[Closed] Fish Theory

You definitely right about that. A lot of regs prefer the main sites because they offer a good vip program and the possibility to massively multitable as well as guaranteed traffic at almost anytime of the day on most limits and type of game. However a good winrate is > than most other thing.

Best regards

Thazar

bump. it took me a while to write this i want some discussion.

Ya really who plays on stars

Originally posted by Targetme
Ya really who plays on stars

isildur1 helllll yeah, i won a pot off of him one time.

since I like to play few tables at lowlimits, I also like playomg at small sites.
But I like tournamentson stars, because the limits don't go up so fast as on small sites.

Micro-Cash games on small sites are extremely profitable if you don't want/need to play 40 000 tales at once. I find the maximum possible on my site of 10 is quite enough and the play is as described by OP, where he average Players on FLop % is often >40.
Unfortunately there is much less action if you are a 'higher limit' player (>NL100)

OH nearly forgot, the PLO micros are just funny.

I've always suspected this was true...

Can someone give me a list of these smaller, fishy euro sites?

I have no evidence to support this, but they are all fishy lol. SO just find any euro site and you should crush haha

But the smaller the site the higher the rake it evens out more then most people think. For example the nl25 players on party are worse then stars and stars has far more regulars (more on this later). Theres something like 6% winning players on party with decent sample size. The higher the limit the more winning regs. I would say nl25 has like 2% winning players. I see more breakeven russian mssers that I can only describe as bots then winners. I am one of if not the biggest winner at party this year with 500k hands. Yet there are probly 50-100 star grinders at the same limit that have me crushed(maybe not that many).

Theres two main differences I can think of. Party has off the top of my head from the ptr article I read awile back 33% more rake. That alone is like what? 2bb/100? im not sure thats a estimate but its huge.

The second is table selection. When I grind which isint usually peak hours I PLAY EVERY TABLE AT PARTY NL25. Thats sh and fr obviously I avoid the jackpot tables there unbeatable at nl25. Where as star grinders have 60+? tables to choose from and from my experience way way less ssers. The average Party sh nl25 table looks like this. Two breakeven russian mssers that play every table. One breakeven reg, a donkey and a small loser. Long term your not making much off the mssers and your playing them at every table so thats 20% of your villians killing your winrate.

So is there truth to what im saying or am I making excuses for a smaller winrate then top star grinders? im not sure but thats my 2 cents

Originally posted by thazar
You definitely right about that. A lot of regs prefer the main sites because they offer a good vip program and the possibility to massively multitable as well as guaranteed traffic at almost anytime of the day on most limits and type of game. However a good winrate is > than most other thing.

Best regards

Thazar

imo, $/hr > winrate

Any examples of small euro sites?
I only really know the big sites

Originally posted by Targetme
But the smaller the site the higher the rake it evens out more then most people think. For example the nl25 players on party are worse then stars and stars has far more regulars (more on this later). Theres something like 6% winning players on party with decent sample size. The higher the limit the more winning regs. I would say nl25 has like 2% winning players. I see more breakeven russian mssers that I can only describe as bots then winners. I am one of if not the biggest winner at party this year with 500k hands. Yet there are probly 50-100 star grinders at the same limit that have me crushed(maybe not that many).

Theres two main differences I can think of. Party has off the top of my head from the ptr article I read awile back 33% more rake. That alone is like what? 2bb/100? im not sure thats a estimate but its huge.

The second is table selection. When I grind which isint usually peak hours I PLAY EVERY TABLE AT PARTY NL25. Thats sh and fr obviously I avoid the jackpot tables there unbeatable at nl25. Where as star grinders have 60+? tables to choose from and from my experience way way less ssers. The average Party sh nl25 table looks like this. Two breakeven russian mssers that play every table. One breakeven reg, a donkey and a small loser. Long term your not making much off the mssers and your playing them at every table so thats 20% of your villians killing your winrate.

So is there truth to what im saying or am I making excuses for a smaller winrate then top star grinders? im not sure but thats my 2 cents

... Party and Stars rake isn't the same? 5%?

Originally posted by supeyrio

Originally posted by thazar
You definitely right about that. A lot of regs prefer the main sites because they offer a good vip program and the possibility to massively multitable as well as guaranteed traffic at almost anytime of the day on most limits and type of game. However a good winrate is > than most other thing.

Best regards

Thazar

imo, $/hr > winrate

defo, wrong choice of words but that is what I meant

Thazar

I get more rakeback on party then I would on stars which is the only reason I play there its about same as ft. There was an article that party tables averaged 3.5$/100hands and stars was like 2.3 but that might have included jackpot tables