Rake and FL SH

    • kavboj84
      kavboj84
      Gold
      Joined: 16.06.2011 Posts: 2,038
      Hi !

      On the coaching yesterday there was a guy who said that it isnt worth playing against less than 3 opponents on SH tables, no matter how weak they are cuz the rake will own you anyway. I didnt pay attention for this so far, but now Im interested in finding out the exact numbers when its still worth to play and when you have to stand up.

      So explaining this topic would be appreciated. I found some tables comparing the rake on various sites and limits in BB/100, but IDK how you get these values. This depends on your own play right ?
      Also how can you estimate your winrate against a certain player ? Lets say I know that I pay 10 BB/100 against 3 players on a table but how can I know if I have more than a 10BB /100 edge over them ?
  • 14 replies
    • CoreySteel
      CoreySteel
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2006 Posts: 3,366
      It's true. Micro and low limits HU rake is not beatable.
      At Stars (which has the best rake structure) even 2/4 HU is considered as a "rake trap".

      No one can really give you exact numbers, but here's an example...
      We usually have winrate stats for people playing 5-6 handed.

      So if you play heads-up with -1BB/100 6max loser, you won't beat rake. But if you play -5BB/100 SH player, you could beat rake, because you will have an even bigger edge over him HU than at SH.

      That doesn't mean if you play -3BB/100 player that you should quit. Game creation is also important and there's a high chance a bad player will come join you two.
    • Boomer2k10
      Boomer2k10
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.09.2010 Posts: 2,551
      As Corey said, micro stakes HUHU rake is pretty much unbeatable, I remember a match I played vs someone at 0.5/1 a while back on Stars. He was decent enough in fundemental startegy and I just decided to play him for a bit to get a feel for HUHU overall.

      He started with $28 and after 230 hands I busted him.

      I lost $3 in doing so :f_eek:

      Basically playing anyone who can tie their own shoes at anything 2/4 and below in a pure HUHU game is asking for failure.

      Of course everyone's rake paid is going to be a little different but those sites take millions of hands played by thousands of players so as far as comprisons go they're as good as they get.

      However, at micro stakes short games should fill fairly quickly and you can get some pretty sick games by game creating as, especially if you're a known reg, usually it's weaker players who will sit and play you for a while so tbh I think you can game create at any level if you can't find the tables. Just don't play HUHU
    • kavboj84
      kavboj84
      Gold
      Joined: 16.06.2011 Posts: 2,038
      But how can that be ? Ive found these two tables which describe the avg rake in 100 hands in FL 2max and 6max :





      according to these, on stars at 1/2 2max the rake is 5,59 BB/100. On 6max, its 3,115 BB/100, on 0,5/1 what you mentioned it is 4,95 BB/100. Still quite a lot of people are playing 2max 1/2 on stars right now, just checked it.

      Something must be wrong here cause if you lost 28+3 = 31 $ /230 hand that means -13,478 BB/100 and the rake is only -4,95 BB/100 (providing the tables are correct).
      And I also remember playing against a maniac on iPoker HU on a 0,05/0,1 6max table quite a few hands (IDK how much really) and I won about 6$ from him, and the rake is here -4,3 BB/100. Also IDK if you should divide that with 2, cause both players pay, and -2,15 BB/100 isnt that high. I mean if I dont have at least 3BB/100 on a fish than I must be doing something wrong.

      edit: Ive just checked my stars db in HM2 with a filter for 2 players, my winrate is 13,79 bb/100 not too many hands tho only 488 from 0,05/0,1 to 0,25/0,5 6max (however I dont play too much HU cause im not that good with wide ranges, only when I have a clear edge on my opponent)
    • YohanN7
      YohanN7
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.06.2009 Posts: 4,156
      It is just a shame that Limit HUHU is raked the way it is. I think that it is one of the finest forms of poker. It's like boxing (with only slightly less brain damage).

      Anyway, I was tilting off my last dollars playing HU at Stars. The match went up and down like crazy, and I finally sat out being close to broke, and ended up chatting with my opponent for a long while. He told me this (among other things about HU):

      1.) He maybe had a slight edge over me (can't argue with that)
      2.) That slight edge wouldn't compensate for the rake.

      This dude and I was playing for the pleasure of playing. While this is fine, I think that it is just horrible that poker is reduced to Roulette (or worse) when two decent players but up.

      I have a story similar to Boomers. A HUHU match became personal (because we both enjoyed playing). While I don't remember who came out on top, we both raked more than $100 in an absolute micro limit game.

