Effect of rake - strategy etc.

[AlamedaMike]

This week is down time from playing at the tables and working on my game.

We all know that playing tight and selective is the way to win long term. Other points are game selection. I have been playing with the Wilson Turbo Texas Hold'em software. Many people disparage this software as a learning tool for lots of reasons.

One thing it allows me to do is see the affect of the drop on the profit margins. It is clear logic that if $5 is dropped on each hand then that is $500,000 over 100,000 hands that the players need to pay. In order to win you need to beat your share.

Two profiles. Myopic Mike (tight/advisor) and Dr Strangelove (average) played in a 6/12 game with a $5 drop. DR SL played 35% of its hands and Mike played 16% - did I say tight?

Well, Mike consistently wins and Dr SL consistently loses. The worse loser plays 74% of its hands.

What does this tell us that we do not already know - next to nothing. But, it does very clearly reinforce that the number one reason to lose at poker is -

all together now -

Playing too many hands and going to far with them.

Where have we heard this before?

Okay, you play a few times a year and it is recreation so who cares. However, if you play 100,000 hands over the course of your poker career then you had better care.

So, the next time some dork who plays 75% of his hands sucks out on you, you can relish in the fact that he is a loser.

I think that 16% is too tight but it seems to work for Mike against this lineup.

What else did I learn? Well, often at the beginning of each trial run (100,000 hands) Mike often started by losing then as the game progressed he started winning and did not look back. Not much - about 0.5-1 big bet per 100 hands, but winning none the less. He was always the big winner. The program learns as it plays. So, what does this tell us.

1) play tight and selective
2) learn how your opponents play

Okay, we know this but it reinforces the concept (for the next time I play).

A few other things such as the effect of the $5 drop/toke on a $3/$6 game almost makes it unbeatable and that most of the time 8 players LOST after 100,000 hands. 6/12 with a $5 drop/toke is much better, most still lost but Mike won more and some of the players did better.

I could create a lineup that is better but I just use the average and aggressive lineup (I think a tight lineup all 10 would lose). So, I ran an all tight lineup and in fact they ALL LOST !

So, what does this tell us that we did not already know. You need to have some loose players at the table in order to win.

0) table/game selection is key
1) play tight and selective
2) learn how your opponents play
3) need loose/bad players in order to win

So, the next time someone sucks out on you be very happy and be kind to him/her since they are your meal ticket.

Hold'em is a very complex game and there are no simple answers and only a few players can really beat the game. It is harder a lower limits.

If any of this is helpful, I am gald. Playing with the software and running different trials has reinforced some concepts that I have read many times. There is much more to the game than these points, but, I think that they are improtant points.

[Willem]

Looks like a nice piece of software but I'm not going pay $60 for it.

I would be interested in the following scenario: A table with 9 rocks only playing premium hands and one other player. I'm interested which kind of player wins the most playing on a table full of rocks. And what if the game is 6-handed instead of 10-handed?

[AlamedaMike]

[AlamedaMike]

[Willem]

[Scott Aigner, M.D.]

8 rocks in a game? You might die from boredom before you could play enough hands past the flop to make up for the drop and if you did go past the flop in this situation, you are more likely to be the one who is behind (he he). Drawing hands are almost worthless in an extremely tight game like this as well! even stealing pots can be too risky given that the times you do get played back at will take away most, if not all, of the profits you might be getting from your steals.

But just look at what typically happens those times you actually see a flop. You raise in late position and only the BB calls. Drop 5 bucks from the pot as soon as the flop hits the board (as happens in the California games). BB checks, you bet $6.00 and he folds (if he leads into you or check raises, you are probably in trouble). Pot= $10.00. You risked $12.00 to win a $10.00 pot and in addition the dealer is wanting his tip. There goes another buck. Now your profit margin is even smaller. Of course the few times that two of the rocks have a hand the guy with the Queens ends up folding just knowing that the other rock has Aces, Kings, or else flopped a set. If you cannot beat those hands when you get involved in a three handed situation, you are going to lose a few BBs (unless you get pretty lucky yourself).

I have, unfortunately, sat in a few games like this (early in the day the games often will be filled with retired people-aka rocks, lol). The game might see one flop every ten hands for the first hour. I will often quit after just 1/2 hour though (especially in a timed game) rather than continue to play until I was called to sit in another game. It was higher e.v. for me to observe the other games that I was waiting to get called to then waste my time hoping to get someone who could not fold their kings post flop, LOL!

