Schooling part 2 by Piemaster

[maddogmike]

Thanks for the analysis. I agree completely. One thing I think a lot of poor players who chase draws too often does is add to variance on both the plus and minus side. I‘ve gone through stretches where many times in a row my premium pairs don’t hold up, or my flopped sets get sucked out. The key here is to not tilt when this happens, which can make the negative variance worse.

I started out playing many hands of 0.02/0.04 limit where there was high percentage players seeing a flop, and a lot of chasers. My win rate was in the 10+BB/100 range. As I moved up in limits, the flop percentages went down along with my win rate at about 2-3BB/100 range in the $1/$2 limits. I don’t think my play was any worse at higher limits. Actually I think its better. I think there are fewer chasers as limits go up.

In your second example, I think it would be more realistic to assume that the villains would need at least a pair to call down on the River when they don’t hit the winning hand. I see MP calling a bet when a 8 or 9 hits, raising a T, and folding everything else. The SB would call a 6, raise an A, and fold everything else. This would lower your expectation somewhat, but not the final conclusion.

[Piemaster]

[AlamedaMike]

I pretty much have to agree with your article. Schooling is not the reason behind why it is hard to beat a loose game.

What I see in practice in loose N-CA games is that the bad players give odds to the good players to draw to their hand.

Let's say that you are in a 10 handed game with 4 bad players who would school and 5 average to good players. The bad players calling, as I said, gives the other players odds to call or else they would fold.

If almost any two cards can win 11% (AA vs 72o) of the time then it does not take many 11% to make you a dog.

This might be a different concept than 'schooling'. There are many reasons why it seems that there are too many Indians to beat. As you said in your article we want bad players to make bad calls over the long haul.

I still remember getting AA 5 times in 2 hours and losing each one. What is unusual is that I got them 5 times, not that I lost with them.

I do much better in TAG games than I do in loose ones and I, therefore, avoid them.

Interesting article - Thanks

[Willem]

Mike Caro has wrote some similar articles. link and link. He actually calls the phenomenon schooling also.

I must say I like Piemasters' articles better. Mike Caro comes up with some hypothetical scenario where he plays a hand against 5 billion people and then shows that schooling becomes a very big problem. Well, next time I play against 5 billion people, I will keep that in mind.

Piemasters' articles show that by the time your expectancy starts to drop, your are in such a good game that you really couldn't care less.

[Piemaster]

[Fast Eddy]

Great article!