How to build from low limits on Party?

[Sir Benjamin Nunn]

Looking for some advice on Party ring games.

I've been playing B&M poker reasonably successfully for a few years, and
have also proven profitable in three years of online tournament play at low
levels.

Last year, I decided to concentrate seriously on Limit ring games online for
the first time and build a big bankroll. I chose Party, as the weakest,
fishiest players were said to be there.

My bankroll conditions are these: Move up to the next limit when I reach 325
BBs at the next level, and drop down when I go below 275 BBs at my current
level.

I play tight-agressive (where 'tight' means tighter than the table I'm
sitting at), I put a lot of emphasis on odds and outs (in the absence of
proper reads online), and like to play speculative hands - suited
connectors, small pockets, Axs etc. - creatively in multiway pots where the
EV is positive.

I fold when I don't hit, and I fold when a raise tells me I'm beaten. I
don't try to bluff and steal against rubbish players. I know how to bet to
get a free turn card, and for information.

I'm not stupid.

But I got fucking burned badly, even at 2/4. The dedicated Party bankroll
diminished, I dropped to 1/2 and then 0.50/1 and got killed every time. The
speculative draws hit less than they should, the only pots I won were
small... complete fucking nightmare.

I started tracking my play with Pokertracker, which could be a very useful
tool, but what's the point when it just tells you that you're getting
unlucky, and pointing out that the fish are making a profit...


So I gave up.

A while later, after winning a tournament on Pacific, I decided to have a go
at the real games there. And my experience was *completely* different.

The usual bad beats and suckouts occurred, and the fish were annoying at
times... but by playing solid, tight-aggressive poker I was able to win over
time, move up through the limits, and build a bankroll for the middle limit
games within about 15,000 hands.

It was also pretty entertaining, as on a table where 75% see the flop, you
can play half the hands, and still be playing optimal poker.

But Pacific's software is crap. Their cashout policy is crap. You can't
multitable, and you can't use Pokertracker.

It is easy money, but I'd rather be earning it on Party, so I moved a bit of
bankroll (enough to start at 0.50/1) to see if anything had changed.


Of course, it hasn't. I'm still losing at Party, and the fish are still
winning. Pokertracker doesn't lie. So what can I do to improve this?

Why can I beat a loose 5-10 game consistently over 4000 hands, making about
2.5BB/100 hands, but I cannot beat a loose 0.50/1.00 game that plays in a
very similar way?

Of course, because Pokertracker doesn't support Pacific, I can't even
compare the statistics that matter to see what I'm doing differently, if
anything.

Some of my stats for Party (from around 4000 hands in Pokertracker):

AA
win % 57.14
BB/hand 0.89

KK
win % 62.50
BB/hand 0.99

QQ
win % 56.25
BB/hand 0.91

JJ
win % 47.37
BB/hand 0.80

TT
win % 29.41
BB/hand -0.76

AKs
win % 60.00
BB/hand 1.07

AKo
win % 56.25
BB/hand 1.41

AQs
win % 33.33
BB/hand -1.21

AQo
win % 30.77
BB/hand -0.24


These are all less profitable than they should be statistically (because of
my aggression preflop, I should win slightly more than statistical expection
for these hands, to account for the times when someone folds a hand to my
preflop raise that would've gone on to win).

I know that variance happens. I know that players get cold-decked. I know
that theoretically a 6000-hand bad run could just happen to coincide with
the first 6000 hands a player happened to play at any given site...

But what the fuck can I do? I'm trying to avoid the 'rigged' argument if
possible, but I would like to be a winning player on Party, move up to a
proper limit, not fucking stupid 1/2, and be able to make it my regular site
for ring gaming.

Will it all even itself in my favour in the long run?

BTN

[smellmuth]

whats ur sample size? how many hands do you have PT'ed at Party?

