## Online Poker

RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
I mostly play 1, 2, and 5 table turbo sngs on Pokerstars. Every now and then I play a multitable tournament, or when I'm in the mood I'll play somewhere between three and seven tables of (full table) low-limit holdem at a time ( on more than one site of course...)

I've been playing some at Paradise, mostly full limit games, and I play some tournaments at FullTilt... Razz and HORSE usually.

I've been off and on UltimateBet.

I used to play quite a bit on Party, but their software is awful and they take a huge rake out of the games I usually play... they take more or less a 10% rake in the .50/1.00 and the 1/2 games. On the other hand they do, or at least did, have very soft games.

Party is a weird story. At one time Paradise had like 60% of the traffic, Stars had 20%, UB 10%, and everyone else fighting for the scraps, party being not one of the larger. Then one night the "World Poker Tour" had the "Ultimate Bet Aruba Classic."

UB's traffic went up so fast it crashed the site. I was playing on it at the time... By the next day they were as big as Paradise. Then the next week Party had the first commercials, and by the end of the month Paradise went from 60% of the market to maybe 20% and keep in mind they grew during that time.

The point? Four years later and those assholes at Party still haven't developed better software.

Okay... maybe more than you wanted to know...

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The reason people think online poker has an unusual number of instances where the worse hand all-in preflop wins is twofold. First is the conformation bias. The second is that most have little clue what the normal rate is.

AKs loses to T2o about 30% of the time. 65s (different suit) about 40% of the time.

Even KK loses to say, 68o about 18% of the time.

Preflop situations in holdem tend to be way closer than people think.

People at every site tend to complain that "this site has the worst beats," (i.e. "UltimateBeat" and "RiverStars") and proclaim same whenever their TT loses to K9 with a T42JQ board or somesuch. Sure that looks odd... but the TT was going to lose about 27% of the time and that is just one of the possible times. That it was dramatic really isn't relevant.

Then there are those special few who get "all in" holding say AJ against KK, the board comes AJ72K, and then moan about taking "a bad beat" and being "rivered," etc. Dipshits.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I'm becoming more and more convinced that no-limit sng (sit-n-go) tournaments are the way to go online. The worse players lose money more slowly, the better players get to play more tournaments, there is one starting up right now so no schedules to worry about, etc.

I fucking hate Omaha H/L. I have very good results from it in tournaments and cash games, but I hate it. It isn't bad on the internet but in a live casino game it sucks. Triple that with a green dealer...
RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
Oh yeah.... I'm "Placebo350" on paradise and "suddenly" everywhere else.
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 4:53 pm
RCC wrote:
I fucking hate Omaha H/L. I have very good results from it in tournaments and cash games, but I hate it. It isn't bad on the internet but in a live casino game it sucks. Triple that with a green dealer...
Why is that?

I only ever play it for low stakes, but I find it fun. Of course that doesn't mean everyone should, I was just wondering why you don't enjoy it.

Oh and I only play on Pokerstars these days, I wasn't aware that UB and Paradise were so large. I think from all the TV exposure and the site traffic, I just assumed PokerStars was the big boy out there.

Over here (UK) we also seem to get a load of TV coverage from 888.com, but I couldn't speak as to their size or software.
RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
A rotation game. Every level (or half hour in a ring game) the game changes.

Holdem
Omaha H/L
Razz
Stud
Stud H/L Eight or Better

Other common variations are HOE, HOSE, and SHOE.

Had a guy on my left giving me shit at one point during the sng; he was shortstacked at that point and I had been picking off his blinds earlier, so he wasn't happy with me. 5 players, I was on the button with KTo. Folds in front of me, I raise it up my standard 3x, shortstack folds, BB goes all-in which is about 2x the pot. I feel like BB is making a play with small pair and pot odds are almost 2-1. Seems like a no brainer but calling and losing will cripple me, leaving me probably with around 4.5x the big blind. Fold now and I could probably try to coast to a third place and money. Meanwhile, shortstack is calling me a pussy. I decide to call, thinking my KTo puts me in a coin flip situation, which it does with his pocket sevens. I lose, and shortstack gives a triumphant "LOL", but I still feel like I made the right play, even though it was close.
Interesting. If you know he has a small pair... say 99 and lower, then folding is criminal in a cash game. It is barely worse than even money for a 2.25-1 shot, and each chip is of equal value.

In a sng with 5 people left it isn't that simple. Each chip is worth only the amount equal to the greater chance it gives to finish higher in the money, and that is going to be a sliding calculation as the less chips you have the more each one is worth. For example having 2X in chips does not mean that you can expect twice as much prize money compared to having X.

This calculation obviously depends on the prize structure. If only 1st place gets any money then the change in value is the same as a cash game, but if 1st -3rd places were the same size with 5 people left... then the 2X-1X thing would be really distorted. With a typical SNG it would be unlikely that the change is enough to give up even money on a 2.25 - 1 shot.

In fact most people tend to overestimate the change. Most of the serious "mathematical" players nearly disregard it in most situations, but late in a tournament is has some effect.

