Comments on: Hand Discussion #9: My Thoughts http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html Training poker players into professional players Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:32:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: DucksTakinDownAKSuffer http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10199 DucksTakinDownAKSuffer Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:48:05 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10199 SERIOUS QUESTON FOR ED: Hi Ed, Is my 1-2NL and 2-5NL Hold 'em games at my local casino not profitable? Is the casino ripping everyone off? My local casino does not have a rake, but instead they collect "time". For 1-2NL they take no rake, but charge each player $5/half-hour to play. (total of $10/hour) For 2-5NL they take no rake, but charge each player $6/half-hour to play. (total of $12/hour) After doing some research it seems that a realistic winning BB/100 would be about 3BB/100. (for 1-2NL that would be $6 profit per 100 hands) A hot streak BB/100 would be about 17BB/100. (for 1-2 NL that would be $34 profit per 100 hands) This is a short term hot streak BB/100 and from what I understand this is NOT maintainable in the long run. So if we are playing 1-2NL at my local casino, you pay $10/hour to play. And you will see about 35hands/hour. This means that you will see 100 hands in about 2.86 hours. So lets be generous, and lets say you are doing well making 17BB/100 at my local casino, which means you will profit $34 per 100 hands. It took 2.86 hours to see those 100 hands, 2.86 x $10/hour = ~$29 to see those 100 hands Your profit $34 Minus cost to play $29 means you have a grand profit of $5 for 2.86 hours of play. You are making on average in the long run, $1.75 per hour! Yikes! Better off working at Burger King! this BB/100 of 17 of course is not realistic! In fact realistically everyone is losing playing 1-2 NL at this casino! ============================== Now lets do the equation for 2-5NL. 2.86 hours to see 100 hands on average $12/hour to play You are a lucky pro making 17BB/100 (17 x 5) - (2.86 x 12) = 85 - 34.32 = $50 for 2.86 hours of play so for 2-5NL you would be making $17.50 an hour at best But again this is being optimistic with 17BB/100... which is not realistic! ======================================= So in fact is my casino ripping people off who play 1-2NL and 2-5 NL? 1-2NL max buy-in is $300 (150BB) 2-5NL max buy-in is $500 (100BB) It seems the only play to make money playing at this casino is playing 5-10NL or more where the "time" is still $12/hour. And therefore the casino is either intentionally or mistakenly protecting the fish by keeping them out of games that the pros know are profitable? SERIOUS QUESTON FOR ED:

Hi Ed,

Is my 1-2NL and 2-5NL Hold ‘em games at my local casino not profitable? Is the casino ripping everyone off?

My local casino does not have a rake, but instead they collect “time”.

For 1-2NL they take no rake, but charge each player $5/half-hour to play. (total of $10/hour)

For 2-5NL they take no rake, but charge each player $6/half-hour to play. (total of $12/hour)

After doing some research it seems that a realistic winning BB/100 would be about 3BB/100. (for 1-2NL that would be $6 profit per 100 hands)

A hot streak BB/100 would be about 17BB/100. (for 1-2 NL that would be $34 profit per 100 hands) This is a short term hot streak BB/100 and from what I understand this is NOT maintainable in the long run.

So if we are playing 1-2NL at my local casino, you pay $10/hour to play. And you will see about 35hands/hour. This means that you will see 100 hands in about 2.86 hours.

So lets be generous, and lets say you are doing well making 17BB/100 at my local casino, which means you will profit $34 per 100 hands.

It took 2.86 hours to see those 100 hands, 2.86 x $10/hour = ~$29 to see those 100 hands

Your profit $34
Minus cost to play $29

means you have a grand profit of $5 for 2.86 hours of play. You are making on average in the long run, $1.75 per hour! Yikes! Better off working at Burger King!

this BB/100 of 17 of course is not realistic! In fact realistically everyone is losing playing 1-2 NL at this casino!

==============================

Now lets do the equation for 2-5NL.

2.86 hours to see 100 hands on average

$12/hour to play

You are a lucky pro making 17BB/100

(17 x 5) – (2.86 x 12) = 85 – 34.32 = $50 for 2.86 hours of play

so for 2-5NL you would be making $17.50 an hour at best

But again this is being optimistic with 17BB/100… which is not realistic!

=======================================

So in fact is my casino ripping people off who play 1-2NL and 2-5 NL?

1-2NL max buy-in is $300 (150BB)

2-5NL max buy-in is $500 (100BB)

It seems the only play to make money playing at this casino is playing 5-10NL or more where the “time” is still $12/hour. And therefore the casino is either intentionally or mistakenly protecting the fish by keeping them out of games that the pros know are profitable?