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
Looking for some advice on Party ring games.
I've been playing B&M poker reasonably successfully for a few years, and
have also proven profitable in three years of online tournament play at low
levels.
Last year, I decided to concentrate seriously on Limit ring games online for
the first time and build a big bankroll. I chose Party, as the weakest,
fishiest players were said to be there.
My bankroll conditions are these: Move up to the next limit when I reach 325
BBs at the next level, and drop down when I go below 275 BBs at my current
level.
I play tight-agressive (where 'tight' means tighter than the table I'm
sitting at), I put a lot of emphasis on odds and outs (in the absence of
proper reads online), and like to play speculative hands - suited
connectors, small pockets, Axs etc. - creatively in multiway pots where the
EV is positive.
I fold when I don't hit, and I fold when a raise tells me I'm beaten. I
don't try to bluff and steal against rubbish players. I know how to bet to
get a free turn card, and for information.
I'm not stupid.
But I got fucking burned badly, even at 2/4. The dedicated Party bankroll
diminished, I dropped to 1/2 and then 0.50/1 and got killed every time. The
speculative draws hit less than they should, the only pots I won were
small... complete fucking nightmare.
I started tracking my play with Pokertracker, which could be a very useful
tool, but what's the point when it just tells you that you're getting
unlucky, and pointing out that the fish are making a profit...
So I gave up.
A while later, after winning a tournament on Pacific, I decided to have a go
at the real games there. And my experience was *completely* different.
The usual bad beats and suckouts occurred, and the fish were annoying at
times... but by playing solid, tight-aggressive poker I was able to win over
time, move up through the limits, and build a bankroll for the middle limit
games within about 15,000 hands.
It was also pretty entertaining, as on a table where 75% see the flop, you
can play half the hands, and still be playing optimal poker.
But Pacific's software is crap. Their cashout policy is crap. You can't
multitable, and you can't use Pokertracker.
It is easy money, but I'd rather be earning it on Party, so I moved a bit of
bankroll (enough to start at 0.50/1) to see if anything had changed.
Of course, it hasn't. I'm still losing at Party, and the fish are still
winning. Pokertracker doesn't lie. So what can I do to improve this?
Why can I beat a loose 5-10 game consistently over 4000 hands, making about
2.5BB/100 hands, but I cannot beat a loose 0.50/1.00 game that plays in a
very similar way?
Of course, because Pokertracker doesn't support Pacific, I can't even
compare the statistics that matter to see what I'm doing differently, if
anything.
AA
win % 57.14
BB/hand 0.89
KK
win % 62.50
BB/hand 0.99
QQ
win % 56.25
BB/hand 0.91
JJ
win % 47.37
BB/hand 0.80
TT
win % 29.41
BB/hand -0.76
AKs
win % 60.00
BB/hand 1.07
AKo
win % 56.25
BB/hand 1.41
AQs
win % 33.33
BB/hand -1.21
AQo
win % 30.77
BB/hand -0.24
These are all less profitable than they should be statistically (because of
my aggression preflop, I should win slightly more than statistical expection
for these hands, to account for the times when someone folds a hand to my
preflop raise that would've gone on to win).
I know that variance happens. I know that players get cold-decked. I know
that theoretically a 6000-hand bad run could just happen to coincide with
the first 6000 hands a player happened to play at any given site...
But what the fuck can I do? I'm trying to avoid the 'rigged' argument if
possible, but I would like to be a winning player on Party, move up to a
proper limit, not fucking stupid 1/2, and be able to make it my regular site
for ring gaming.
Will it all even itself in my favour in the long run?
BTN

_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com

[hooflops]

I would recommend playing short handed (6 max) games. In my experience
you more quickly learn the opposition, and your skills more likely wil
lead to profits.

I personally find that Party 1/2 6 max is particularly juicy. I use
it to build my bankroll so that I now play 5/10 6 max at a significan
profit.

If you are using PokerTracker, I would recommend getting eithe
Playerview or GameTime + as an add-on. The biggest step up for me wa
learning to understand who were the idiots and who were the sharks.
Gametime + makes this clear in numeric terms.

Good luck

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
hooflops's Profile: http://www.rgpaccess.com/member.php?userid=5
View this thread: http://www.rgpaccess.com/showthread.php?t=4612

-----------------------POSTED AT RGP ACCESS----------------------------
++++ RGPchat, vBookie and Poker News at http://www.rgpaccess.com +++

[BreezyLou]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:40:30 -0500, hooflops

If you are using PokerTracker, I would recommend getting either
Playerview or GameTime + as an add-on. The biggest step up for me was
learning to understand who were the idiots and who were the sharks.
Gametime + makes this clear in numeric terms.

You need some machine to tell you who plays well and who doesn't?

[mjostar]

A computer game add on, to help your computer game add on, help you play
better on a computer game.

Irish Mike

Post by BreezyLou
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:40:30 -0500, hooflops

If you are using PokerTracker, I would recommend getting either
Playerview or GameTime + as an add-on. The biggest step up for me was
learning to understand who were the idiots and who were the sharks.
Gametime + makes this clear in numeric terms.

You need some machine to tell you who plays well and who doesn't?

[LucasLegion]

Post by mjostar
A computer game add on, to help your computer game add on, help you play

Alright, we get it. You weren't good enough to beat online poker so you
decided that it's rigged. Give it a rest already.

_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[mjostar]

I have never said it was rigged and my guess is I made a lot more than you
did playing online in 2004.
I just don't like it.

Irish Mike

Post by LucasLegion

Post by mjostar
A computer game add on, to help your computer game add on, help you play

Alright, we get it. You weren't good enough to beat online poker so you
decided that it's rigged. Give it a rest already.
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[LucasLegion]

Post by mjostar
I have never said it was rigged and my guess is I made a lot more than you
did playing online in 2004.
I just don't like it.
Irish Mike

Almost every single post that I've read by you contains the same bullshit:
online poker isn't poker. It's clearly an obsession. Something traumatic
must have happened. Probably something along the lines of having one big
losing session and deciding that it's "not real poker" so that you can
sleep at night. If it helps you to convince yourself that, fine, but give
the bull shit a rest already. There's a shit-load of people that play
both live and online poker and win at both.

_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com

[CincinnatiKid]

Post by mjostar
I have never said it was rigged and my guess is I made a lot more than you
did playing online in 2004.
I just don't like it.
Irish Mike

I rarely agree with Irish Mike but I feel the same way he does. I play
online purely for the covenience of it. If I could walk out of my door and
into a casino I'd never play online.

Post by mjostar

Post by LucasLegion

Post by mjostar
A computer game add on, to help your computer game add on, help you play

Alright, we get it. You weren't good enough to beat online poker so you
decided that it's rigged. Give it a rest already.

------- 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com

[CrackerZack]

Me too but that doesn't mean playing online is like playing warcraft.