      Do the sites have an explicit policy against HU?

      /Johan = :f_confused:
    • taavi1337
      taavi1337
      Bronze
      Joined: 29.05.2009 Posts: 2,920
      I have a 1.4 BB/100 winrate at 2/4 heads-up with 5.5 BB/100 rake (Pacific). Only 6.5k hands, but I think it's beatable. Play only the guys who make big mistakes, and have a good idea of what you're doing yourself.
    • redskwerl
      redskwerl
      Black
      Joined: 03.03.2008 Posts: 3,804
      you can probably beat 5-6BB/100 rake if your opponents are really bad... but i mean if you have to tableselect like crazy, wait around for action and still only have an EV of 0.5-1BB/100.. you might as well play SH with the same winrate and put in 4 times as many hands per month.
    • Boomer2k10
      Boomer2k10
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.09.2010 Posts: 2,551
      @Kay

      Those figures are what EACH player pays in rake. The match I played was very aggressive so bigger pots ergo more rake. We both paid about 6.5BB/100 in rake which over 230 hands for both of us is about 30BB.

      In terms of winrate, the sample sizes being quoted here aren't even close to determining an accurate winrate. You need 100k hands minimum to even be within 1BB/100 and for HUHU where Standard Deviation is higher than 6-max I'd say 150k-200k would still only get you within 1BB/100.

      Basically agree with what taavi says. Be solid yourself and only play vs people who have GAPING holes in their game at anything 2/4-
    • datsmahname
      datsmahname
      Global
      Joined: 23.11.2009 Posts: 1,366
      Hi guys, nice to see the conversation carrying on outside the coaching.

      I'll just add a couple things. The PokerTableRatings rake page may still be out of date.

      Stars made some large changes to their rake structure earlier this year. HU tables are now raked at 2% with a 50 cent cap from 1/2-15/30.

      A pot size needs to be $25 to reach the cap. Pots of this size are rare at 1/2 (12.5BB) and at 2/4 a $25 pot (6.25BB) is still above average.

      For the low stakes, the site is winning just under 2% of all money wagered. If the average pot size is 4.5BB at 1/2 then the site's "winrate" at those stakes is nearly 9BB/100.
    • Boomer2k10
      Boomer2k10
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.09.2010 Posts: 2,551
      One thing I may recommend is that if you want to learn HUHUFLHE the best place may be Sit n Goes until you get up to the appropriate stakes or a bankroll big enough where you're not being fried alive by the rake.

      Also prevents some of the standard HUHU annoyances like Hit n Runners as you're locked into the game

      Obviously it's not going to exactly replicate a cash game situation but it's better than paying 6BB/100 in rake
    • kavboj84
      kavboj84
      Gold
      Joined: 16.06.2011 Posts: 2,038
      Thanks for the replies guys.Basically I dont wanna play 2max, I play 6max only but sometimes the table reduces to 3-4 players, and I wanna know when its worth to stay and when I need to bounce. Also its hard to leave if theres only one opponent left but he is flushing all his money to you. I needed to know somehow, when my edge over the other player(s) beats the rake and when not.
    • datsmahname
      datsmahname
      Global
      Joined: 23.11.2009 Posts: 1,366
      This is a question that people ask very often in short handed situations, but we need to ask this question all the time. "Do our opponents lose enough so theres something left over after the rake?" If you spend enough time on it you'll start to find this question easier to answer.
    • kavboj84
      kavboj84
      Gold
      Joined: 16.06.2011 Posts: 2,038
      Would you help me to shorten the amount of time that is needed to find an answer :f_biggrin:
    • taavi1337
      taavi1337
      Bronze
      Joined: 29.05.2009 Posts: 2,920
      It's hard to say how big one's edge is in any situation. You have to feel it somehow :D

      Try to get a great seat - tight guy on your left and loose fish on your right. Seathop to achieve this. Seat selection is very very important part of your winrate.

      If it's 3-4handed and everyone's fishy - I think it's almost always +EV to you at any stakes if you're somewhat decent. So don't leave if all other players are making big mistakes.
    • datsmahname
      datsmahname
      Global
      Joined: 23.11.2009 Posts: 1,366
      Yep, Taavi knows his stuff.

      To add to that, have an idea about how much it costs the game to be running. Whats the total amount being raked? Who's paying it? At what rate do you expect your opponents to lose money?... or win money?

      Short handed play can leave you in a lot of marginal spots. Some of it takes practice even against a nice line-up.