Getting back to the problem, if we figure a more realistic scenerio where our raiser has any pair or any "blackjack" then you are something like 1.75 - 1 for that 2.25-1 shot. Then for me I almost always call, unless the blinds w/r/t the stacks are very small and the opponent not a maniac, which usually indicates a tighter raise and a better chance of AK or a big pair.

However, if a loss leaves me out then I am somewhat more likely to fold because (1) the chip value thing, (2) that 4.5 the BB isn't totally crippled close to the money especially if my opposition folds too much.

I think my strategy with sngs works pretty well: I play tight early on until the blinds become large and the number of players is halved. I then switch to more passive and always aggressive and try to put everyone else to the test. I think a lot of players tend not to open it up enough when the number of players at the table dwindles, so playing really loose at that point and having that image of a tight player works like a charm, since they don't want to call all-in against a guy who appears to be getting a good run of cards.
That is in line with the change in value stuff. The only time to change is when a bunch of other players are doing the same thing, or if someone is playing way to badly, like moving in with any ace or something. I do like to screw around a bit through the first few levels... a rule of thumb is that when you have 20X the amount of chips in the pot pre-flop then you are deep enough to try to trap here or there... but that can have a "kids don't try this at home" aspect. Done right it can add a bit to the ROI (return on investment), done wrong and it is a disaster. Often better to just keep it simple.

The image thing can help quite a bit. Plus the comments are priceless when I play like no hands and then move all in UTG for mathematical reasons with T6o, get called by AK and suck out. This confuses people...

RCC wrote:I fucking hate Omaha H/L. I have very good results from it in tournaments and cash games, but I hate it. It isn't bad on the internet but in a live casino game it sucks. Triple that with a green dealer...

I only play it online and for low stakes. Playing for Lo is a hoot, reminds me of playing with my uncles. The games at that level are always loose and passive. I wouldn't call it a challenge but it's a nice way to pick up $10 for an hour. I'm easily amused :) I'm probably going to play more of it as well as pot-limit Omaha (hi only) because neither has tightened up as much as limit holdem. I just got some tracking software for it (I have a database with every hand I play) and I'm curious what my winrates would be. Hopefully positive :D RCC Posts: 7019 Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm Location: Here for now. slimshady2357 wrote: RCC wrote: I fucking hate Omaha H/L. I have very good results from it in tournaments and cash games, but I hate it. It isn't bad on the internet but in a live casino game it sucks. Triple that with a green dealer... Why is that? I only ever play it for low stakes, but I find it fun. Of course that doesn't mean everyone should, I was just wondering why you don't enjoy it. Oh and I only play on Pokerstars these days, I wasn't aware that UB and Paradise were so large. I think from all the TV exposure and the site traffic, I just assumed PokerStars was the big boy out there. Over here (UK) we also seem to get a load of TV coverage from 888.com, but I couldn't speak as to their size or software. Pokerstars is the biggest for tournaments. Scary large fields. I played in the 3$ NLHE with rebuys, a field of 2100 and the total prize pool was like 26 thousand dollars or something... First place was 4.5K.

I also know 28th was about $58, but let's not dwell on that. Omaha h/l is a rough game to try to win money at. In a loose game proper strategy is to play extremely tight pre-flop. On the internet where I can play more than one game and it goes quickly this isn't too bad, but in a cardroom there is like 20 hands an hour with dealer mistakes, the "but don't I have a low" people misreading the board, etc. Maybe if I played more of it online, totally avoided it and cardrooms and became more comfortable about it I'd like it. Who knows... Blue Monk Posts: 744 Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:00 pm I play at Party Poker mainly because at night I can’t imagine you could possibly find any looser players. I only play 7 card stud. I’m an old school old man I guess, hehe, but at the lower limits ($10 and below ) you can easily find a table where NO ONE understands the game.

Bad beats are common but if you know how to play the game properly and can adjust to really loose play you can win in the long run.
RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
There are some nice stud games online, and I am of course a Champion Seven Card Stud Player. :P

(actually I just got lucky one day)

Problem is that stud requires me to pay too much attention. I want to play three or four games while watching a movie on the other monitor... maybe read a book and talk to my wife while paying the bills as well...

I tried to fix it so I could play civilization on one screen and poker on the other but it seems to tax my system too much. Civ IV is a brutal resource pig...
RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
From the "Too Good to be True" file.

The "world poker exchange," (www.worldpx.com) a smallish site, is advertising "no rake" poker. They still take the rake from the pots but then they apparently give you all your rake back at the end of the week.

I'm still looking for the catch. They say they are making it a loss leader for their sportsbook and casino gambling operations.