[pjsub]

Post by mjostar
A computer game add on, to help your computer game add on, help you play
better on a computer game.
Irish Mike

Post by BreezyLou
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:40:30 -0500, hooflops

If you are using PokerTracker, I would recommend getting either
Playerview or GameTime + as an add-on. The biggest step up for me was
learning to understand who were the idiots and who were the sharks.
Gametime + makes this clear in numeric terms.

You need some machine to tell you who plays well and who doesn't?

Why do some people who only or mainly play B&M think they're above online
players?

_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com

[Raider Fan]

Post by pjsub
Why do some people who only or mainly play B&M think they're above online
players?

That's a really good question considering that online players are much
stronger at a given level.

____________________________________________________________________ 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com

[Sir Benjamin Nunn]

Post by mjostar
A computer game add on, to help your computer game add on, help you play
better on a computer game.

Instinctively I do agree with you here.

Online poker is no substitute for the real thing. Reads, personalities,
tabletalk, staredowns - it's a much more complex game than sitting at home
doing sums and clicking a mouse.

And yet I still want to become better at online poker, because it's a
challenge that all B&M players must beat, IMHO, in order to continue to
occupy the intellectual high ground.

If some irritating spotty 16 year old in his bedroom is taking my money on
Party Poker, I want to adapt and beat that game and put a stop to it.

Sure, I might well whoop his sorry arse playing £15/30 Stud8 in real life.
But that's not the issue. The playing field is Party $0.50/1 Holdem, and the
cold, unpalettable reality is that he's beating me at the game we're
playing.

I know I can choose to play only in games that I know I can beat, but the
very existence of a low-stakes game that I can't beat bothers me.

So I'm trying to beat it - sad little computer game though it is.

BTN

[Asha34]

Curiously, it may be impossible for folks to beat the $.50/1.00 limit hold em
on line. I'm not saying it is impossible, but it may be.

This is because of the rake. If everyone, or even nearly everyone at your
table has adopted an optimal or even nearly optimal strategy then you're all
going down -- some more quickly than others. If I recall, the rake at Party is
about 10% with a $1 max in the $.50/1.00 game. That's huge.

It occurs to me that on line Hold Em, more than any b&m game and more than any
on line game, may lend it self to skill convergence -- where players tend to
become similarly skilled. I'm not sure why I think that -- I have no data to
back me up -- but it's a hunch.

Ashley Adams

[LucasLegion]

Post by Asha34
Curiously, it may be impossible for folks to beat the $.50/1.00 limit hold em
on line. I'm not saying it is impossible, but it may be.
This is because of the rake. If everyone, or even nearly everyone at your
table has adopted an optimal or even nearly optimal strategy then you're all
going down -- some more quickly than others. If I recall, the rake at Party is
about 10% with a $1 max in the $.50/1.00 game. That's huge.
It occurs to me that on line Hold Em, more than any b&m game and more than any
on line game, may lend it self to skill convergence -- where players tend to
become similarly skilled. I'm not sure why I think that -- I have no data to
back me up -- but it's a hunch.
Ashley Adams

I agree that the rake is huge in those games, but I strongly disagree with
you saying that it's practically impossible to beat .50/1.00. If everyone
played equally, poker would be completely unnessicary. The money would
just flow from one pocket to another and back again while the casinos are
the only ones making money. However, not all players play the same way.
Most of the players at the .50/1.00 level are so terrible that it more
than makes up for the rake. I have the records to prove it. I'm not
claiming to be one of the greatest players ever. It's not that I play
THAT well, it's that they play THAT bad. I almost never have a losing
session at .50/1.00.

_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.1 - http://www.recpoker.com

[Sir Benjamin Nunn]

Post by LucasLegion
I agree that the rake is huge in those games, but I strongly disagree with
you saying that it's practically impossible to beat .50/1.00. If everyone
played equally, poker would be completely unnessicary. The money would
just flow from one pocket to another and back again while the casinos are
the only ones making money. However, not all players play the same way.
Most of the players at the .50/1.00 level are so terrible that it more
than makes up for the rake. I have the records to prove it. I'm not
claiming to be one of the greatest players ever. It's not that I play
THAT well, it's that they play THAT bad. I almost never have a losing
session at .50/1.00.

Where are these players who are THAT bad that I keep on hearing about?

Maybe I've just been unlucky in the tables/times that I've been playing, but
according to PokerTracker, the number of fish/loose-passive players in the
games I've been playing has been low. Of course, there have a been a few
very obviously poor players (calling reraises with bottom pair, 3-flush
etc.) but more players who have been solid, profitable, and making correct
plays.

Based on the games I've played in, I'd say the standard on Party was about
comparible with Stars, and Bugsyclub, other sites where I've played.

Only on Pacific have I seen the truly terrible players in such numbers that
it's almost impossible to lose if you have a clue.

BTN

[Asha34]

There is a tendency for bad players to be replaced by good players -- as bad
players either lose all of their money for poker or they get better (much less
common).

While it's surely true that it is possible to beat $.50/1.00 games on any
internet site inspite of the rake, I only opined that it was possible that
someone could find games where no one was winning because they were all equally
skilled and the house was getting all of the money.

I am not familiar enough with Party games or any other on line sites to say
whether there are a sufficient number of bad players for these low stakes games
to be profitable. It seems to me that if one were to look around for good
games one could surely find a few. But not everyone takes the time or has the
patience for good game selection.

