What online stakes is easiest to crush?
As you move up in stakes, you generally pay less rake. At the same time, you generally face harder competition.
If you are a strong, winning player, what is the "sweet spot" stake where you can maximize your bb/100, ignoring $/hr?
I generally play low stakes PLO on ignition, but also curious about GGpoker.
As you move up in stakes, you generally pay less rake. At the same time, you generally face harder competition.
If you are a strong, winning player, what is the "sweet spot" stake where you can maximize your bb/100, ignoring $/hr?
I generally play low stakes PLO on ignition, but also curious about GGpoker.
My guess would be PLO10 or PLO25.
I highlighted "face harder competition" because your words seem to indicate the the harder competition is only human as no where do you mention cheating bots. PLO100 use to be a hot bed for bots where the cheaters felt that amount of money won was still high, while the potential of being noticed and caught was still low. So in general I would say PLO25 is the highest stake where you are still facing the most humans instead of at least one account at table being non-human.
I highlighted GG Poker because it is a site that has very large leader board money prizes which can make cheating at lower stakes than PLO100 still extremely profitable. So the answer on GG Poker might be PLO10 as the sweet spot to crush without facing too many non-humans.
If I had to pick one stake, I would say PLO25 because of lower rake, but some sites have weird rake structures.
The latest 2+2 thread on the eye opening threat and extent of bots at a poker site can be found below or just go to the "New, Views and Gossip section above and look at WPT Global thread.
Probably $1/$2.
I might as well put it a different way if easier to understand. Very good players make 10bb/100 at PLO100 or PLO200. You don't have to be a very good player to make 10bb/100 at PLO25. By the OP's definition of thread, PLO25 is way more a sweet spot than PLO100 or PLO200 and and probably a bb/100 20% higher at PLO25.
And for fun let me ask everyone a thought experiment. If I were to cross book a bet where you win a million dollar if you win over 10bb/100 plus x amount of money for every bb/100 you make over 10bb/100 and you can play any stake for the bet. Given the realities of rake and good players and bots and RTA, what stake are you sitting down for the bet? I'm sitting down at PLO25.
^^ If you sit down at $1/2 I am going to laugh at you and jokingly wish you well.
Live
If that was meant for me, yes I sit down a lot at $1/$2. I have played full time for +20 years. You go play your PL25 with other children and have fun, but remember to watch out for the bots!
Actually ready the threads you post in before posting. But as we have all seen recently, you have planted your face firmly in the ground multiple times. Little girl, if you had read the thread, OP asked about maximizing bb/100. You keep trying to deflect away from your ignornce.
I passed my phone around at the live game I'm at right now and several people laughed at you. It has been fun owning you again.
They also said although this thread was about online, dangomango gets serious props for his post.
This stupid crap tickled me.
Anyone want to guess what might be the one of the largest threads in the history of the Omaha sub-forum that wasn't a reoccurring monthly type strategy thread????
If you guess the Pokerstars PLO100 bot thread, then you would be correct with over 500,000 views. And that is old times, I covered my bases and didn't even go there and instead linked a current thread about a 130+ account bot ring on WPT. And in that thread is at least one well known Omaha poster. Getting cheating is a factor in what can be won as a bb/100. I listed the real crap from rake, good players and the likelihood of being cheated at a given stake. Little girl amok runs amok pretending away reality.
who would have guessed this thread would have devolved into a train wreck so fast?
I do not know, because I don't play bluefeet-stakes. I know how weak players there are in PLO200 and I assume you are allowed to table select a bit. I also know the rake difference is around 10bb/100.
The original question also wasn't how much can player x win in stakes y.
^^ amok can't read for crap the question was about stake to maximize bb/100
And for fun let me ask everyone a thought experiment. If I were to cross book a bet where you win a million dollar if you win over 10bb/100 plus x amount of money for every bb/100 you make over 10bb/100 and you can play any stake for the bet. Given the realities of rake and good players and bots and RTA, what stake are you sitting down for the bet? I'm sitting down at PLO25.
^^ amok don't understand crap about cross booking a bet where the stake are used as a tool.
I do not know, because I don't play bluefeet-stakes. I know how weak players there are in PLO200 and I assume you are allowed to table select a bit. I also know the rake difference is around 10bb/100.
The original question also wasn't how much can player x win in stakes y.
Quit while you are behind. You look more foolish with each post. It must be a sad life for you to have to attempt to deflect and move the goal post after getting called out for being an idiot.
I did read the question and I did understand it. My point is that rake is lower and the opposition is weak. Note that the question wasn't where YOU would make most bb/100 but where a strong player would.
Cross booking has nothing to do with the question so I skipped that part.
I did read the question and I did understand it. My point is that rake is lower and the opposition is weak. Note that the question wasn't where YOU would make most bb/100 but where a strong player would.
Cross booking has nothing to do with the question so I skipped that part.
Yet another weak attempt at you to change the meaning and spirit of the original post.