Weird. So far they owe me like $9. One thing this will do is make you appreciate just how much rake you pay... RCC Posts: 7019 Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm Location: Here for now. I found the "kind of but not really" catch w/r/t the "no rake" thing. They do give back all the rake, but they do it in a weird way, with an effect that is completely brilliant. What happens is after each round of betting the appropriate rake is taken out of each pot. That is then divided by the players still active in the hand. This goes into the player's rake total that the player gets at the end of the week. It would be simpler just to get rid of the rake or just give the pot winner the amount of rake taken, but... The practical upshot of this is that a winning player is still being raked, and that rake goes to the losing players. WPX's thin assertions aside, the person paying rake in a particular hand is the winner of the hand. But for the rake that player would have more chips equal to that rake. Call that X. Under this system, the most rake a pot winner can be awarded is .5X, if there are only two players in the hand. This drops for every round where there are more than two players, etc. Likewise the losing players are getting that portion of X they otherwise would not get, up to .5X in a heads up pot. So... since the way to win at poker is to put the least amount of money into pots that you do not win (hopefully zero) and more in the ones you do win, we can conclude that usually the winning player will in the end collect <X from his rake, as he is maximizing the rake when he is giving at least .5X and minimizing the times he is getting the free portion. Which of course means that this site in some way is rewarding loose play, the types of people more likely to play that money in the sportsbook and online blackjack. Meanwhile I'm being raked but that just means bad players have that much more to lose... shemp Posts: 7247 Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:16 pm Title: inbred shit-for-brains Location: Planet X Saturday, I played in a$6.60 satellite on Full Tilt Poker. 147 players played for one of three seats in the Sunday 18:00 $216 tourney with$200,000 guaranteed, and a first prize of $45,000. I finished 2nd in that satellite, so I got to play in the big tourney. It was interesting playing against better players than I usually run into. I had dreams of winning that$45,000, but the bad news is that I didn't. However, the good news is that I did finish in the money (91st out of 1017 starters; 99 got paid), so after sweating out the bubble, I managed to pick up $344. Hey, better than finishing 100th. I used to play at UltimateBet. After a couple months of play at Full Tilt, I'm convinced that the deals at UB were rigged. At Full Tilt, the poker is much more normal; at UB, if you got dealt AQ you could be pretty certain someone else had AK or KK, and pocket pairs were dealt out far too often. In terms of results, at UB I dropped about$1,000 over two years. In two months at Full Tilt, I'm ahead $600 (only$80 of which is cleared bonus).
RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
You cleared a bonus at Full Tilt?

I had no idea that was possible.

(My data shows that the deal at UB is well within expectation... or at least it did, I used to play there a lot but notsomuch since the Great Harddrive Crash. However, my results there suck compared to other rooms. It is just a tough room with a rough rake.

Plus, if you are reckless with AQ against any kind of decent player you are going to be in trouble.. a little trouble at limit, but big, big trouble at no-limit)
Bearguin
Posts: 8094
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 12:26 am
Title: Thankless Bastard!
Location: Get off my fucking lawn
So, I gotta ask at what point do people go from playing for play money to playing for real money? What is a logical transition?

I've just joined PokerStars becasue RCC says he plays there but am just in the play money on the low blind tables.

In two games I went from the initial $1,000 to over 10,000. I then played a 100/200 table and lost 5,000. Back to the low tables and I'm back over 10K in one game. I'm not about to play with real money yet (casue I'm a cheap bastard) but when do most people make the move? RCC Posts: 7019 Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm Location: Here for now. Bearguin wrote:So, I gotta ask at what point do people go from playing for play money to playing for real money? What is a logical transition? I've just joined PokerStars becasue RCC says he plays there but am just in the play money on the low blind tables. In two games I went from the initial$1,000 to over 10,000.

I then played a 100/200 table and lost 5,000.

Back to the low tables and I'm back over 10K in one game.

I'm not about to play with real money yet (casue I'm a cheap bastard) but when do most people make the move?

General idea is that play money is used just to become familiar with the interface and basic rules.

Keep in mind that short term results are close to meaningless, especially if you are playing no-limit holdem for play money. In fact, most play money no-limit is completely unrelated to any kind of real money poker. All in fest every hand.

My advice is to get about $20 or so in real money and play the (rake free) micro limit (.02/.04) games and the odd$.10 turbo n/l holdem tournaments where pokerstars adds $50 to the prize pool. Then once you have$50 go up to the .5/.10 games, and around $80 mix in some of the smaller sng's and tournaments and so on until you buy your own jet. RCC Posts: 7019 Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm Location: Here for now. Those$.10 tournaments with $50 added to the prize pool kill me. Limited to 3000 players, pays 594 places no matter the # of entries. If anyone here has been playing play money there and wants to taste the big money let me know. I'm willing to make backing arrangements... :lol: shemp Posts: 7247 Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:16 pm Title: inbred shit-for-brains Location: Planet X RCC wrote:You cleared a bonus at Full Tilt? I had no idea that was possible. (My data shows that the deal at UB is well within expectation... or at least it did, I used to play there a lot but notsomuch since the Great Harddrive Crash. However, my results there suck compared to other rooms. It is just a tough room with a rough rake. Plus, if you are reckless with AQ against any kind of decent player you are going to be in trouble.. a little trouble at limit, but big, big trouble at no-limit) When I deposited$300, I got 300 bonus dollars. They are paid out in increments of $20. So far I have gotten$80 of it. I play mostly in S&Gs, and rarely in cash games, so I don't earn much of that bonus. And the bonus is only good until 7/2, so at this rate I'll probably only get about $200 of it. But with my bankroll now up to$960, I'll probably play in bigger S&Gs, so maybe I'll earn more of it.
shemp
Posts: 7247
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:16 pm
Title: inbred shit-for-brains
Location: Planet X
So Saturday, I tried again to get into the Sunday night $200,000 guaranteed tournament on Full Tilt. I paid my$6.60 to play in a satellite; 3 players out of about 120 would qualify. Through my incredibly skillful play (OK, I was more lucky than good) I got to the final table, then down to the final six. 3 qualify, 3 get small cash prizes.

