Zoom PLO

    • JonikoP
      JonikoP
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.05.2010 Posts: 600
      Does anyone have a decent sample size at Zoom PLO10, 25 and/or 50?

      If so, what is your winrate? What winrate do you think is possible? And what kind of stats are you playing?

      The games seem to be really nitty to me - definitely beatable, but the winrate seems low compared to the regular tables.
  • 17 replies
    • Ribbo
      Ribbo
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.06.2010 Posts: 6,157
      My hilarious zoom 50 graph :f_biggrin:



      Lost $850 but paid $1500 in rake so was actually a winning player before the rake despite running 22 buyins under EV
    • mute20
      mute20
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.01.2011 Posts: 563
      Originally posted by Ribbo
      My hilarious zoom 50 graph :f_biggrin:



      Lost $850 but paid $1500 in rake so was actually a winning player before the rake despite running 22 buyins under EV
      I can only imagine how crazy a omaha graph can be even compared to yours :f_frown:
    • TheMarxBros3
      TheMarxBros3
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.09.2008 Posts: 1,346
      Does anyone have a decent sample size at Zoom PLO10, 25 and/or 50?

      If so, what is your winrate? What winrate do you think is possible? And what kind of stats are you playing?

      The games seem to be really nitty to me - definitely beatable, but the winrate seems low compared to the regular tables.


      This is my graph for Zoom bring in $25. It may be to small for what you are looking for but I just started playing Zoom (I'm not a fan) in order to make myself play more aggressively pre-flop. I usually play full-ring PLO and that is a nit-game IMO.

      My sample size is barely over 1,000 hands but my win-rate is pretty good for a person who doesn't like the game.

      You can draw your own conclusions from the graph but I find it anything but nitty. 3 betting is much more common pre-flop and the overall agression is more prevalent here.


    • JonikoP
      JonikoP
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.05.2010 Posts: 600
      Thanks - although not sure you can really draw any conclusions from 1000 hands of PLO.

      By nitty, I mean there are a lot more people playing stats like 25/16/4, 20/18/7, 20/10/2 whereas at the regular tables it seems to be more like 35/18/7, 30/15/3 and a lot more droolers 60/5/0. Overall Zoom is a much tougher game IMO.

      This weekend I played Zoom PLO10 on Stars and PLO50 on Party. The Party games were definitely weaker. I think its probably time to abandon my Zoom experiment...
    • Kreatief
      Kreatief
      Bronze
      Joined: 28.01.2006 Posts: 13,896
      I played a couple hands PLO10 SH zoom to PLO50 SH zoom. They are all beatable, and there are alot of recreational players, but they are just different compared to the ringgame tables. The fishes are tighter. Some of them preflop but at least most of them postflop. If they dont hit that well, they just fold and go on to the next hand. Theres not as much thin value as on the ringgame tables.
      Though there are still the typical fish, peeling alot and stuff.
      The regs are mostly very tightish and there are alot of nits playing down to 8/3. Most of them dont 3bet much, so there are no real battles. But because all ranges are thighter than normally, the thin value is less and the swings are bigger.

      the regular tables are way softer and easy to play. If you are able to put in some volume on them, Id recommend playing them. You should also have at least 30% rb, as it is a big part of your winrate.
      I also play at ipoker and my rb winrate is at 10bb/100. But i just dont like playing there and are only able to get like 300 hands an hour, wich obviusly sucks.
    • Heitzenizer
      Heitzenizer
      Bronze
      Joined: 04.02.2012 Posts: 885
      Not the biggest sample either but here's my ZoomPLO10.




      Thats 2.7bb/100 which is pretty bad imo and there's room for loads of improvement. Even with the rake being 10-15bb/100 I don't see why it should be hard to have a winrate of closer to 10bb/100.
    • Skodljivec
      Skodljivec
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.12.2011 Posts: 5,709
      I think rake is waaaaay above 15bb/100 at plo10... I think it's above that even at plo25 if i'm not mistaken. But i agree. It's really a small winrate... However it's better than a loosing graph, that's for sure :) Like you said, definetly room for improvement :)

      Btw, why do you guys even like zoom? I never tried it beyond 200 hands... Nits, everywhere you look, nits nits nits...

      Heitzenizher, if you have such a graph at plo10 zoom i'm 99% sure you'd have at least twice the winrate at regular tables plo10
    • Ribbo
      Ribbo
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.06.2010 Posts: 6,157
      I like it because I crush nits :f_biggrin:
    • Skodljivec
      Skodljivec
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.12.2011 Posts: 5,709
      Originally posted by Ribbo
      I like it because I crush nits :f_biggrin:
      Riiiiight....

      :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
    • Heitzenizer
      Heitzenizer
      Bronze
      Joined: 04.02.2012 Posts: 885
      Well. I have limited time to play poker and I'm using my lap top, so I'm either playing 4 zoom tables or 4 regular tables for maybe 1 hour a day. If I want any kind of volume zoom seems to fit my schedule.

      But you are right there's lots of nits, although it's plenty of fishes as well. You just have to adapt to both of them.
    • aXSesPS
      aXSesPS
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.12.2010 Posts: 61
      Hi there

      I only play zoom, ranging from PLO25 to PLO200 when I am feeling adventurous. I have only recently started learning PLO, and I much prefer it to Hold'em
      I am currently losing, but am working through all of Lechrumski's videos and any other PLO material I can get.
      I play zoom PLO on stars and HU PLO on ipoker, will be glad to post my hands at plo25 as I play that the most.
      I will post my rate here once I have enough hands.
    • Kaitz20
      Kaitz20
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.02.2007 Posts: 27,343
      Can´t post graph, since I don´t have enough hands, but I would personally prefer staying out of Zoom. Without no history you´re likely get back a littlebit too often and at least regular 6-max table you can figure out soon who are the fishes and against which players you can make moves

      Playing sometimes for fun ZOOM PLO 10 has always some entertainment value :)

      best regards,
    • mute20
      mute20
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.01.2011 Posts: 563
      I was thinking of picking up plo, but probably not soon cause the swings are so high.. I guess their is more to learn as the game is not as popular till now.
    • aXSesPS
      aXSesPS
      Bronze
      Joined: 13.12.2010 Posts: 61
      I cane from NL, switched to PLO only now as I find it much more fun to play.
      the swings and variance are higher, that is why a 50 buy in is recommended per stake

      :-)
    • Skodljivec
      Skodljivec
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.12.2011 Posts: 5,709
      Yeah, imo PLO is really more fun than nlh
    • Tim64
      Tim64
      Black
      Joined: 02.11.2008 Posts: 7,513
      Originally posted by JonikoP
      Does anyone have a decent sample size at Zoom PLO10, 25 and/or 50?

      If so, what is your winrate? What winrate do you think is possible? And what kind of stats are you playing?

      The games seem to be really nitty to me - definitely beatable, but the winrate seems low compared to the regular tables.
      I've just finished 25k hands at plo50 Zoom.



      I've no idea what is possible - but I would guess at least 10bb/100 is doable, esp if you try to play more pots with rec. players.
    • Kaitz20
      Kaitz20
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.02.2007 Posts: 27,343
      That´s why I stay away at PLO Zoom :)
      You can never be sure, if regulars are going out of line or have always nuts

      best regards,