Party "August Bonanza" this week (not same as the reload)

[Sintax]

here

[badplayer]

Is anyone going for this?

Even if I 4-table at $1/2-full for all nine hours, do I stand a chance against the 6-maxers, particularly at $5/10 where hands are raked more often?

[illunious]

Last bonanza or whatever they called it (lucy jones i think ), I got into 3rd a bunch of times playing .5/1, less players then, but I wasn't doing it the full time alloted.

I'm thinking I'll do $25 NL 6 max this time, probably the best shot for a microlimit player.

[Benholio]

[ QUOTE ]
Last bonanza or whatever they called it (lucy jones i think ), I got into 3rd a bunch of times playing .5/1, less players then, but I wasn't doing it the full time alloted.

I'm thinking I'll do $25 NL 6 max this time, probably the best shot for a microlimit player.

[/ QUOTE ]

1/2 limit 6-max might be better than 25NL. I'm not sure what % of hands are raked at the various limit games, but 6-max NL goes something like this:

25NL-6max = 50% hands are raked
50NL-6max = 65% hands are raked
100NL-6max = 83% hands are raked

[badplayer]

For the low-limit games, I have something like:

57% for $0.50/1 full
66% for $1/2 full

Although the % raked hands might be a tad lower at the 6-max versions of these games, my guess is that since there are more hands/hour, the overall effect is more raked-hands per hour than the full tables.

But I have no idea since I don't play much short-handed.

[illunious]

There goes that plan [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Seemed like every pot was getting at least .10 rake last time I played NL $25, with the lower required pot size it seemed like it would be perfect for the bonanza or reloads, but I never kept track of it.

Thanks for the info.

[Benholio]

[ QUOTE ]
There goes that plan [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Seemed like every pot was getting at least .10 rake last time I played NL $25, with the lower required pot size it seemed like it would be perfect for the bonanza or reloads, but I never kept track of it.

Thanks for the info.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, the NL25 and NL100 figures are second-hand, since I didn't have any recent hands of my own logged at those limits. You might want to check your own stats for NL25 to make sure. Its possible the person who posted these stats for me (in SSNL forum) was going by an older rake structure, if it has recently changed.

An hour or two should give you a pretty good sample size, assuming you are using pokertracker or something similar to track your play.

[TheMetetron]

If I had rakeback on Party, I'd be on this in a second.

[illunious]

Yeah, I have very similar stats (all 6 max)

NL 25 - 48%
NL 50 - 70%
NL 100 - 84%

[ctv1116]

Yes, because no 5/10er will play 9 hours straight for a measly $200.