So now I have a slight chip lead with about 40,000 chips, but everyone is still in contention, nobody is badly shortstacked. Blinds are 1600/3200 with an ante of 250 (I'm not sure about the exact amount of the ante; I don't have the hand record here, but the blinds are correct.) On the BB, I'm dealt AK off. 3 folds to the button, who, with about 30,000 chips, raises to 10,000. SB folds. Now I gave this a lot of thought, since I only have to finish third. If I call and I miss my flop I'm probably behind to a pair. I also considered going all in, but I didn't want to put my whole tournament on the line here. I decided I could afford to call, it's only another 6,800 and even if I missed I was still in decent shape.

So I called. The flop was A97 rainbow. Nice. I figure I'm almost certainly ahead here. So I went all in, putting him all in if he calls for his remaining 20,000 chips. Without hesitation, he called. He had pocket 10s!!! EXCELLENT!!!

Of course, you all know what happened next. 10 on the turn. I'm drawing dead. I was down to about 10,000 chips, in last place. 2 hands later, I went all in on the button with A8, got called by the BB with 44, and didn't improve. 6th place, $28, instead of a$216 entry.

I walked around the living room for awhile, talking about it. "HOW THE FUCK CAN HE MAKE THAT CALL WITH AN ACE ON THE BOARD??? ANYONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD LAY DOWN EVEN KK IN THAT SITUATION!!! HE WASN'T POT COMMITTED, HE STILL HAD 20,000 CHIPS AND WAS FAR FROM OUT OF IT IF HE FOLDS!!!" My wife said, "You sound like Phil Hellmuth when Annie Duke beat him." (2004 World Series of Poker Tournament of Champions)

So I had some dinner, shrugged it off as best I could, and signed up for another satellite. Finished 9th out of about 150. No prize. No big tourney this week. Maybe next week.
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 4:53 pm
Shit like that is always happening to me too. Oh, except for the making the final table so regularily, not that part :D