I can easily name six to a dozen strong players that post here that I confidently feel if their life was on the line would easily win at over 10bb/100 at PLO25. But I also feel that those same players would be sweating bullets trying to win at over 10bb/100 at PLO200. There is a reasonable upper limit on win rate per bb/100 at PLO200 given rake, skill of opponents, cheating by opponents, etc. You wish casting it higher than it is ain't changing ****.
You are a flat out bullcrap poster. You calling the opposition at PLO200 weak is disingenuous. And the next bullcrap post from you will be you saying that the opponents are weak for you. Because all you have is a bag full of lies. I won't waste my time looking, but PLOMastermind or RIO, probably put PLO100 or maybe PLO200 as the first stakes where your opponents are not going to be weak anymore. You lie. But you tried to dance between the raindrops but now introducing table selecting into your bullcrap excuses. You lie. It is obvious to most reading this sub-section. But you have no choice but to keep trying to change reality because you are a fool.
Just for grins, I did a Google search and AI, which can give wonky answers, gave a reasonable answer here as to when your opponents at a given stake start getting better.
Amok is a disingenuous bullcrap poster.
No offense, but if you don't play PLO25, on what basis can you confidently say "strong players will achieve higher winrates at PLO200 than PLO25."
You know rake is 10/bb higher in PLO25, but you are simply speculating about the difference in skill level because you've never played people at those stakes?
As you move up in stakes, you generally pay less rake. At the same time, you generally face harder competition.
If you are a strong, winning player, what is the "sweet spot" stake where you can maximize your bb/100, ignoring $/hr?
I generally play low stakes PLO on ignition, but also curious about GGpoker.
Any stake. There are terrible players at every stake. The problem you run into is playing online they're not dealing 100% randomly so you're going to run into these longer streaks of losing and breaking even because the goal of an online poker site is to keep gains as even as possible. But you honestly think that the players you're seeing live aren't the same players that are coming online? I mean you think there are people that just play online and are crushing and they're playing 100 PLO online? Those are the same fools you would see playing low stakes live poker so the games aren't any harder. The dealing online is just different
How could a live player know if they are "running bad" without hand histories?
Do you have any shred of evidence that all online poker sites have secretly conspired to manipulate their algorithm to boost losers and punish winners? Do you realize how insane the conspiracy would be to be kept secret without any leaks or whistleblowers?
How could a live player know if they are "running bad" without hand histories?
Do you have any shred of evidence that all online poker sites have secretly conspired to manipulate their algorithm to boost losers and punish winners? Do you realize how insane the conspiracy would be to be kept secret without any leaks or whistleblowers?
Yes. All winners have a smaller win rate online then they do live. Are you going to ask me how I know that too? We'll add it up most hold them players can make $25 to $30 an hour live playing one table. You would never make that playing the same steaks online. This is how I know. So why do winners have a smaller win rate online? The only thing I can think of is the sites are not dealing cards the same way you would get in a live game, you get a different distribution and because of that winners are winning slower, and loses a losing slower. I mean what else would you say it is? And they can't be any whistleblowers. Because anybody who tells you that they know for sure because they have inside information about it you all say it's a lie anyway. So somebody could come out put a post and say hey I work for a site and here's exactly what they did and then you would get 9,000 responses where people would say it's not true. You understand you guys don't want to believe that it's true so no amount of evidence is ever going to convince you that it could be true. It's like if you believe the Earth is flat no amount of evidence is going to make you think it's round. And if you believe the Earth is round no amount of evidence is going to make you believe the Earth is flat
So why do winners have a smaller win rate online? The only thing I can think of is the sites are not dealing cards the same way you would get in a live game, you get a different distribution and because of that winners are winning slower, and loses a losing slower.
Genuinely don't know whether this is satire or not. If you're serious, please spend about 5 seconds thinking about this and you can easily come up with many reasons why win rates are lower online than live.
Genuinely don't know whether this is satire or not. If you're serious, please spend about 5 seconds thinking about this and you can easily come up with many reasons why win rates are lower online than live.
There's one reason why the win rates online would be lower. And that's because the parts are smaller. But if you take a guy who's playing say1-2 live a good solid player could probably win between 30 and $40 per hour. That same person playing the same limits online is probably going to win three big blinds per 100 hands which works out to be about $5 per hour. Now you can't tell me that the reason this guy goes from $35 an hour live to $5 an hour online is because the players are that much better? I mean are you serious? There is no way the players are that much better online to account for that difference. I have played online for about 21 years and never had a losing year playing online. I have also talked to a lot of people in the tech industry. I have talked to a lot of people that audit sites. I talked to a guy playing live poker 2 days ago that used to deal for a casino out in Vegas where he said they had the automatic shuffle is and they could program the automatic shuffle is to put all the cards back in order. So you had a scrambled deck and then everything could be back in order from ace of spade to King of spade etc. So he said those automatic shuttles can deal cards any way they want. And I said oh I definitely believe it I don't like the automatic shufflers because who knows what they're doing in a live game also. But my question becomes if they're able to do that in a live game what the hell can they do online?
