I miss plo content... 
Notifications
Clear all
Originally posted by ghaleon
Yeah it's not great to flat either, but then again if we assume SB is raising ATC and tends to double/triple barrel postflop his range on turn and river will just be so absurdly wide that bluff catching even in this spot becomes reasonable.
I think that's even more of a reason for folding pre. I can't think of anything more gross than knowing that sb is going to be putting me all in on the river and forcing me to show up with a boat in order to be able to call him because we can't ever "bluffcatch" in this spot.
For example, flatting AA and calling down post is probably as risky as calling a 4b jam pre with TT/JJ.
Originally posted kyyberi
I miss plo content...
well, I'm trying to source a plo coach 
sent you a pm.
Originally posted by ghaleon
Btw Tim has there been quarterly report for this year yet?
The directors regret the absence of this years quarterly report. They intend to produce a half year report.
It's frustrating for me, obv, but it's out of my hands. ♦
Originally posted by Tim64
Originally posted by ghaleon
Yeah it's not great to flat either, but then again if we assume SB is raising ATC and tends to double/triple barrel postflop his range on turn and river will just be so absurdly wide that bluff catching even in this spot becomes reasonable.I think that's even more of a reason for folding pre. I can't think of anything more gross than knowing that sb is going to be putting me all in on the river and forcing me to show up with a boat in order to be able to call him because we can't ever "bluffcatch" in this spot.
For example, flatting AA and calling down post is probably as risky as calling a 4b jam pre with TT/JJ.
Well I partly disagree. If villain is raising ATC, cbetting almost always his range is still almost ATC in turn. Now if he fires turn again often to put ICM pressure his range is still very wide in river. Risky, but reasonable to call down without monster hand.
Hi Tim - fascinated to see how your PLO experiment goes. How are things so far on Zoom PLO50? Weems like a tough jumping in point but you're obviously a poker guru so I'm sure you can handle it!
What are your thoughts on the the rake? Why did you choose Zoom over ordinary games?
Good luck with it!
J
Thanks for dropping by JonikoP. I think plo50 is a decent starting point. If I start at the micros when I'm rolled for pl100/200 I'm just not going to really be playing against the kind of players I would face if I actually tried to do this for a living. So even though my many mistakes will be more costly at plo50, it's a reasonable compromise.
Rake seems absurd. It's one of my main concerns going forward... I think playing zoom is just easier b/c I'm dipping in an out and I don't know anyone so if i join normal tables i might end up oop to a strong reg and loose 3 bi b4 i realise it 
At the moment I'm running very well indeed (unsust., obv) but mostly it's dumb luck b/c my h/h in the forums are rightly being torn apart ♦
Originally posted by Tim64
Originally posted kyyberi
I miss plo content...well, I'm trying to source a plo coach
Oh well... Sad day. We have lost one more to the dark side (as Kyyberi likes to refer).
Don't be sad. We have cookies. Join us.
Originally posted by ghaleon
Originally posted by Tim64
Originally posted kyyberi
I miss plo content...well, I'm trying to source a plo coach
Oh well... Sad day. We have lost one more to the dark side (as Kyyberi likes to refer).
Ah, but WAIT!!!
Who said you can't mix business (sngs) with PLeasure (plo)? Today, as well as the usual day job of grinding reg-infested NLHE sngs, I found time for some PLO SNGS. When you mix a swingy format (sngs) with a swingy game (plo), you get SWINGS. However, I eventually grinded out a small profit:
ABI: $11.88 ♠_cool:
Yes. Depending on your definition of works. But the ev bit seems ok.
Edit:
A guy goes to see his doctor.
The doctor says: "I don't know how to tell you this, but you've got to stop masturbating"
The guy says: "why?"
The doctor says: "so I can examine you".