Hey man, if you're making the last ten this many times, you're doing great. Sounds like you'll be winning that $216 tourney in no time ;) Good Luck. RCC Posts: 7019 Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm Location: Here for now. If it makes you feel any better I'd have called. (....of course with 30,000 and 1600/3200 blinds plus an ante, I'd have never, ever, ever bet 10000 preflop with TT... At that level it is all in or fold. There is at least 5400 in the pot preflop. Trying to see a flop with less than 5x or so of the preflop pot size is a really, really bad horrible idea. Especially with a hand that will flop a danger flop most of the time. Hands like TT and AK for example. Tossing out a small bet with AA isn't a bad idea against the right kind of opponents.) ...but that is beside the point. So assuming I'm the type of player who makes small raises which are significant parts of my stack with such dangerous hands, all I do by folding to any danger card is make myself never, ever win because I'm now trying to fix the leak in my game (making silly raises that will put me in ugly situations) by drilling another hole in the floor of my boat to let the water out (making myself exploitable by even semi-aggressive play by folding in those situations). The only way the TT makes any sense is if I believe you will call (or move in) out of the BB with a lot of hands and then move all in no matter the flop. I have to be trying to get someone to bluff at me, and if I'm going to commit 1/3 of my stack I can't go outthinking myself post flop. Maybe the all in bet means a bluff because most players would check an ace. Maybe not. But if I make a bet that wants action I can't wuss out when one scary card comes down. maybe I release it on AKQ or the like. I think that strategy isn't very good absent extreme circumstances, but it does make some sort of sense... shemp Posts: 7247 Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:16 pm Title: inbred shit-for-brains Location: Planet X I wish he had gone all in preflop, I'd have folded. For a laugh, here's a hand I had tonight in a$20+2 SNG:
Full Tilt Poker Game #612338176: $20 +$2 Sit & Go (4018833), Table 1 - 20/40 - No Limit Hold'em - 23:57:36 ET - 2006/05/03
Seat 1: jingles174 (1,425)
Seat 2: edgourmet (1,410)
Seat 4: freddyman111 (1,470)
Seat 5: cusefan1979 (1,950)
Seat 6: medik8me (1,770)
Seat 7: Axenators (2,425)
Seat 8: DennyK (1,580)
Seat 9: darval (1,470)
DennyK posts the small blind of 20
darval posts the big blind of 40
The button is in seat #7
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to edgourmet [Ah Jh]
jingles174 folds
edgourmet raises to 80
freddyman111 folds
cusefan1979 calls 80
medik8me folds
Axenators folds
DennyK folds
darval calls 40
*** FLOP *** [6h 5h Jc]
darval bets 160
edgourmet raises to 320
cusefan1979 calls 320
darval calls 160
*** TURN *** [6h 5h Jc] [2c]
darval checks
edgourmet bets 360
cusefan1979 calls 360
darval raises to 1,070, and is all in
edgourmet calls 650, and is all in
cusefan1979 calls 710
darval shows [6s 6c]
edgourmet shows [Ah Jh]
cusefan1979 shows [7c 8c]
*** RIVER *** [6h 5h Jc 2c] [9h]
darval shows three of a kind, Sixes
cusefan1979 shows a straight, Nine high
cusefan1979 wins the side pot (120) with a straight, Nine high
edgourmet shows a flush, Ace high
edgourmet wins the main pot (4,250) with a flush, Ace high
darval stands up
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 4,370 Main pot 4,250. Side pot 120. | Rake 0
Board: [6h 5h Jc 2c 9h]
Seat 1: jingles174 didn't bet (folded)
Seat 2: edgourmet showed [Ah Jh] and won (4,250) with a flush, Ace high
Seat 4: freddyman111 didn't bet (folded)
Seat 5: cusefan1979 showed [7c 8c] and won (120) with a straight, Nine high
Seat 6: medik8me didn't bet (folded)
Seat 7: Axenators (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 8: DennyK (small blind) folded before the Flop
Seat 9: darval (big blind) showed [6s 6c] and lost with three of a kind, Sixes
shemp
Posts: 7247
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:16 pm
Title: inbred shit-for-brains
Location: Planet X
My latest Presto adventure. Good thing somebody caught a piece of the board.
Full Tilt Poker Game #621345770: Table Alcazar (6 max) - $0.25/$0.50 - No Limit Hold'em - 21:47:24 ET - 2006/05/07
Seat 1: edgourmet ($50.05) Seat 2: IAMWETAWDED ($45)
Seat 3: MIND FOCKER ($15.75) Seat 4: Packers4Ever ($33.95)
Seat 5: Kenny_Barron ($49.75) Seat 6: MrWrinklyBalls ($50.15)
MrWrinklyBalls posts the small blind of $0.25 edgourmet posts the big blind of$0.50
The button is in seat #5
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to edgourmet [5d 5h]
MIND FOCKER calls $0.50 Packers4Ever calls$0.50
Kenny_Barron folds
MrWrinklyBalls folds
edgourmet checks
*** FLOP *** [9h 5s 5c]
edgourmet checks
MIND FOCKER checks
Packers4Ever checks
*** TURN *** [9h 5s 5c] [2s]
edgourmet checks
MIND FOCKER checks
Packers4Ever checks
*** RIVER *** [9h 5s 5c 2s] [Tc]
edgourmet bets $1 MIND FOCKER raises to$3
Packers4Ever calls $3 edgourmet raises to$7
MIND FOCKER raises to $15.25, and is all in Packers4Ever folds edgourmet calls$8.25
*** SHOW DOWN ***
MIND FOCKER shows [2h 2d] (a full house, Twos full of Fives)
edgourmet shows [5d 5h] (four of a kind, Fives)
edgourmet wins the pot ($33.50) with four of a kind, Fives MIND FOCKER is sitting out *** SUMMARY *** Total pot$35.25 | Rake $1.75 Board: [9h 5s 5c 2s Tc] Seat 1: edgourmet (big blind) showed [5d 5h] and won ($33.50) with four of a kind, Fives
Seat 2: IAMWETAWDED is sitting out
Seat 3: MIND FOCKER showed [2h 2d] and lost with a full house, Twos full of Fives
Seat 4: Packers4Ever folded on the River
Seat 5: Kenny_Barron (button) didn't bet (folded)
Seat 6: MrWrinklyBalls (small blind) folded before the Flop
swellman
Posts: 1439
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 5:43 am
I caught some pretty negative reviews of two poker sites here.

Party Poker - your money is not safe here. You can log-in at any time, and find your balance at $0. Just a crap shoot cause Party lets criminals who've hacked you withdraw money way too easily. One player at a popular forum was recently robbed of$10,000 cold hard cash. If all this wasn't bad enough, Party's customer service is among the worse you can find. If you're a small fry, you'd be lucky to even get a reply. They could give a rats azz about you.

Bet 365 or Bet 365 Poker - these people are cons. Unscrupulous buisness practices. If you currently have an account here, I recommend you close it and open an account somewhere else. Why have an account at an unscrululous site when there are better places to play.

If the above is true, how long until the demise of on-line poker?