Ashley Adams

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn

Post by LucasLegion
I agree that the rake is huge in those games, but I strongly disagree with
you saying that it's practically impossible to beat .50/1.00. If everyone
played equally, poker would be completely unnessicary. The money would
just flow from one pocket to another and back again while the casinos are
the only ones making money. However, not all players play the same way.
Most of the players at the .50/1.00 level are so terrible that it more
than makes up for the rake. I have the records to prove it. I'm not
claiming to be one of the greatest players ever. It's not that I play
THAT well, it's that they play THAT bad. I almost never have a losing
session at .50/1.00.

Where are these players who are THAT bad that I keep on hearing about?
Maybe I've just been unlucky in the tables/times that I've been playing, but
according to PokerTracker, the number of fish/loose-passive players in the
games I've been playing has been low. Of course, there have a been a few
very obviously poor players (calling reraises with bottom pair, 3-flush
etc.) but more players who have been solid, profitable, and making correct
plays.
Based on the games I've played in, I'd say the standard on Party was about
comparible with Stars, and Bugsyclub, other sites where I've played.
Only on Pacific have I seen the truly terrible players in such numbers that
it's almost impossible to lose if you have a clue.
BTN

[pjsub]

Post by Asha34
Curiously, it may be impossible for folks to beat the $.50/1.00 limit hold em
on line. I'm not saying it is impossible, but it may be.
This is because of the rake. If everyone, or even nearly everyone at
your
table has adopted an optimal or even nearly optimal strategy then you're all
going down -- some more quickly than others. If I recall, the rake at
Party is
about 10% with a $1 max in the $.50/1.00 game. That's huge.
It occurs to me that on line Hold Em, more than any b&m game and more than any
on line game, may lend it self to skill convergence -- where players tend to
become similarly skilled. I'm not sure why I think that -- I have no
data to
back me up -- but it's a hunch.
Ashley Adams

Most are players are so bad at $0.5/$1 limits that you can more than make
up for the proportionally higher rake. Whereas 2BB/hr is accepted as good
for the higher limits, at this limit 4-5BB/hr is possible.

As for skill convergence I think you have a point. However, from what I've
noticed it seems that its not so much as a convergence to a certain level
of play, but more a convergence to a certain type of play depending on the
particular site. As some people learn and play exlcusively on one site it
stands that they will pick up the sites play style at certain limits. New,
poor,  players then adapt to this style.

_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.1 - http://www.recpoker.com

[Sir Benjamin Nunn]

Post by Asha34
Curiously, it may be impossible for folks to beat the $.50/1.00 limit hold em
on line. I'm not saying it is impossible, but it may be.
This is because of the rake. If everyone, or even nearly everyone at your
table has adopted an optimal or even nearly optimal strategy then you're all
going down -- some more quickly than others. If I recall, the rake at Party is
about 10% with a $1 max in the $.50/1.00 game. That's huge.

I have considered this.

The standard of play on Party is significantly better than that on Pacific
(at least in the games that I've played), possibly good enough to make any
profit/hand less than the rake.

I did notice that when building my Pacific bankroll, .50/1.00 and 1/2 took a
lot longer to move through than 2/4 and 3/6, which I always belived to be
partly down to the rake proportion, and partly because by definition moving
up to a double limit will take longer than moving to a limit that is 50%
more.

I still think I should be able to beat Party with better game selection,
however.

Post by Asha34
It occurs to me that on line Hold Em, more than any b&m game and more than any
on line game, may lend it self to skill convergence -- where players tend to
become similarly skilled. I'm not sure why I think that -- I have no data to
back me up -- but it's a hunch.

I think you are right, and I suspect it is because the starting hands are so
few in number, that it's very easy to learn a few routine things.

A player doesn't need a lot of education to pick up a standard approach to
Limit Holdem, something like:

Raise with AA, KK, QQ, AK
Call with JJ-88, AQ, AJs, KQs
Call unraised pots from late position with small pairs, suited connectors,
suited aces, AJ, KQ, QJ, JT.

There are a lot of people with very similiar starting hands requirements,
all out there playing against one another.

Post flop, again there are a few core skills that lots of half-decent
players learn, like the correct odds to chase a draw, and how to fold a
small pair that didnt make a set to any bet.

BTN

[Born Stoopid]

"Sir Benjamin Nunn"

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
Will it all even itself in my favour in the long run?

No it won't because Party is a nothing but a dumpster filled with the
trailer trash of online poker players.

Play badly and you will be rewarded at Party. It's not rigged except by the
fact that so many crappy players seeing so many hands to the river makes
luck more of a factor.

[pat]

i don't know if this is an issue for you or not, but i find that it's a
lot easier to tilt on party, ive definitely improved in that area over
the years but it can still bite you in the ass, especially on 1/2 when
some d-bag hits runner runner or something....another thing that can
help, that helped me, is switching between limit (1/2 and 2/4 in my
case) to a 25$ NL table. if you're a decent NL player, there's just
obscene amounts of money there. if you start to go on a losing streak
or whatnot, switch back to limit. the two kind of balance each other
out in a weird way. just my two cents.

pat b

[kevin cline]

Perhaps the weak fishy players at party are not as weak and fishy as
the opposition you have been beating live and at Pacific?

[flyingnite]

Have you tried reconsidering what constitutes a good raising hand in a
loose, limit game?

