More Poker

[DavyB]

I am by no means a poker pro, like snowbank and pokerrich, nor did I pull ESPN airtime at a WSOP final table like JScott. However, this post is more geared to some people who may have read some of the poker posts and thought to themselves that they may want to try it. Obviously, several people have tried and had varying degrees of success. But judging by the number of views of the posts, they have been very popular. I heard Snowbank's presentation at the 2008 B&P on poker as a business, and I thought that it sounded like something at which I could excel. I'd played some poker before and even online at PartyPoker before it was shutdown to U.S. residents.

At first, I followed Snowbank's advice on playing the 6-handed NL games, but I found I was too impatient after a couple of hours each session of playing to be a winning player consistently. So I branched out and played various games, Sit-N-Gos, cash games, Heads-Up games, tourneys, etc. So my road to success is a little different from what snowbank and others have laid out. However, I think there is merit to it because like snowbank's system, it allows you to build capital from a small amount of money, even without being one of the top players.

The games that I have concentrated on are called Heads-Up Sit-N-Gos. Basically, it is a two-person tournament. At the buy-ins that I am currently playing--$110+5--the total purse is $220, $110 from each player and $10 to the rake. (Btw, rakeback applies to these games as well.) Obviously, the object of this small, two-person tournament is to end up with all the chips. Each player starts with 1500, blinds at 15/30, increasing every 3 minutes, and it's No Limit.

So let's say you win 50% of your games. You will be a losing player because of lost rake. Rakeback will only recover a certain portion of that rake. The break-even point is about a 52% winrate. Let's take a look at some examples, as well as win %, gross winnings, cost, net winnings, and ROI (not including rakeback).

52% = 52 wins/100 games

Gross winnings=52*220=11,440

Cost=115*100=11,500

Net winnings= -60

ROI= -.5%------> This means that at $110 buy-in, you will lose an average of 58 cents/game

So obviously at 52% winrate, you are a losing player, but with rakeback, you come out slightly ahead. Continuing...

53% = 53/100 = 11,660 gross winnings-11,500 costs=160 profit
ROI= 160/11,500=1.39%, or $1.60/game

At 53%, you become a winning player.

54%= 11,880-11,500=380
ROI=380/11,500=3.30%, or $3.80/game

55%= 12,100-11,500=600
ROI=600/11,500=5.22%, or $6/game

56%= 12,320-11,500=820
ROI=820/11,500=7.13%, or $8.20/game

57%= 12,540-11,500=1040
ROI=1040/11,500=9.04%, or $10.40/game

58%= 12,760-11,500=1260
ROI=1260/11,500=10.96%, or $12.60/game

59%= 12,980-11,500=1480
ROI=1480/11,500=12.87%, or $14.80/game

60%= 13,200-11,500=1700
ROI=1700/11,500=14.78%, or $17/game


So you may be thinking, big deal, so I win 57% of my games and make $10.40/game. Well, the great thing is, each game usually takes 15 minutes maximum, and I would say the average game takes 8-10 minutes. So you can generally play about 6 games/hour. Now you're making 6*10.40=72.40/hour, without rakeback. Until you decide you can play more than one game at once, just like snowbank and others multi-table. However, these games are much faster paced than the 6 player games--there are only two players, so you will need to pay more constant attention. But let's say you feel comfortable playing 2 games at once...now you're at 72.40*2=144.80/hour. Personally, I am at the point where I feel very comfortable playing 2-3 games simulatenously, or about 15 games/hour. Since April began, I have made over $14K. And, let me tell you, I am nowhere near to being one of the top/better players in these games. Obviously, you probably would not be starting out at $110+5 buy-in, but use the appropriate ratio to figure out what profityou can expect, given the buy-in you select and your winrate.

A quick note about rakeback, which I have somewhat glossed over in this discussion...as I said, rakeback still applies in these games, so my rakeback hourly is approximately $5 dollars/gm*15 games/hr*.27rakeback factor = approximately $20/hr.

My apologies for anything that is unclear/jumbled. I would be happy to elaborate if there is any interest.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Jill]

That's VERY encouraging, DavyB! I've found that heads-up is a very different game, and I've not ventured into that neighborhood just yet. But sounds very interesting. How many hands do you play in an average month?

I remember playing Cashflow with you at last year's B&P, and you're clearly a numbers guy! Do you consciously calculate odds with each hand? Or is it second nature to you now? Where do you play? (I want to avoid you!)