I know many poker players who refuse to play on-line out of fear of secret collusion, hacks, bots and just general piss poor customer service from most of the poker sites.
RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
swellman wrote:I caught some pretty negative reviews of two poker sites here.

Party Poker - your money is not safe here. You can log-in at any time, and find your balance at $0. Just a crap shoot cause Party lets criminals who've hacked you withdraw money way too easily. One player at a popular forum was recently robbed of$10,000 cold hard cash. If all this wasn't bad enough, Party's customer service is among the worse you can find. If you're a small fry, you'd be lucky to even get a reply. They could give a rats azz about you.

Bet 365 or Bet 365 Poker - these people are cons. Unscrupulous buisness practices. If you currently have an account here, I recommend you close it and open an account somewhere else. Why have an account at an unscrululous site when there are better places to play.

If the above is true, how long until the demise of on-line poker?
The first is mostly bullshit. Party does have bad customer service, but are accepted as a legit site. They are publicly traded, and do quite a bit of checking into collusion, etc. This isn't run out of someone's trailer, and actual confirmed cases of outright theft would result in their quick and violent demise... On any site it is not a good idea to flash large amounts of cash and have no idea how to keep your personal data safe. Bad to act like a moron and have tons of cash in any enviroment... Not a whole lot of casinos are going to refund your dough if you parade it around the cardroom and then get jacked in the parking garage...

As to the second review... Who? That site may be run out of someone's trailer. Not smart to go down the dark back alleys, stick to the places that have years in the business and have other reasons to be trustworthy. On-line poker today is more secure than it ever has been, as long as some common sense is applied...

I know many poker players who refuse to play on-line out of fear of secret collusion, hacks, bots and just general piss poor customer service from most of the poker sites
Piss poor customer service isn't universal. Some are better than others.

Collusion can be a problem, but not much of one. Most of it is so bad that it either benefits the other players or is red-flagged by software that the reputible sites use. Sometimes both. Multi-table tournaments are tough to collude in... kinda need to be at the same table and that isn't a given. The way SNGs work makes normal cash-game collusion backfire.

As to the rest of it... people cheat in regular poker too.

There is nothing new about the horror stories.

The big thing seems to be the crybabies.

You cannot hide from the truth online. Most real life players don't keep records and think they are doing far better than they really are. Nobody like to think they lose. Online that number can't be changed by forgetting that one loss or even hidden from via not keeping track. How much you lose is just... there. That number. Plus a 2-4 limit game online is usually way way tougher than a casino 2-4 game. A winning strategy in a 2-4 casino game will get you a sound beating in an online 2-4 game.

So the "I'm not a loser so I must have been cheated" virus runs rampant. The net is full of people that will tell you in no uncertain terms about how on one site there are too many flushes or action flops or it makes the bad players win to create more rake or.... whatever. Then there are the people who shill for one site or another making up stories...

Everyone has some friend who says the whole thing is a rip-off, etc. Makes people nervous.
shemp
Posts: 7247
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 12:16 pm
Title: inbred shit-for-brains
Location: Planet X
The net is full of people that will tell you in no uncertain terms about how on one site there are too many flushes or action flops or it makes the bad players win to create more rake or.... whatever.
Maybe so, but I will go to my grave believing that Ultimate Bet fixes the hands to create action. I lost over $700 there over 1.5 years of play. Since going to Full Tilt, I am up$1,000 in just 2.5 months. I don't think I suddenly became a better player on March 2, 2006.
RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
shemp wrote:
The net is full of people that will tell you in no uncertain terms about how on one site there are too many flushes or action flops or it makes the bad players win to create more rake or.... whatever.
Maybe so, but I will go to my grave believing that Ultimate Bet fixes the hands to create action. I lost over $700 there over 1.5 years of play. Since going to Full Tilt, I am up$1,000 in just 2.5 months. I don't think I suddenly became a better player on March 2, 2006.
1) There are different players as well, and you may have changed the types of game you play. FullTilt attracts a different breed of player that may better suit how you play, one that might fold a little more or less or whatever type of mistake you need for optimal results. Outside of razz and HORSE tournaments I get killed at FullTilt. It is by far my worst site.

2) You have been improving (or so I hope) along this time, which sort of blends in with the biggie...

3) Small sample size. Especially if you are now playing a lot of multitable tournaments. Massive variance there. Even in cash games and sngs there are serious streaks. Your sudden change is not unusual even if you hadn't changed sites. Especially if you have improved.

and of course...

4) Maybe Full Tilt is the one creating action flops...
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 4:53 pm
RCC wrote: Plus a 2-4 limit game online is usually way way tougher than a casino 2-4 game. A winning strategy in a 2-4 casino game will get you a sound beating in an online 2-4 game.
Can you expand on that please?

And what are all the sites you play (or have played) for money on? That's for RCC, shemp, and anyone else who plays for money online.

I've only ever played on PokerStars, since it's the only one I've ever set up a money account with. But I have been to Party Poker and Ultimate Bet to see the layout.

I tend to play for very low amounts right now, even in SNG's.