I believe statistically AJs, KQs and 99 is a better hand than AQo but just
below AKo.

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
AA
win % 57.14
BB/hand 0.89
KK
win % 62.50
BB/hand 0.99
QQ
win % 56.25
BB/hand 0.91
JJ
win % 47.37
BB/hand 0.80
TT
win % 29.41
BB/hand -0.76
AKs
win % 60.00
BB/hand 1.07
AKo
win % 56.25
BB/hand 1.41
AQs
win % 33.33
BB/hand -1.21
AQo
win % 30.77
BB/hand -0.24
These are all less profitable than they should be statistically (because of
my aggression preflop, I should win slightly more than statistical expection
for these hands, to account for the times when someone folds a hand to my
preflop raise that would've gone on to win).
I know that variance happens. I know that players get cold-decked. I know
that theoretically a 6000-hand bad run could just happen to coincide with
the first 6000 hands a player happened to play at any given site...
But what the fuck can I do? I'm trying to avoid the 'rigged' argument if
possible, but I would like to be a winning player on Party, move up to a
proper limit, not fucking stupid 1/2, and be able to make it my regular site
for ring gaming.
Will it all even itself in my favour in the long run?
BTN

_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com

[Sir Benjamin Nunn]

Post by flyingnite
Have you tried reconsidering what constitutes a good raising hand in a
loose, limit game?
I believe statistically AJs, KQs and 99 is a better hand than AQo but just
below AKo.

Heh. Not in my statistics they're not:


AJs
win % 27.27
BB/hand -1.07


KQs
win % 0.00
BB/hand -2.17


Actually, you may have a point about 99:

99
win % 50.00
BB/hand 1.91


99 is actually my most profitable hand (BB/hand)

Second: 55
Third: T8s. Yes, really.
Fourth: K7s
Fifth: K5s

basically, apart from the presto, all hands that I've seen for cheap from
the blinds, and picked up a flush draw with.

BTN

[BreezyLou]

Post by flyingnite
I believe statistically AJs, KQs and 99 is a better hand than AQo but just
below AKo.

I'll let others jump on this one.

[CincinnatiKid]

One person, some time ago, used the phrase "tight aggressive" to describe
his play. NOW, almost every single person (especially new players) in the
world says they play "tight aggressive" even when 1/2 of them don't know
what the hell it means to play "tight aggressive". why is that?
Tro

Because "loose aggressive" somehow implies that you are a fish or a
madman. Also, they read 2+2, er, I mean "4"

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
Looking for some advice on Party ring games.
I've been playing B&M poker reasonably successfully for a few years, and
have also proven profitable in three years of online tournament play at low
levels.
Last year, I decided to concentrate seriously on Limit ring games online for
the first time and build a big bankroll. I chose Party, as the weakest,
fishiest players were said to be there.
My bankroll conditions are these: Move up to the next limit when I reach 325
BBs at the next level, and drop down when I go below 275 BBs at my current
level.
I play tight-agressive (where 'tight' means tighter than the table I'm
sitting at), I put a lot of emphasis on odds and outs (in the absence of
proper reads online), and like to play speculative hands - suited
connectors, small pockets, Axs etc. - creatively in multiway pots where the
EV is positive.
I fold when I don't hit, and I fold when a raise tells me I'm beaten. I
don't try to bluff and steal against rubbish players. I know how to bet to
get a free turn card, and for information.
I'm not stupid.
But I got fucking burned badly, even at 2/4. The dedicated Party bankroll
diminished, I dropped to 1/2 and then 0.50/1 and got killed every time. The
speculative draws hit less than they should, the only pots I won were
small... complete fucking nightmare.
I started tracking my play with Pokertracker, which could be a very useful
tool, but what's the point when it just tells you that you're getting
unlucky, and pointing out that the fish are making a profit...
So I gave up.
A while later, after winning a tournament on Pacific, I decided to have a go
at the real games there. And my experience was *completely* different.
The usual bad beats and suckouts occurred, and the fish were annoying at
times... but by playing solid, tight-aggressive poker I was able to win over
time, move up through the limits, and build a bankroll for the middle limit
games within about 15,000 hands.
It was also pretty entertaining, as on a table where 75% see the flop, you
can play half the hands, and still be playing optimal poker.
But Pacific's software is crap. Their cashout policy is crap. You can't
multitable, and you can't use Pokertracker.
It is easy money, but I'd rather be earning it on Party, so I moved a bit of
bankroll (enough to start at 0.50/1) to see if anything had changed.
Of course, it hasn't. I'm still losing at Party, and the fish are still
winning. Pokertracker doesn't lie. So what can I do to improve this?
Why can I beat a loose 5-10 game consistently over 4000 hands, making about
2.5BB/100 hands, but I cannot beat a loose 0.50/1.00 game that plays in a
very similar way?
Of course, because Pokertracker doesn't support Pacific, I can't even
compare the statistics that matter to see what I'm doing differently, if
anything.
AA
win % 57.14
BB/hand 0.89
KK
win % 62.50
BB/hand 0.99
QQ
win % 56.25
BB/hand 0.91
JJ
win % 47.37
BB/hand 0.80
TT
win % 29.41
BB/hand -0.76
AKs
win % 60.00
BB/hand 1.07
AKo
win % 56.25
BB/hand 1.41
AQs
win % 33.33
BB/hand -1.21
AQo
win % 30.77
BB/hand -0.24
These are all less profitable than they should be statistically (because of
my aggression preflop, I should win slightly more than statistical expection
for these hands, to account for the times when someone folds a hand to my
preflop raise that would've gone on to win).
I know that variance happens. I know that players get cold-decked. I know
that theoretically a 6000-hand bad run could just happen to coincide with
the first 6000 hands a player happened to play at any given site...
But what the fuck can I do? I'm trying to avoid the 'rigged' argument if
possible, but I would like to be a winning player on Party, move up to a
proper limit, not fucking stupid 1/2, and be able to make it my regular site
for ring gaming.
Will it all even itself in my favour in the long run?
BTN