 

[DavyB]

Hey Jill,

Actually, I don't track how many hands I play/what percentage of hands I win. I track none of my stats, other than those discussed above. I would say most plays are second nature now, rarely am I calculating any odds. You are correct in that heads-up is a completely different ballgame, especially with games that go so fast and blinds become a significant portion of your stack fairly quickly. There is a premium on good starting hands and value betting and getting called when out in front in a hand.

I would say the average month I have played anywhere from 200-700 games, although this month I am really trying to focus on building my bankroll, so I think I'm up around 900-1000 games so far. This is the first month, though, that I have been playing 3 games at once, so that helps account for some of the increase in games played. And, I've played for about 70 hours so far in 3 weeks, so I'm at about $200/hour before rakeback.

I play at FullTilt, although it's under a different name...

 

[rakebackreport]

@DavyB:

I think your math is correct however I'm not quite sure that you are approaching the problem from the correct angle.

Of course your win rate at heads-up needs to be over 50% as there are only two people in the game. Heads-Up is one of the hardest forms of poker and has extreme variance involved.

I didn't catch Snowbank's advice on playing the 6 handed tournaments but if you claim to be too impatient to play a 6 handed S&G poker is already not a game for you

The reason 6 and 10 (some rooms only spread 9) handed games are profitable is because you can have a much lower win rate and still make money.

If you find yourself being too impatient to play 6 and 10 handed then play 2 or 3 tables at a time. Heads-Up is a specialists game. It's a skill above normal poker.

For instance, let's say I'm playing a 10 handed S&G. I can sit back and play very conservative and very mathematically until the first 3 or 4 players knock themselves out. Now I'm facing 5 or 6 opponents and the tournament pays to three places. You only need to make a few moves or pick up a few nice hands to be able to last until only 4 are left. Then you kick it into gear and start hammering away at people who are afraid to mix it up and miss making the money. That strategy will get your into the money enough where you can make a decent 30% ROI without rakeback. The rackback is just icing on the cake.

When you plays heads-up it's a completely different animal. There is no laying back and letting others do the dirty work for you. You have to fight for every pot.

I used to play quite a bit of heads up. My win rate was well over 50% but I played not for the money but as practice for playing the later stages in big tournaments. I also dug the fact that you can almost throw math out the window and just play your opponent. It's a great way to build up your ability to psychologically manipulate your opponent.

But if I was playing to make a profit I would never play heads-up.

Besides, unless you are playing multiple games at once you would probably be better off grinding the cash games. Just sit back and be a nit who only plays monster hands and your rakeback will likely exceed your winnings. But who cares, right? It's all money in your pocket. It doesn't matter if you won it or got it in RB.

RB is beautiful on sites that attribute rake to every player who is dealt in the hand. You don't put a dime in the pot and your opponents jack up the pot and you get a piece of the rake *THEY'RE* paying. You can make some serious cash playing 15% - 18% of your hands.

I wrote an article about this recently on my site (which I won't link to because I'm not shilling - just passionate about poker). If you were to 4 table $3/$6 limit (I know it's boring but you're playing for money, not excitement, right?), 6 hours a day, 7 days a week (or any other combo that equals approx 40'ish hours per week), your rakeback would be $5,656 a month. Just the rakeback! That's on top of whatever you win.

Or if limit is too boring play the $1/$2 NL cash games and the same 40 hours and 4 tables a week is $5,202 just in rakeback. If you're playing $110 S&G's then beating a $1/$2 NL game should be no problem. So throw a win rate of several grand on top of that and you're making some pretty decent cash.

Anyway, ran across your post on a search and wanted to throw my .02 at you. Good luck at the tables and stay away from HU

Cheers,

Bill

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[MJ DeMarco]

Great post, Speed+ and congrats on making some $$. Love having the mathematics and the numbers behind your strategy -- makes it all very understandable.

 

[Sid23]

First off, DavyB, thanks for starting this thread and posting your experience. Speed ++.

$14k thus far in April? Great job man.

I have a few questions if you don't mind:

1) How long did you play 6-max NL before you decided to switch and explore other games?

2) I understand how heads up would require a different strategy than 6-max. Are you playing every hand on heads up? Most hands? How does your strategy differ from 6-max? (I'm not asking you to devulge any secrets, just curious on a basic strategy level).

3) How long have you been playing heads up? Did you start at a really low money level and work your way up? How long did that take? It seems you find it easier and more lucrative than you did 6-max.

I also have a general question for the poker gods on this site. I started playing about 6 months ago on FullTilt at $2NL and I never signed up for rakeback. I'm playing at $10NL now and not receiving any rakeback. Is there a way for me to remedy this situation??