It seems like you see a LOT of Full Tilt shirts, hats, etc at the WSOP. Maybe I'll check them out and see what the layout is like there.
RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
RCC wrote: Plus a 2-4 limit game online is usually way way tougher than a casino 2-4 game. A winning strategy in a 2-4 casino game will get you a sound beating in an online 2-4 game.
Can you expand on that please?
Most decent live 2-4 games (at least in Indiana/Atlantic City/ Foxwoods) feature 5-10 people seeing a flop, little preflop raising, lots of callers on the flop, not so many on the turn and river. A showdown about 80% of the time. Some differ, some looser, some tighter, but that is about average.

Online, at least on PokerStars/Paradise/UB etc these games average between 2-3 people seeing the flop, usually for a raise and there is no showdown most of the time. Very aggressive play is the norm. Many raise and take it hands preflop. Sometimes looser or tighter (!), etc..

In the former calling along with drawing hands is a good idea, mainly suited aces. Raising and reraising with a nut flush draw with 5+ opponents can be very profitable. Only trick is to be careful with pairing an ace with a lousy kicker... It is, to steal a concept from Gary Carson, a game of money and odds. There is enough volume in each pot to allow speculation.

In the latter, having the best hand preflop is paramount. No real speculation. Game of hand selection and explotation. Finding exploitable play is key, those that fold too much, never bluff, etc. More of a tactical game than above.

Wondering into an online 2-4 game and limping in from middle position with A4s and folding postflop without two pair or a flush draw is a recipe for pain. Much more tactical game, bluff and semi-bluff raises are very important, as is reading betting patterns, finding people who always fold the river to a checkraise, etc.

At 2-4 and above on any site that works with pokertracker there are going to be about 4 players on average using tracking software, saving every hand they play and applying data analysis to find trends. On Party there is volume enough that there may be less... but party allows observers to collect hand histories and there are those that trade. So there will likely be at least one player that knows you better than you know yourself, having access to every hand you have played and analyzed them for patterns.

I used to play like that... but I've better things to do these days... limit poker is not where the money is anymore.

And what are all the sites you play (or have played) for money on? That's for RCC, shemp, and anyone else who plays for money online.

I've only ever played on PokerStars, since it's the only one I've ever set up a money account with. But I have been to Party Poker and Ultimate Bet to see the layout.
I've played most everywhere. Now I play mostly turbo SNGs on PokerStars. I play the occasional tournament at FullTilt. (I played yesterday and lasted 4 minutes. KK v. AA and QQ v. AA back to back. I gotta quit playing no-limit holdem there...) I only play at UB to try to get the bonus. Very low limit (.25/.50) holdem, omaha and tripledraw just to collect points to work off a deposit bonus.

You aren't missing much. Pokerstars is a great tournament site. The cash games there are pretty rough though. Not as bad as before, but not good.

Fulltilt seems to have a different breed of player, has HORSE and Razz tournaments, but not many. They have HORSE SNGs which are nice...

I've given up on cash games outside of the UB games and the occasional .05/.10 game at PokerStars just for the hell of it. I'm trying to find what my expected rate per 100 hands is. It is looking to be in the .80 range which means that it isn't all that less than the .50/1.00 game, which is rather alarming... The .05/.10 game is more like the casino 2/4 game above and with no rake, which makes a huge difference.

You will never see me complain that a game is too loose, that it is impossible to win with morons calling me, etc. These games are my specialty... in a live game I can irritate tight players with my "lucky" plays and soon the game gets even looser as they tilt. This is harder to do online. In a live game my good cheer and skills at getting other players to "have a good time" pressures the pissy player to STFU. Online they just type shit into the chatbox and it gets ugly as they give sermons as to why someone screwed up by calling with QTo. In a live game I can handle this kind of player with the wry needle and goofy smile, etc. Either the nit goes on tilt, loosens up and has fun, or leaves. Whatever.

One of the things I love about casino low-limit games. With any small luck I can turn the my table into the most lively in the room... six or seven players giggling about suckouts, etc. while two or three pissy nits gripe about losing to such sucky players...

The real game there has little to do with cards, more about keeping a fun atmosphere going.

This is lost online..

I tend to play for very low amounts right now, even in SNG's.

seems like you see a LOT of Full Tilt shirts, hats, etc at the WSOP. Maybe I'll check them out and see what the layout is like there.
The 6$NLHE and$3 Pot limit Omaha H/L turbo SNGs are where I'm usually at. Low stress, mildly challenging.

The one good thing about FullTilt is that the blind structure isn't as slow as PokerStars, and the fields are smaller. Smaller prize pool, but none of that 8 hour crap that happens at Stars...

...but a lot of what is cut out is pretty dead money anyway...
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 4:53 pm
first, thanks for the detailed response re: the difference between online 2-4 and live-casino 2-4. Very interesting. I'm used to the 'few raises pre-flop with 5 people seeing the flop' style, because I play a lot of .5/.10 and lower cash games just for fun and often to win $2 or$3 so I can play a SNG for free.