]]> By: Adrian http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10191 Adrian Sat, 15 Sep 2007 00:08:38 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10191 I already have the book and have scanned the contents several times but see no mention of the term REM. Perhaps someone might mention the page please :) I already have the book and have scanned the contents several times but see no mention of the term REM. Perhaps someone might mention the page please :)

]]> By: jamleeco http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10187 jamleeco Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:33:27 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10187 Or just fan the pages with your thumb, you can't miss it. You will love the book, Adrian. Unfortunately I have been on a 3 month hiatus =( so haven't taken it for a spin but has given me time(since it's release) to have read it twice and studied it. It might seem simple on the surface to some and you might hear comments that way, but there is a LOT to digest. I will rush out and buy vol.2 when done, but there is plenty to work on your game with in vol.1. The games I am playing in at this time, I would be well set if I could execute everything in vol.1 without error. Sorry, didn't mean to hijack. I just get excited when I see the book mentioned because it follows me around the house and I think about it a lot. Beautiful work, Ed. Or just fan the pages with your thumb, you can’t miss it. You will love the book, Adrian. Unfortunately I have been on a 3 month hiatus =(
so haven’t taken it for a spin but has given me time(since it’s release) to have read it twice and studied it.

It might seem simple on the surface to some and you might hear comments that way, but there is a LOT to digest. I will rush out and buy vol.2 when done, but there is plenty to work on your game with in vol.1. The games I am playing in at this time, I would be well set if I could execute everything in vol.1 without error.

Sorry, didn’t mean to hijack. I just get excited when I see the book mentioned because it follows me around the house and I think about it a lot.

Beautiful work, Ed.

]]> By: Ed Miller http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10186 Ed Miller Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:41:58 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10186 Hrmm.. weird. Well, it's definitely in the TOC. :) Hrmm.. weird. Well, it’s definitely in the TOC. :)

]]> By: Adrian http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10185 Adrian Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:36:53 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10185 Tx Ed. Did look there but the index made no mention of it. Tx Ed. Did look there but the index made no mention of it.

]]> By: Ed Miller http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10184 Ed Miller Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:30:24 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10184 REM stands for Range, Equity, Maximize, and it's discussed in detail in <a href="http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/news/professional-no-limit-holdem-coming-soon-to-a-bookstore-near-you.html" rel="nofollow">Professional No-Limit Hold'em</a>. REM stands for Range, Equity, Maximize, and it’s discussed in detail in Professional No-Limit Hold’em.

]]> By: Adrian http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10183 Adrian Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:23:16 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10183 Whats the REM Process? Not Random Eye Movement? Whats the REM Process? Not Random Eye Movement?

]]> By: Shrike http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10169 Shrike Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:03:36 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10169 Nice. Glad to know my estimate of the BB's range was fairly accurate, and you were fortunate enough to be in a very good spot after calling his squeeze. Nice. Glad to know my estimate of the BB’s range was fairly accurate, and you were fortunate enough to be in a very good spot after calling his squeeze.

]]> By: Todd http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html/comment-page-1#comment-10163 Todd Wed, 12 Sep 2007 19:17:14 +0000 http://www.notedpokerauthority.com/no-limit-hold-em/hand-discussion-9-my-thoughts.html#comment-10163 Ed, Out of curiosity, at what stack sizes are you putting in a raise that isn't all in to find out if the BB has JJ or TT? Given the action in the hand, if I'm in the BB and someone in the middle shoves on me I'm putting him on some gambling hand, like 9T or TJ, or a PP from 33-JJ. If I have JJ or TT, I think I'm calling a shove from the middle a lot. In my heart of hearts, I don't think I need QQ+ to find a call. I think if I'm in the middle with 55 and I don't think that the BB is capable of outplaying me (he/she will only shove with a hand that beats me) it seems that it would be worth sticking in a raise if I had 200-250BB or so. That does put me in the awkward spot of putting 100BB in the pot and being willing to give it up. Is there value there or am I over thinking the problem? Thanks, Todd Ed,

Out of curiosity, at what stack sizes are you putting in a raise that isn’t all in to find out if the BB has JJ or TT?

Given the action in the hand, if I’m in the BB and someone in the middle shoves on me I’m putting him on some gambling hand, like 9T or TJ, or a PP from 33-JJ. If I have JJ or TT, I think I’m calling a shove from the middle a lot. In my heart of hearts, I don’t think I need QQ+ to find a call.

I think if I’m in the middle with 55 and I don’t think that the BB is capable of outplaying me (he/she will only shove with a hand that beats me) it seems that it would be worth sticking in a raise if I had 200-250BB or so. That does put me in the awkward spot of putting 100BB in the pot and being willing to give it up. Is there value there or am I over thinking the problem?

Thanks,

Todd

]]>