Thanks all. Love these threads!!

 

[biophase]

2) I understand how heads up would require a different strategy than 6-max. Are you playing every hand on heads up? Most hands? How does your strategy differ from 6-max? (I'm not asking you to devulge any secrets, just curious on a basic strategy level).

I also have a general question for the poker gods on this site. I started playing about 6 months ago on FullTilt at $2NL and I never signed up for rakeback. I'm playing at $10NL now and not receiving any rakeback. Is there a way for me to remedy this situation??

Thanks all. Love these threads!!

2) You play probably 90% of the hands heads up. If by play you mean that you complete or raise the SB. If you mean the hands see a flop, I actually have no idea what percent I see a flop.

And to answer your 2nd question, switch to Cake Poker.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Sid23]

2) You play probably 90% of the hands heads up. If by play you mean that you complete or raise the SB. If you mean the hands see a flop, I actually have no idea what percent I see a flop.

And to answer your 2nd question, switch to Cake Poker.

Stupid question...I switch to Cake Poker and sign up. Do I have to specifically set up a rakeback agreement or does that automatically happen?

THanks.

 

[biophase]

Stupid question...I switch to Cake Poker and sign up. Do I have to specifically set up a rakeback agreement or does that automatically happen?

THanks.

I think you need to sign up after you click on an ad that says 33% rakeback. Don't just go to Cake and signup directly.

 

[DavyB]

@DavyB:

I think your math is correct however I'm not quite sure that you are approaching the problem from the correct angle.

Of course your win rate at heads-up needs to be over 50% as there are only two people in the game. Heads-Up is one of the hardest forms of poker and has extreme variance involved.

I didn't catch Snowbank's advice on playing the 6 handed tournaments but if you claim to be too impatient to play a 6 handed S&G poker is already not a game for you

The reason 6 and 10 (some rooms only spread 9) handed games are profitable is because you can have a much lower win rate and still make money.

If you find yourself being too impatient to play 6 and 10 handed then play 2 or 3 tables at a time. Heads-Up is a specialists game. It's a skill above normal poker.

For instance, let's say I'm playing a 10 handed S&G. I can sit back and play very conservative and very mathematically until the first 3 or 4 players knock themselves out. Now I'm facing 5 or 6 opponents and the tournament pays to three places. You only need to make a few moves or pick up a few nice hands to be able to last until only 4 are left. Then you kick it into gear and start hammering away at people who are afraid to mix it up and miss making the money. That strategy will get your into the money enough where you can make a decent 30% ROI without rakeback. The rackback is just icing on the cake.

When you plays heads-up it's a completely different animal. There is no laying back and letting others do the dirty work for you. You have to fight for every pot.

I used to play quite a bit of heads up. My win rate was well over 50% but I played not for the money but as practice for playing the later stages in big tournaments. I also dug the fact that you can almost throw math out the window and just play your opponent. It's a great way to build up your ability to psychologically manipulate your opponent.

But if I was playing to make a profit I would never play heads-up.

Besides, unless you are playing multiple games at once you would probably be better off grinding the cash games. Just sit back and be a nit who only plays monster hands and your rakeback will likely exceed your winnings. But who cares, right? It's all money in your pocket. It doesn't matter if you won it or got it in RB.

RB is beautiful on sites that attribute rake to every player who is dealt in the hand. You don't put a dime in the pot and your opponents jack up the pot and you get a piece of the rake *THEY'RE* paying. You can make some serious cash playing 15% - 18% of your hands.

I wrote an article about this recently on my site (which I won't link to because I'm not shilling - just passionate about poker). If you were to 4 table $3/$6 limit (I know it's boring but you're playing for money, not excitement, right?), 6 hours a day, 7 days a week (or any other combo that equals approx 40'ish hours per week), your rakeback would be $5,656 a month. Just the rakeback! That's on top of whatever you win.

Or if limit is too boring play the $1/$2 NL cash games and the same 40 hours and 4 tables a week is $5,202 just in rakeback. If you're playing $110 S&G's then beating a $1/$2 NL game should be no problem. So throw a win rate of several grand on top of that and you're making some pretty decent cash.

Anyway, ran across your post on a search and wanted to throw my .02 at you. Good luck at the tables and stay away from HU

Cheers,

Bill

Bill,

Well, I can agree with you on one thing--variance is high in any given heads-up match. Any given match can be lost or won, so if there is a small sample size, you could take a beating if you extrapolate data from that small sample. But, if you look over the course of hundreds--or even better--thousands of games, your winrate will even out and your true winrate will be displayed, or exposed. I learned this the hard way, really. That's why I stay well within my limits and bankroll now when playing these 110 buy-in matches. If I went and played in $1,100 buy-ins, I could play/run bad and be busted in short order.