RCC wrote: At 2-4 and above on any site that works with pokertracker there are going to be about 4 players on average using tracking software, saving every hand they play and applying data analysis to find trends. On Party there is volume enough that there may be less... but party allows observers to collect hand histories and there are those that trade. So there will likely be at least one player that knows you better than you know yourself, having access to every hand you have played and analyzed them for patterns.
:shock:

I had no idea people were so hardcore! Or even that such analyzing software existed! Wow, I'd like to get that just so I can analyze my own game and see what patterns appear. I think it would be even more helpful that way then trying to keep track of other players.
You will never see me complain that a game is too loose, that it is impossible to win with morons calling me, etc. These games are my specialty... in a live game I can irritate tight players with my "lucky" plays and soon the game gets even looser as they tilt. This is harder to do online. In a live game my good cheer and skills at getting other players to "have a good time" pressures the pissy player to STFU. Online they just type shit into the chatbox and it gets ugly as they give sermons as to why someone screwed up by calling with QTo. In a live game I can handle this kind of player with the wry needle and goofy smile, etc. Either the nit goes on tilt, loosens up and has fun, or leaves. Whatever.

One of the things I love about casino low-limit games. With any small luck I can turn the my table into the most lively in the room... six or seven players giggling about suckouts, etc. while two or three pissy nits gripe about losing to such sucky players...
:D

Man, you really do see a lot of people whine on and on and on about other people's play. It really cracks me up. And when it's directed at me, I just act like a goof too. When some jerk-off types in "Nice suck out! What a stupid play!" I just type back "Thanks! I always make calls like that. Not usually so lucky though :D" with the little smilie too. It just sends them over the edge usually.
The 6$NLHE and$3 Pot limit Omaha H/L turbo SNGs are where I'm usually at. Low stress, mildly challenging.
That's pretty interesting, because I play that $3 turbo PL Omaha H/L quite a bit. In fact it's one of the SNG's I play the most. Other than that, I go for the$1.50 turbo's like the NL Omaha H/L and the Stud H/L.

I doubt I'd see you on there though, because of the time difference, I'm probably playing between 2pm and 5 pm your time and you're likely playing in the middle of the night my time.

Thanks again for the detailed response.

RCC
Posts: 7019
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:28 pm
Location: Here for now.
The software I use is from pokertracker.com.

There is also an Omaha version. These work well with pokerstars as stars can be set up to automatically put the hand histories in the hard drive, and then the software reads them out of that file.

Then if the tournament side is run it alerts you to the tournament #ers without a file. The tournament histories can only be had via e-mail; there is a option for that on the stars mainscreen.

A bit pricy for those playing at small limits, but I find the whole thing rather interesting. It does track your performance well, but at such small limits it is rare to see the same person very often. At 2-4 and 3-6 (even to some extent 1-2) I kept seeing the same people over and over... They'd see like 14% of the flops and have a rather high aggression factor. Plus they likely knew I did as well... so you would see a lot of hands with a shitload of action, checkraises, threebets, caps, etc. and then a split pot with AQ or something with a ten high board... Which would make those there who were innocent of tracking software think we were freaking nuts.. especially if that person laid down 99 or something.

At between 2-5PM in the $3 Omaha PL H/Ls look out for a player with the name "laughter." Ask her about her idiot defense attorney son... :D Antiquehunter Posts: 8 Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:45 am Location: Usually Vancouver, Currently Kabul I am 'PatekPhil' on PStars and UB - occasionally other sites as well, when I'm trawling for a bonus. Strongly recommend PokerTracker for anyone playing cash games - an incredibly valuable tool - although I'd suggest not watching the trends too closely on players until you have about 100 hands on 'em. Even 100 hands is not statistically relevant. You'll find me mostly in 3-6 Limit and 1-2 / 2-4 No Limit ring games - but I gotta tell you the quality of the play online is getting very solid online at these levels. I'd rather be playing 15-30 at the Bellagio during a big tournament on some days. Very much an S&M (Sklansky/Malmuth) game texture. Tough to make a good rate when the players are all very solid. But the Vegas 3-6 / 4-8 limit tables are pretty juicy on the weekends if you're selective, as are some of the small NL games. I'm dabbling with Omaha HI/Hi-Lo, 7-Stud HI/Hi-Lo and Triple Draw hoping to find a bit of an edge on people who are focussing their learning and skills on hold'em. Starting to wonder if I should drop down in limit to pick off n00bs - but the problem there is that the swings you take in games with 7 people seeing the flop is brutal. And its pretty much impossible to bet a complete nincompoop off a hand. I also like the smaller SNG's (up to$20 buy-in) but I don't play many multi-table tourneys. They take too long and my connectivity is too flaky over here - too many horror stories of being disconnected at a crucial point in time.

Anyways - for those going to TAMV (If you're active at TOP) I'll be running (barring anything unforseen) a rerun of last year's World Skeptics Series of Poker - this year at the Riviera. We had over 30 players last year, hoping for 50 this time out.

Aces to you!

-AH.