_____________________________________________________________________ 
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com

[ChrisBrown]

Post by CincinnatiKid

One person, some time ago, used the phrase "tight aggressive" to describe
his play. NOW, almost every single person (especially new players) in the
world says they play "tight aggressive" even when 1/2 of them don't know
what the hell it means to play "tight aggressive". why is that?
Tro

Because "loose aggressive" somehow implies that you are a fish or a
madman. Also, they read 2+2, er, I mean "4"

i don't play "tight aggressive" (TA-x) or "loose aggressive" (LA-x.) I
play "drunk" (XXX) , the way poker is supposed to be played.

----- 
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com

[Tro]

One person, some time ago, used the phrase "tight aggressive" to describe
his play. NOW, almost every single person (especially new players) in the
world says they play "tight aggressive" even when 1/2 of them don't know
what the hell it means to play "tight aggressive". why is that?


Tro

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
Looking for some advice on Party ring games.
I've been playing B&M poker reasonably successfully for a few years, and
have also proven profitable in three years of online tournament play at low
levels.
Last year, I decided to concentrate seriously on Limit ring games online for
the first time and build a big bankroll. I chose Party, as the weakest,
fishiest players were said to be there.
My bankroll conditions are these: Move up to the next limit when I reach 325
BBs at the next level, and drop down when I go below 275 BBs at my current
level.
I play tight-agressive (where 'tight' means tighter than the table I'm
sitting at), I put a lot of emphasis on odds and outs (in the absence of
proper reads online), and like to play speculative hands - suited
connectors, small pockets, Axs etc. - creatively in multiway pots where the
EV is positive.
I fold when I don't hit, and I fold when a raise tells me I'm beaten. I
don't try to bluff and steal against rubbish players. I know how to bet to
get a free turn card, and for information.
I'm not stupid.
But I got fucking burned badly, even at 2/4. The dedicated Party bankroll
diminished, I dropped to 1/2 and then 0.50/1 and got killed every time. The
speculative draws hit less than they should, the only pots I won were
small... complete fucking nightmare.
I started tracking my play with Pokertracker, which could be a very useful
tool, but what's the point when it just tells you that you're getting
unlucky, and pointing out that the fish are making a profit...
So I gave up.
A while later, after winning a tournament on Pacific, I decided to have a go
at the real games there. And my experience was *completely* different.
The usual bad beats and suckouts occurred, and the fish were annoying at
times... but by playing solid, tight-aggressive poker I was able to win over
time, move up through the limits, and build a bankroll for the middle limit
games within about 15,000 hands.
It was also pretty entertaining, as on a table where 75% see the flop, you
can play half the hands, and still be playing optimal poker.
But Pacific's software is crap. Their cashout policy is crap. You can't
multitable, and you can't use Pokertracker.
It is easy money, but I'd rather be earning it on Party, so I moved a bit of
bankroll (enough to start at 0.50/1) to see if anything had changed.
Of course, it hasn't. I'm still losing at Party, and the fish are still
winning. Pokertracker doesn't lie. So what can I do to improve this?
Why can I beat a loose 5-10 game consistently over 4000 hands, making about
2.5BB/100 hands, but I cannot beat a loose 0.50/1.00 game that plays in a
very similar way?
Of course, because Pokertracker doesn't support Pacific, I can't even
compare the statistics that matter to see what I'm doing differently, if
anything.
AA
win % 57.14
BB/hand 0.89
KK
win % 62.50
BB/hand 0.99
QQ
win % 56.25
BB/hand 0.91
JJ
win % 47.37
BB/hand 0.80
TT
win % 29.41
BB/hand -0.76
AKs
win % 60.00
BB/hand 1.07
AKo
win % 56.25
BB/hand 1.41
AQs
win % 33.33
BB/hand -1.21
AQo
win % 30.77
BB/hand -0.24
These are all less profitable than they should be statistically (because of
my aggression preflop, I should win slightly more than statistical expection
for these hands, to account for the times when someone folds a hand to my
preflop raise that would've gone on to win).
I know that variance happens. I know that players get cold-decked. I know
that theoretically a 6000-hand bad run could just happen to coincide with
the first 6000 hands a player happened to play at any given site...
But what the fuck can I do? I'm trying to avoid the 'rigged' argument if
possible, but I would like to be a winning player on Party, move up to a
proper limit, not fucking stupid 1/2, and be able to make it my regular site
for ring gaming.
Will it all even itself in my favour in the long run?
BTN

----- 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com

[Sir Benjamin Nunn]

One person, some time ago, used the phrase "tight aggressive" to describe
his play. NOW, almost every single person (especially new players) in the
world says they play "tight aggressive" even when 1/2 of them don't know
what the hell it means to play "tight aggressive". why is that?

