ITH Poker Forum

[jeffnc]

What I've seen personally in my limited experience is that live limit play doesn't get any better, but the selection of tables has gone down. As one example, there used to be tons of $8/16 tables at Bellagio. There was only 1 last time I was there, replaced by $2/5 NL tables.

[MacTaiga]

I agree that there are more bad players playing the NL tables, the reason I stick to the limit side is that I can grind out several tables at once working off bonuses and know I can steadily make money doing this.

Those were my thoughts exactly, Mac, but I'm no longer so confident that I'm right. I dunno, maybe I just haven't done enough chasing yet. I'm on my second at Prima this year. The first I broke even on the play and came away with a nice $700, which was fine by me, but this one . . . after a quick initial +75BB I've been getting consistently hammered and have lost about 200BB.

200BB down is tough to take, I've been lucky to catch rushes before downswings rather than the other way around but I've had a couple of comparable swings. My last 6 months varies between -50BB and +200BB each, it's helped me to have a friend who plays and regularly queries my play (does a great job of keeping me honest:). I do think the limit tables are getting tougher though and if I stop being up on average then I'll take a serious look at NL.

That seems far too much to be simply variance. I'd have thought after almost 3 yrs my game would be good enough to at least hold my own at 1/2 grinding tables, but it seems not. And if I can't even do that, well, wtf can I do?

On my regular tables the problem is that most of the players are old hands too, we're all getting better You might be right about the variance though, always worth seeing if you can find improvements. You probably have a feel yourself for whether you're playing well, I tend to know when a run is me or the cards.

What I have discovered recently is SnG's on a really soft site, I'm loving it and as they do 6 player tables I'm finding I can cash pretty frequently. Maybe a change of game to keep things fresh and make you re-learn some things?

[mconstab]

I agree that there are more bad players playing the NL tables, the reason I stick to the limit side is that I can grind out several tables at once working off bonuses and know I can steadily make money doing this.

Those were my thoughts exactly, Mac, but I'm no longer so confident that I'm right. I dunno, maybe I just haven't done enough chasing yet. I'm on my second at Prima this year. The first I broke even on the play and came away with a nice $700, which was fine by me, but this one . . . after a quick initial +75BB I've been getting consistently hammered and have lost about 200BB. That seems far too much to be simply variance. I'd have thought after almost 3 yrs my game would be good enough to at least hold my own at 1/2 grinding tables, but it seems not. And if I can't even do that, well, wtf can I do?

Pauli's eyelids are looking tastier by the minute

I'm in this category with Prima as well at the moment. I just can't seem to beat any limit from 2/4 upwards there and this is over a decent sample size as well. It's pretty disheartening when you've been playing the game for a while as well as studying hands, books etc. I also seem to be running horribly bad constantly, always being sucked out on, and generally missing a large percentage of draws. My win % with the big pockets pairs is significantly lower then the norm also.

What I have noticed though is that some of the players at 2/4 also play up to 20/40 which probably doesn't help

[Misunderstud]

You probably have a feel yourself for whether you're playing well, I tend to know when a run is me or the cards.

I usually know when I'm making more mistakes than usual, yes. But when you think you're playing your A (stands for 'average' in my case) game that has served you well enough until now, and are still bombing, you do tend to wonder where to go from there.

I'm in this category with Prima as well at the moment. I just can't seem to beat any limit from 2/4 upwards there and this is over a decent sample size as well. It's pretty disheartening when you've been playing the game for a while as well as studying hands, books etc. I also seem to be running horribly bad constantly, always being sucked out on, and generally missing a large percentage of draws. My win % with the big pockets pairs is significantly lower then the norm also.

What I have noticed though is that some of the players at 2/4 also play up to 20/40 which probably doesn't help

I'm truly sorry to hear that, even if a little relieved that it's not 'just me'.

My experience with big hands is similar, which is odd, since these tables don't seem to be especially loose and a lot of the cracking seems to occur HU. I've even begun to wonder whether the algorithm is skewed towards rake maximization!

If you're finding 2/4 games, I'd guess they're not at FR, since 1/2 tables seem to be the only ones in regular use there. I'd guess this is because, at Prima, a raked hand is a raked hand, and bonuses will clear almost as quickly at 1/2. Nevertheless, you're right that higher-limit players are often to be found chasing there. OTOH, it's hardly a fish-free zone either, and it really ought to be possible to avoid the true sharks.

[MacTaiga]

You probably have a feel yourself for whether you're playing well, I tend to know when a run is me or the cards.

I usually know when I'm making more mistakes than usual, yes.

That is a much better way of saying what I meant, I know I make mistakes and if even just the ones I know about are adding up then I can't blame the cards.

But when you think you're playing your A (stands for 'average' in my case) game that has served you well enough until now, and are still bombing, you do tend to wonder where to go from there.

I think you have to work out if it's really your game, I read the poker mindset recently and it had a whole section on downswings (plus it's a good read in general as well), it might help. In fact I find my emergence from downswings has come suspiciously close to me reading another poker book or two. I think it's got something to do with making me study decisions away from the table and make less autopilot decisions (dangerous if the autopilot is broken).

Interesting comment about "A for average", got me trying to think where I'd put my game . I know I'm decent (or consistently lucky) as I make money at it and have had a few good tournament results, but compared to some of the talent on here...well, least said the better possibly

[pokerbear]

Hi. My apologies for my hiatus. I have been hospitalized, as has my wife.

I guess I forget that this is the INTERNET Texas Hold'em forum. The live games (though, yes, there are fewer at lower middle limits like 8-16), as still quite good up and down the line. Not so on-line. The limit games are tougher for reasons that I am certain have been explored in depth on this site (I will pitch in if my opinion is wanted.)

NL games always get tougher, but there are still some spots on-line. I have some well at heads-up NL SnGs ($50 and $100). Plus, guaranteed no collusion!

So my answer about online was incomplete. mostly play live, and the games,. while not a good a 3 years ago, as so much better than 10 years ago (when I was also making good money) that is no comparison.

[nsidestrate]

Hi. My apologies for my hiatus. I have been hospitalized, as has my wife.

I'm very sorry to hear that. I hope all is well now.

[jeffnc]

Hope you are both doing better Barry.

[pokerbear]

Thanks for the kind thoughts. Much appreciated..

[AlamedaMike]

Perhaps I could add a supplementary to nside's question: why (or why not) FR rather than 6-max?

My guess would be that short-handed games are rare live. As far as I know, games never run intentionally short-handed. Sometimes they don't have a full table, but I don't know of any tables that are intentionally limited to six players in a casino setting.

Not intentionally short as you say but quite often there are short handed games. Force move tables and early in the AM have short handed play. Some casions will not break a game that becomes short (5-6) unless the players want to.

The games in my area do get short handed and I do not like to play less than 6 for very long - the limits available are between 3/6 and 80/160 - but I just play the low limits. My point is that if you like short handed play live it is available in some areas and more so 20+

I played NL all of 2005 and though it was the cats meow - 2006 on I am strictly a limit player. I have seen most of the writing and games are focused on NL. I am very happy that Barry still writes about limit - also, Roy Cooke.

I can always find a limit game in my area (San Francisco).