However, playing these games, I have established a track record over thousands of games now where I know that within any 100 game span, I'll probably have between 46-70 wins, and even more likely I'll be somewhere in the mid-high 50s%.

Additionally, it seems you misread/misunderstood some of my post. I said I didn't have the patience playing cash ring games 6-handed NL after a couple hours to maintain the level of play that I desired. The SNGs, 6- and 9-handed are not in question. And speaking of which, if you can name ANY player who can provide a 30% ROI over the course of thousands games of single table SNGs, I'd be shocked.

As far as what's best for me, I've basically played all the Hold em games, limit and NL. Heads-up is what is best for me, and frankly if I was trying to grind out $2-3K/month , I wouldn't be doing it. Not that 2-3K is not a solid accomplishment, but not if I'm going to put in 60-100 hours/month for it.

Oh, one more piece of info. Snowbank has posted some great info about 6-max NL cash games, not SNGs, and it's definitely worth reading. You can do a search and find it easily.

Hope that clears some things up...

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[DavyB]

First off, DavyB, thanks for starting this thread and posting your experience. Speed ++.

$14k thus far in April? Great job man.

I have a few questions if you don't mind:

1) How long did you play 6-max NL before you decided to switch and explore other games?

2) I understand how heads up would require a different strategy than 6-max. Are you playing every hand on heads up? Most hands? How does your strategy differ from 6-max? (I'm not asking you to devulge any secrets, just curious on a basic strategy level).

3) How long have you been playing heads up? Did you start at a really low money level and work your way up? How long did that take? It seems you find it easier and more lucrative than you did 6-max.

I also have a general question for the poker gods on this site. I started playing about 6 months ago on FullTilt at $2NL and I never signed up for rakeback. I'm playing at $10NL now and not receiving any rakeback. Is there a way for me to remedy this situation??

Thanks all. Love these threads!!

Hey Sid,

1. I dabbled in cash games for a while, and basically have to force myself to avoid them. I tried to play them seriously for about 6 months I would say.

2. Bio's right about the 90% of hands played. You are much more playing a psychological game with your opponent, and particularly setting him/her up with betting patterns, checking/raising patterns, etc. Very much a feel game. I have no secrets that I wouldn't share. Top pair/overpair after the flop is very valuable heads-up, as are straight/flush draws coupled with overcards to the board.

3. I started off at the 110s, had some initial success, and tried to move up too fast. Busted. Repeated this process SEVERAL times. Now, I know that I can have this kind of success just sticking to these games, which I actually consider low-level buy-ins, because lots of weaker players love to play them. There are some better players that I avoid playing/and generally they will avoid me as well. That way, winrates on both sides are maximized. I would *DEFINITELY* recommend starting off at much lower level games to get a feel for the flow of the HU game. I think they have $1 buy-in HU games.



Good luck and let me know if you have any more questions.

Dave

 

[Matrix]

I think you need to sign up after you click on an ad that says 33% rakeback. Don't just go to Cake and signup directly.

The rakeback sounds interesting. I have been playing on PokerStars but not aware I could get RB. Does PokerStars offer RB? I am new to RB, could you tell me more how I can take advantage of the RB? Do I sign up for RB at a different site or directly at pokerstars?
Thanks.

 

[rakebackreport]

The rakeback sounds interesting. I have been playing on PokerStars but not aware I could get RB. Does PokerStars offer RB? I am new to RB, could you tell me more how I can take advantage of the RB? Do I sign up for RB at a different site or directly at pokerstars?
Thanks.

No rakeback on Stars. They don't even pay MGR to affiliates in any way so there isn't even an opportunity to get rackback since your affiliate gets a 1 time payment for the referral.

They do have a nice loyalty program if you can stick it out with them and build up enough loyalty points. It's good enough that people sort of compare it to getting rakeback but you won't be getting the monthly cash like you do on rakeback.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[rakebackreport]

Bill,

Well, I can agree with you on one thing--variance is high in any given heads-up match. Any given match can be lost or won, so if there is a small sample size, you could take a beating if you extrapolate data from that small sample. But, if you look over the course of hundreds--or even better--thousands of games, your winrate will even out and your true winrate will be displayed, or exposed. I learned this the hard way, really. That's why I stay well within my limits and bankroll now when playing these 110 buy-in matches. If I went and played in $1,100 buy-ins, I could play/run bad and be busted in short order.