Because X-Y axis happens to be the best way of categorising players, and
people read everywhere that the tight aggressive corner is best place on the
graph to be?

A tight-medium-loose scale defines the range of starting hands a player will
see the flop with. And a passive-medium-agressive scale defines how likely
they are to bet or raise - I don't think most new players even consider
these concepts, tbh. When they learn more, all they hear about in forums
like this is that 'tight aggressive' is good, so they try to play that way.

There are respective merits to other playing styles, but for consistently
beating a game, tight agressiveness is the most effective proven style.

BTN

[Rob Borer]

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
Because X-Y axis happens to be the best way of categorising players, and
people read everywhere that the tight aggressive corner is best place on the
graph to be?

I think that Tro was referring to the fact that this guy says he sees 50%
of the flops on Pacific Poker, but still describes himself as tight.

Rob Borer

----- 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com

[Sir Benjamin Nunn]

Post by Rob Borer

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
Because X-Y axis happens to be the best way of categorising players, and
people read everywhere that the tight aggressive corner is best place on the
graph to be?

I think that Tro was referring to the fact that this guy says he sees 50%
of the flops on Pacific Poker, but still describes himself as tight.

I didn't say that - I defined tight as 'somewhat tighter than the table', so
on Pacific I can play loose (by my usual standards) and still be playing at
optimum tightness.

Seeing 50% of the flops only works on a table where 70% see the flop, but I
would suspect that a player who sees 50% of the flops on a table where
players/flop is >70% would probably have a higher EV than a player who
didn't adapt to this table, and only saw 15% of flops for example.

BTN

[CincinnatiKid]

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn

Post by Rob Borer

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
Because X-Y axis happens to be the best way of categorising players, and
people read everywhere that the tight aggressive corner is best place on the
graph to be?

I think that Tro was referring to the fact that this guy says he sees 50%
of the flops on Pacific Poker, but still describes himself as tight.

I didn't say that - I defined tight as 'somewhat tighter than the table', so
on Pacific I can play loose (by my usual standards) and still be playing at
optimum tightness.
Seeing 50% of the flops only works on a table where 70% see the flop, but I
would suspect that a player who sees 50% of the flops on a table where
players/flop is >70% would probably have a higher EV than a player who
didn't adapt to this table, and only saw 15% of flops for example.
BTN

I was to the right of a player on Pacific NL200 who only played QQ-AA and
AK. That's it. He made a killing during the 4 hours or so I was there. He
built his $200 up to $800. Short term luck? Probably. But he was seeing
well less than 15% of the flops and the idiots at the table kept paying
him off......

----- 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com

[CrackerZack]

50% of the flops is never right regardless of how loose the table it.
At a ridiculously loose table seeing more than 35% is probably wrong,
over 40 is definitely wrong.

[Bob]

while the players on party are bad, it is actually about 4 steps from the
bottom of online players. Pacific has much worse players which is why you
do better there. You need to start from scratch and rebuild your game
geared specifically to defeat loose cally wally (loose passive) players
since they are the most profitable and view flop numbers in the 60's with
pots below 7BB's is about right on Pacific. Several things you said in
your post are NOT giving you the best ev versus this kind of weak
opposition. If you don't want to start from complete scratch, then read
Sklansky Theory of Poker at least twice completeing all the written
exercises and then follow it with the book Psychology of Poker also by 2+2
publishers. I play full time on pacific and average 4bb's per hour at 5/10
limit. This is the standard 2bb's just for good poker plus another 2bb's
for playing specifically to beat the lpp's. You can believe me or not but
all I am saying is you can play differently and make more money which is
something any poker player must be open to considering. I offer no tips
because you should build your system for yourself and your best system
would be a little differnt anyway.

