I started trying to writing this reply, but it got too long winded. nicely put.bennymacca wrote:its not +EV at all because you dont have an opportunity to ever double up, which is where good players can apply their edge - i.e getting a bit stack and use it.
Time to change the sizes of the online games...
- rcon
- Moderator
- Posts: 4493
- Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:01 pm
- State: SA
- 888PL Name: maffau
- Location: Over boats
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
"Please, my Leftie friends. On no possible definition does cutting someone’s tax rate constitutute ‘giving’ them money."
-
Conspiracy Theorist
- Posts: 558
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:42 pm
- State: VIC
- 888PL Name: CTheorist
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
bennymacca wrote:its not +EV at all because you dont have an opportunity to ever double up, which is where good players can apply their edge - i.e getting a bit stack and use it.
Not so sure I agree. You would see more hands than a full table. possibly 3-4 times more. And in the example given there is still two other live players. So a double up is possible. But just stealing blinds at 3 times the hand rate of a full table would add to your stack.
Just think of it as 7 superduper tight players.
CT
- bennymacca
- Moderator
- Posts: 16623
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:30 am
- State: SA
- 888PL Name: bennyjams
- Location: In your poker Nightmares
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
and 7 loose passive below average players are always better than 7 super nits.
also, stacking someone is probably 50BB in a tourney. thats a lot of stealing to be done.
also, stacking someone is probably 50BB in a tourney. thats a lot of stealing to be done.
Check out The Rail, the only podcast dedicated to Australian Pub Poker! http://www.therail.com.au.
Once you have done that, follow the Rail Podcast on Twitter, Facebook!, and iTunes!
Follow Me on Twitter
Once you have done that, follow the Rail Podcast on Twitter, Facebook!, and iTunes!
Follow Me on Twitter
-
Conspiracy Theorist
- Posts: 558
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:42 pm
- State: VIC
- 888PL Name: CTheorist
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
bennymacca wrote:and 7 loose passive below average players are always better than 7 super nits.
But no risk against the dead stacks.
also, stacking someone is probably 50BB in a tourney. thats a lot of stealing to be done.
3-4 orbits I reckon. Assuming your taking the blinds everyhand.
CT
- AceLosesKing
- Posts: 9557
- Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 10:26 pm
- State: SA
- 888PL Name: Aces2Kings
- Location: Updating my status.
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
In an 888pl event, if you're +EV in the field, players > deadstacks.
Scott wrote:Seriously, how hard is it to get his name right.
Aaron Coleman.
- Caleb
- Posts: 2568
- Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:34 pm
- State: SA
- 888PL Name: manwithaduck
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
Conspiracy Theorist wrote:Just think of it as 7 superduper tight players.
7 Bruces?
That's a scary thought.
Caleb Rybalka
SA Special Events Coordinator
"Life is hard. It's even harder when you're stupid." - John Wayne
SA Special Events Coordinator
"Life is hard. It's even harder when you're stupid." - John Wayne
- bennymacca
- Moderator
- Posts: 16623
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:30 am
- State: SA
- 888PL Name: bennyjams
- Location: In your poker Nightmares
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
if you are a good player, would you rather 9 horrible players on your table or just 3 or whatever?
Check out The Rail, the only podcast dedicated to Australian Pub Poker! http://www.therail.com.au.
Once you have done that, follow the Rail Podcast on Twitter, Facebook!, and iTunes!
Follow Me on Twitter
Once you have done that, follow the Rail Podcast on Twitter, Facebook!, and iTunes!
Follow Me on Twitter
-
Conspiracy Theorist
- Posts: 558
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:42 pm
- State: VIC
- 888PL Name: CTheorist
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
bennymacca wrote:if you are a good player, would you rather 9 horrible players on your table or just 3 or whatever?
The issue is dead stacks in online tourneys. Im not saying I'd rather a table of them to a full table of playing players. Im saying that its not the worst possible thing that can happen in a tourney, which it seems to be given the amount of times it has been brought up.
CT
- bennymacca
- Moderator
- Posts: 16623
- Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:30 am
- State: SA
- 888PL Name: bennyjams
- Location: In your poker Nightmares
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
assuming you have an EV advantage over the field, it is most definitely the worst thing that can happen.
i can't think of a worse case really.
if you are talking about comparing it to a full table of tough pros or something, then sure, but lets face it, the online tourneys that we play in, even on other sites, are never like that
i can't think of a worse case really.
if you are talking about comparing it to a full table of tough pros or something, then sure, but lets face it, the online tourneys that we play in, even on other sites, are never like that
Check out The Rail, the only podcast dedicated to Australian Pub Poker! http://www.therail.com.au.
Once you have done that, follow the Rail Podcast on Twitter, Facebook!, and iTunes!
Follow Me on Twitter
Once you have done that, follow the Rail Podcast on Twitter, Facebook!, and iTunes!
Follow Me on Twitter
- trishan
- Posts: 4515
- Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:04 pm
- State: VIC
- 888PL Name: nplking
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Time to change the sizes of the online games...
Having dead stacks is +EV, it's just the magnitude of the EV that would be incredibly small depending where the blinds are at. The EV on a table with no players is just the sum of BB and SB.
FoldPre Forums - Old 888PL Forumers register here
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