I think Lou Krieger did a scenario with all strong players sitting in the game and it too was a lose lose situation. But add one good fish (loose passive) and they split up a fair portion of the fishes' money! A second fish was even better. But adding a third fish actually lowered the expectation as the fishes were splitting some of the pots among themselves ( more than just a few of them ended up fish vs. fish past the flop) while most or all of the strong players were forced into watching the action from the sidelines. Scott

[AlamedaMike]

I think a profitable game is one that has a wide spread of player by ability from 1-2 fish to 1-2 pros with the others mixed in.

5-6 to the flop for a raise 40-45% of the time. 2-4 players seeing the flop about 25-45% and the fish 50-75% and the pros 18-25%.

I see players play any two face cards, any ace, any pair, any suited cards over a 9 and any suited cards under 9 that less than 4 gaps. Offsuit cards that can make a straight. That is 66% of the hands dealt.

If the game has 7-9 to the flop it is quite loose and hard for me to beat and if it is 2-3 to the flop it is too tight so I like the middle of the road.

I was sitting in a game where it was raised almost every hand and capped often with 6-7 to the flop. The like to gamble. A player next to me said this is the only game that you can make any money in. Big pots and big swings.

Can't make money in a rock garden.

[Willem]

Mike, if you are willing, would you run the following scenario for me: A loose 2/4 full ring table with average 5 people to the flop and 10% rake. Is this game beatable and if so, by how much? My bankroll finally (almost) allows me to go play in our local casino's and I want to make sure if these games are worth it.

[AlamedaMike]

[Scott Aigner, M.D.]

You need to realize that 2-4 (and even most 3-6 games) are extremely profitable for the casinos and only marginally profitable for the better players at best. A rake of 10% (up to $4 dollar max) will take $100 --$160 per hour off the table (i.e. one player's buy in). Some countries do not even have a max rake and 10% is taken out for the total pot amount.

Just in the $4.00 max game you either have to win 1 in every 9 pots just to break even or else win more than your fair share of the bigger pots that are being played to the river. It requires you to be more lucky in a session than just being the most skilled player at the table. The automatic flop=drop in California makes these small staked games unbeatable (or close to it when considering a juicy 3-6 game). You'd make more working at McDonalds (way more, lol). Scott

[Willem]

Full Tilt, where I usually play now, has a rake of 5%. I have calculated that I payed 1.9BB/100 hands worth of rake there. These were 6-max tables however where you play and win more pots (= more rake) so a 10% rake on a full table translates to something between 3 and 3.5BB/100 hands worth of rake.

I think I'll wait until I can play 5/10 (which has 5% rake).

[AlamedaMike]

[Scott Aigner, M.D.]

An online rake is not near as much as live play willem. Although I understand that the 6 max game generates a ton of rake the 5% max is still very cheap when you have a definite skill advantage In the live game setting you will be lucky if you see 40 hands per hour in the live game setting. When 6-8 players are seeing every flop then each one of those players take a fair amount of time before acting on their hand. Add in the fact that there can be multiple decisions to make including the calling of raises and multiplying this for preflop, flop, turn, and river play and the numbe of hands you might see in an hour will drop substantially. The total number of raked hands will drop as a result but in the 10% rake games the amount will max out quite often, In California games the $4.00 is taken out when a flop is seen. If there is no flop (fat chance in these low limit games, the casino still takes $.50 from the SB. There are also some rooms that take out a dollar out of the pot (once it reaches a certain amount- usually $10.00) for a badbeat jackpot. The schooling effect in all of the low limit games with limits less than 5-10 is huge (and yes I have read piemaster's articles on the schooling effect). The winning hand rank is two pair or better most of the time.

If you are new to playing in a brick and mortar game then playing low limit allows you to get a feel for playing live (i.e. gettting used to keeping your cards hidden from players, learning to keep a poker face, picking up tells and telegraphing, handling chips, acting in turn, etc.). It is also fine to play in these games if you play for fun (hobby, entertainment, socailizing) and do not care about the money. If you are serious about winning money though, then you have to move up as quickly as possible in order to be able to beat the house rake. Scott

[AlamedaMike]

Scott, one reason that I play $6/$12 more than $3/$6 is that the rake is the same as $3/$6, $4 drop and $1 tip.

I really need to knckle down and learn how to beat the $15/$30 games.