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
Looking for some advice on Party ring games.
I've been playing B&M poker reasonably successfully for a few years, and
have also proven profitable in three years of online tournament play at low
levels.
Last year, I decided to concentrate seriously on Limit ring games online for
the first time and build a big bankroll. I chose Party, as the weakest,
fishiest players were said to be there.
My bankroll conditions are these: Move up to the next limit when I reach 325
BBs at the next level, and drop down when I go below 275 BBs at my current
level.
I play tight-agressive (where 'tight' means tighter than the table I'm
sitting at), I put a lot of emphasis on odds and outs (in the absence of
proper reads online), and like to play speculative hands - suited
connectors, small pockets, Axs etc. - creatively in multiway pots where the
EV is positive.
I fold when I don't hit, and I fold when a raise tells me I'm beaten. I
don't try to bluff and steal against rubbish players. I know how to bet to
get a free turn card, and for information.
I'm not stupid.
But I got fucking burned badly, even at 2/4. The dedicated Party bankroll
diminished, I dropped to 1/2 and then 0.50/1 and got killed every time. The
speculative draws hit less than they should, the only pots I won were
small... complete fucking nightmare.
I started tracking my play with Pokertracker, which could be a very useful
tool, but what's the point when it just tells you that you're getting
unlucky, and pointing out that the fish are making a profit...
So I gave up.
A while later, after winning a tournament on Pacific, I decided to have a go
at the real games there. And my experience was *completely* different.
The usual bad beats and suckouts occurred, and the fish were annoying at
times... but by playing solid, tight-aggressive poker I was able to win over
time, move up through the limits, and build a bankroll for the middle limit
games within about 15,000 hands.
It was also pretty entertaining, as on a table where 75% see the flop, you
can play half the hands, and still be playing optimal poker.
But Pacific's software is crap. Their cashout policy is crap. You can't
multitable, and you can't use Pokertracker.
It is easy money, but I'd rather be earning it on Party, so I moved a bit of
bankroll (enough to start at 0.50/1) to see if anything had changed.
Of course, it hasn't. I'm still losing at Party, and the fish are still
winning. Pokertracker doesn't lie. So what can I do to improve this?
Why can I beat a loose 5-10 game consistently over 4000 hands, making about
2.5BB/100 hands, but I cannot beat a loose 0.50/1.00 game that plays in a
very similar way?
Of course, because Pokertracker doesn't support Pacific, I can't even
compare the statistics that matter to see what I'm doing differently, if
anything.
AA
win % 57.14
BB/hand 0.89
KK
win % 62.50
BB/hand 0.99
QQ
win % 56.25
BB/hand 0.91
JJ
win % 47.37
BB/hand 0.80
TT
win % 29.41
BB/hand -0.76
AKs
win % 60.00
BB/hand 1.07
AKo
win % 56.25
BB/hand 1.41
AQs
win % 33.33
BB/hand -1.21
AQo
win % 30.77
BB/hand -0.24
These are all less profitable than they should be statistically (because of
my aggression preflop, I should win slightly more than statistical expection
for these hands, to account for the times when someone folds a hand to my
preflop raise that would've gone on to win).
I know that variance happens. I know that players get cold-decked. I know
that theoretically a 6000-hand bad run could just happen to coincide with
the first 6000 hands a player happened to play at any given site...
But what the fuck can I do? I'm trying to avoid the 'rigged' argument if
possible, but I would like to be a winning player on Party, move up to a
proper limit, not fucking stupid 1/2, and be able to make it my regular site
for ring gaming.
Will it all even itself in my favour in the long run?
BTN

_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.1 - http://www.recpoker.com

[Sir Benjamin Nunn]

Post by Bob
while the players on party are bad, it is actually about 4 steps from the
bottom of online players. Pacific has much worse players which is why you
do better there.

You've hit the nail on the head there.

According to Poker Tracker, the % of fish (based on the default rules for
auto-rating players) is pretty low. A typical full LHE table might only
contain two or three fish, and a mix of rocks, tight-aggressive and maniacs.

I know I can make money consistently playing against the Pacific fishpool,
but it's more about the challenge than the money.

Post by Bob
You need to start from scratch and rebuild your game
geared specifically to defeat loose cally wally (loose passive) players
since they are the most profitable and view flop numbers in the 60's with
pots below 7BB's is about right on Pacific. Several things you said in
your post are NOT giving you the best ev versus this kind of weak
opposition. If you don't want to start from complete scratch, then read
Sklansky Theory of Poker at least twice completeing all the written
exercises and then follow it with the book Psychology of Poker also by 2+2
publishers.

Have read both of these - and, yes, they're both very good books. Psychology
of Poker repeats itself rather too much, but the concepts within are sound.

Post by Bob
I play full time on pacific and average 4bb's per hour at 5/10
limit. This is the standard 2bb's just for good poker plus another 2bb's
for playing specifically to beat the lpp's. You can believe me or not but
all I am saying is you can play differently and make more money which is
something any poker player must be open to considering. I offer no tips
because you should build your system for yourself and your best system
would be a little differnt anyway.

Agree.

Pacific I can beat for 2-2.5 BB/hour without really trying, and I know I
could increase that rate by being a bit more careful (like making sure there
are enough LPPs on the table to give me the odds before calling from early
position with 22).

The problem on Party is not the calling stations, but the more aggressive
players who 3-bet or cap preflop against one another. I like to see flops
for cheap against multiple opponents with speculative hands, and that's much
harder on Party.

BTN

[BreezyLou]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:22:51 -0000, "Sir Benjamin Nunn"

Post by Sir Benjamin Nunn
I know that variance happens. I know that players get cold-decked. I know
that theoretically a 6000-hand bad run could just happen to coincide with
the first 6000 hands a player happened to play at any given site...
But what the fuck can I do? I'm trying to avoid the 'rigged' argument if
possible, but I would like to be a winning player on Party, move up to a
proper limit, not fucking stupid 1/2, and be able to make it my regular site
for ring gaming.
Will it all even itself in my favour in the long run?

I could help you out. I could even tell you what you're doing wrong.
But what's in it for me? I don't believe in educating the
competition. But I'll be following this thread so see if anyone gives
you the right answer. My interest is piqued.

[Raider Fan]

Post by BreezyLou
I could help you out. I could even tell you what you're doing wrong.
But what's in it for me? I don't believe in educating the
competition. But I'll be following this thread so see if anyone gives
you the right answer. My interest is piqued.

Why do you come here? You want to pick up a thing or two, but you don't
want to "educate your competition". Think about it for a second or two.
What percent of your competition participates in this newsgroup? I'd say
less than 5.

What is the point in your post? If you have something to offer, but
you're not willing to do so, why not just keep quiet? Are you that big of
an asshole?

______________________________________________________________________ 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com

[CrackerZack]

Given your other reply, i seriously doubt you'll be much help. But
that's ok, you got that high and mighty thing going for you, which is
nice.