However, playing these games, I have established a track record over thousands of games now where I know that within any 100 game span, I'll probably have between 46-70 wins, and even more likely I'll be somewhere in the mid-high 50s%.

Additionally, it seems you misread/misunderstood some of my post. I said I didn't have the patience playing cash ring games 6-handed NL after a couple hours to maintain the level of play that I desired. The SNGs, 6- and 9-handed are not in question. And speaking of which, if you can name ANY player who can provide a 30% ROI over the course of thousands games of single table SNGs, I'd be shocked.

As far as what's best for me, I've basically played all the Hold em games, limit and NL. Heads-up is what is best for me, and frankly if I was trying to grind out $2-3K/month , I wouldn't be doing it. Not that 2-3K is not a solid accomplishment, but not if I'm going to put in 60-100 hours/month for it.

Oh, one more piece of info. Snowbank has posted some great info about 6-max NL cash games, not SNGs, and it's definitely worth reading. You can do a search and find it easily.

Hope that clears some things up...

Yeah, I may have misread you. My apologies.

And 30% ROI can be done. I've seen people do it over several thousand games. Not at the $110 but they can multi $20's and 30's. Granted . . . that was a year or two back and the tables have gotten substantially more tight and more difficult over the last couple of years so take that for what it's worth. So let's say 20% is fair these days?

I'll give Snowbank's posts a look. Also, do you read any of the 2+2 threads (they have a whole section dedicated to HU play you might enjoy)? They have some really, really solid strategy posts on their message boards for all types of poker. There was a fantastic thread that someone posted about his favorite 6-max posts and it had about 20 or so different posts that were top notch. Several of the posters there have gone on to write their own books (Ed Miller, Stoxtrader, etc) and Greg Raymer was a regular poster there before he won the WSOP. Probably one of the best free poker resources there is if you can avoid all the flame wars and Brandi Hawbacker sorts of drama

As for Sid23's question about how to get rakeback. You need to go to a rakeback affiliate. Otherwise the rooms will keep it if you don't have an affiliate and if you sign up with an affiliate who doesn't offer rakeback they pocket your rakeback money.

Again, wasn't here to shill but throw .com on my name and you can get 33% of Cake. Personally I think that overall, my favorite rakeback deals are:

Full Tilt @ 27% - Obviously not because of the payout but they have such great liquidity. Since Stars doesn't offer any rakeback at all they're the second best choice (and they accept American players).

Cake @ 33% - Good room, decent liquidity, and a good payout.

UB/Absolute @ 30% - Though I loathe recommending either room because of the way they handled the cheating scandals on both sites they do seem to have recovered in terms of players and it looks like they'll be around for the long run.

 

[Matrix]

Yeah, I may have misread you. My apologies.

And 30% ROI can be done. I've seen people do it over several thousand games. Not at the $110 but they can multi $20's and 30's. Granted . . . that was a year or two back and the tables have gotten substantially more tight and more difficult over the last couple of years so take that for what it's worth. So let's say 20% is fair these days?

I'll give Snowbank's posts a look. Also, do you read any of the 2+2 threads (they have a whole section dedicated to HU play you might enjoy)? They have some really, really solid strategy posts on their message boards for all types of poker. There was a fantastic thread that someone posted about his favorite 6-max posts and it had about 20 or so different posts that were top notch. Several of the posters there have gone on to write their own books (Ed Miller, Stoxtrader, etc) and Greg Raymer was a regular poster there before he won the WSOP. Probably one of the best free poker resources there is if you can avoid all the flame wars and Brandi Hawbacker sorts of drama

As for Sid23's question about how to get rakeback. You need to go to a rakeback affiliate. Otherwise the rooms will keep it if you don't have an affiliate and if you sign up with an affiliate who doesn't offer rakeback they pocket your rakeback money.

Again, wasn't here to shill but throw .com on my name and you can get 33% of Cake. Personally I think that overall, my favorite rakeback deals are:

Full Tilt @ 27% - Obviously not because of the payout but they have such great liquidity. Since Stars doesn't offer any rakeback at all they're the second best choice (and they accept American players).

Cake @ 33% - Good room, decent liquidity, and a good payout.

UB/Absolute @ 30% - Though I loathe recommending either room because of the way they handled the cheating scandals on both sites they do seem to have recovered in terms of players and it looks like they'll be around for the long run.

Thanks. I just signed up an account at rakebackreport.com