Sux to be gettin new plo regs at stars ♠ ♦
But PLO SNG's must be like the gambliest gamboool ever ♦... Is there such a thing on Stars like Hyper-Turbo NLO 6max SNGS? ♦ ♦ ♦
Originally posted by Skodljivec
Sux to be gettin new plo regs at stars ♠ ♦But PLO SNG's must be like the gambliest gamboool ever ♦... Is there such a thing on Stars like Hyper-Turbo NLO 6max SNGS? ♦ ♦ ♦
There's PLO Hyper Turbo HU SnGs running, never played one but every time I search my opponent and he's playing 1x NLHE HU Hyper and 1x PLO HU Hyper I instantly know he's gonna be gambling it up
Originally posted by Skodljivec
Sux to be gettin new plo regs at stars ♠ ♦But PLO SNG's must be like the gambliest gamboool ever ♦... Is there such a thing on Stars like Hyper-Turbo NLO 6max SNGS? ♦ ♦ ♦
Almost. There are Hyper-Turbo PLO 6max SNGS. Very low variance. :/
Hey Tim, long-time lurker, first-time poster Maybe you've already seen this, but just in case you haven't, there are some pretty convincing 2+2 threads arguing that rake on PLO50/100 is too high for the game to be beatable in the long run:
Petition to Pokerstars to reduce the PLO cash game rake
no money plo, everyone is raked
2nd thread especially is really scary. Definitely something to keep an eye on if you're thinking of transitioning to PLO.
That second thread has some flaws imo. They have examined the hands from the players that have played the most hands a PLO100. Now if someone grinds a sh*tload of hands at PLO100 without moving up, doesn't that tell us that he isn't a winning player in the first place?
You can ask Ribbo and TwiceT if they think PLO100 rake is beatable.
But still, the rake is high and when the player pool evolves a little it might kill the game unless something is done.
About PLO sitngo's and tournaments, the basic thing to understand is the concept "risk of gambling".
When you have a big stack, you can usually bully shorter stacks how you wish. The perfect example is when you have zillion bb's at BTN and you open. At the blind there is 10bb shortie. Now what is he going to do? The lone fact that he usually has 0% FE ties his hands. He can never raise as a bluff. So he can raise only for value. Most players don't like to flip and raise something like QJT9 there, so they are just waiting for aces or kings. And while folding 95% of their hands hero can win lots of blinds. So when they finally get those aces, they are still almost flipping against hero's range. They raise to 6bb's, hero calls and they have to shove flop. Hero can play flawlessy against them. And if they happen to win the flip, hero pays it from the blinds he has won against them in last orbits.
That concept is very easyto apply at lower stakes cos 99% of the villains don't understand that they NEED to gamble anyway if they have a short stack. And the longer they wait, the less they win if they finally win that flip.
If you know how to use big stack, you can make a lot of chips at 50/50's. No one wants to gamble their payout so if hero is the only aggressive player at the table he can make a lot of money in the bubble when the blinds are high.
Originally posted by Kyyberi
That second thread has some flaws imo. They have examined the hands from the players that have played the most hands a PLO100. Now if someone grinds a sh*tload of hands at PLO100 without moving up, doesn't that tell us that he isn't a winning player in the first place?You can ask Ribbo and TwiceT if they think PLO100 rake is beatable.
But still, the rake is high and when the player pool evolves a little it might kill the game unless something is done.
Yeah, but you can make arguments that go the other way too - that if someone's losing a lot then they usually won't play very many hands either, so the players with most played hands will tend to be solid players who are running decently, but are scared of moving up.
And it's not THAT uncommon for players who are winning at a stake where you can make a living to just not move up, so if PLO100 really was the kind of game where you can get good winrates despite the rake then you would expect to see some people who would grind out a good winrate for $60/h or whatever, and those people would be the ones with the most played hands. I remember reading the blog of a guy on here who was making $30/h by mass-multitabling NL25, lol.
I dissagree. I had a huge winrate at plo25 at Stars, over a decent sample... Even with the killer rake, it was still beatable...
And now at plo50, i'm doing ok 2... I i ran a bit better i'd be at 100 already... I think those threads are just wierd... How can there even be any regs if everyone is loosing? ♦ ♦...
Ofc making the rake smaller would be superawesome... But that's beside the point