple categories that ended up in the black, iirc.

-d