![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
August update
Aug. 14th, 2009 04:20 pmWell, the throughput continues, 14,150 hands so far by the 14th, and the hourly rate is above expectation ($37.61, to be precise), on a per-100 hands rate of $12.77. A quick run on the calculator tells me that I'm averaging 295 hands per hour. About 30% of this appears to be bonus/rakeback.
That's actually an indication of the generosity of the bonus/rakeback postion at the moment. There appears to be a war going on for market share, and the much-playing customer is the beneficiary. And since there's only a fixed number of short-stack rakeback/bonus specialists, this is all good news. There's a lag effect which means that, if the benefits continue, more people become short-stack rakeback specialists, but that's probably three to six months-worth.
The biggeest surprise I got was that a hundred bucks a month was being deposited into my Party account. I ignored it last month, but when it happened again, I emailed Party to find out why. And I'm getting it from the affiliate with whom I signed up to Party.
So, not only has Party moved over to one of the best bonus schemes going, but it's once more paying the affiliates that were giving rakeback! This is on a par with a Damascene conversion.
I reckoned that I was getting three cents a hand rakeback already, so this pushes it up to four cents a hand. If I move up to the famed "Palladium" level (ya gotta love that element), which is quite feasible, then I could be looking at five cents a hand.
Of course, I am playing $200 and $400 buy-ins, so I suppose a slightly higher refund could be expected, but, looking at the rake I am paying, it still seems to be about 30% to 40% rakeback equivalent.
Stars can't match that, but it's still considerably better than it used to be. At the moment I can get £250 for 25,000 FPPs, and that takes me 12,500 hands. That is likely to be about $1,250 in rake, so we're looking at little more than three cents a hand. I've got a $300 reload bonus that will take about 15k hands, so that's another two cents a hand. And that's just at my current Gold Star level. If you move up to Supernova (as I should do this month or next) then I'm probably looking at five cents a hand, without the reload bonus.
In a sense it's important not to lose sight of the trees here, which is that finding weaker games are always more important than good rakeback and bonus schemes. That was the reason I walked away from NoIQ, despite its fantastic rakeback. But I need to play on about three different sites to stop boredom setting in. Playing on different sites also makes it harder for opponents to completely suss you out. Since my own game also changes over time, there's a "hidden" advantage in playing more than one site, in that regulars are fractionally more likely to make mistakes against you.
However, I'm beginning to feel that the poorer Rewards scheme on 888, its weaker software and the lack of liquidity above $100 buy in could mean that I will be giving that site a rest in the near future. I've got several other sites awaiting my custom (Mansion, for example), but once again, liquidity might be a problem. $200 full-ring buy in games do not appear in large numbers outside the four major sites.
For that reason I'm seriously consdering a return to my bete noire site, Full Tilt. They too are playing the bonus wars game, and there's certainly plenty of liquidity. And the software is v good.
What's most pleasing about this month, in a paradoxical way, is that I am running bad. I had a genuine two-outer beat me for a $400 pot two days ago, which pushed me $300 down on all-in EV overall this month, and $600 down on all-in EV at Stars alone, and I'm still breaking even there. This is where Hold Em Manager is pure gold. I can carry on playing at Stars with a reasonable degree of confidence that I am good enough at this level.
On the other hand, I think that I am benefiting on Party not so much because I am running good there, as that my good cards have come at the $400 buy-in level. Just checked, and in 3934 hands this year, I've had Aces and Kings 47 times (expected occurrence 38 times)and have won the hand 95% of the time that I've had them. Half the hands went to showdown, and I won 84% of the hands at showdown, as well as 93% of the hands when I saw the flop. For an average of $40 a hand. That, in any poker language, is running good.
Another interesting point is the extent to which variance can influence your performance over a LOOONNNNG time. I've played 31,000 hands on Stars this year and I'm a staggering $1,500 below all-in EV (or, to give it a percentage term, I'm winning 20% of what I "should" be winning). Over at Party, I've played 66,800 hands, and, yes, I'm $2,400 AHEAD of the amount that I should have won (or about 160% of what I "should", be winning).
If we merge these into a similar number of hands played, it means that an unlucky player at 50c/$1 could be level after 40k hands, while another player could be $2,000 up, and both would have the same "expected" win. Playing live, 40k hands is about six months' "work". That's why the myths of "lucky" and "unlucky" players abound. Because, in the land of live poker (and particularly live tournaments), it is true. What is untrue is that the "lucky" player is any more likely to be lucky tomorrow than the "unlucky" player.
Here's the hand, jst so that you can have a laugh. The other "good" news about this was that it didn't have any emotional impact. Having five figures in your online account is a good way to make you sanguine.
Hold'em No Limit ($1/$2 USD) - 2009/08/13
Table 'Phemios IV' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: HERO ($195 in chips)
Seat 2: thapuss ($119.45 in chips)
Seat 3: BRzRoll ($220.15 in chips)
Seat 4: Villain ($227.15 in chips)
Seat 5: studboy1 ($220.45 in chips)
Seat 6: mr.flopswell ($200 in chips)
Seat 7: czyrsk23 ($200 in chips)
Seat 8: vinivici9586 ($400.30 in chips)
Seat 9: KingDanne ($229.50 in chips)
studboy1: posts small blind $1
mr.flopswell: posts big blind $2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to HERO [K♠ K♣;]
czyrsk23: folds
vinivici9586: folds
KingDanne: raises $5 to $7
HERO: raises $15 to $22
thapuss: folds
BRzRoll: folds
Villain: raises $15 to $37
studboy1: folds
mr.flopswell: folds
KingDanne: folds
HERO: raises $23 to $60
Villain: calls $23
That would appear to rule out Aces, although I know of at least one player who would flat-call with Aces in this spot..
*** FLOP *** [T♡; J◊; 5♣;]
HERO: bets $80
Villain: calls $80
I think I am winning this. The only decision is whether to shove or whether to go for all his money (but risk mine in the process). If opponent has a set or has played Aces cannily, it makes no odds (I'm going broke anyway), so the question is, does he have two outs or six? I really like the guy for Queens here.
*** TURN *** [T♡; J◊; 5♣;] [J♠]
HERO: bets $55 and is all-in
Villain: calls $55
*** RIVER *** [T♡; J◊; 5♣; J♠] [Q♡;]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
HERO: shows [K♠ K♣;] (two pair, Kings and Jacks)
Villain: shows [Q◊; Q♣;] (a full house, Queens full of Jacks)
Villain collected $397 from pot
Hmm, ok, everything went right there apart from when the fat lady sang….
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $400 | Rake $3
Board [T♡; J◊; 5♣; J♠ Q♡;]
Seat 1: HERO showed [K♠ K♣;] and lost with two pair, Kings and Jacks
Seat 4: Villain (button) showed [Q◊; Q♣;] and won ($397) with a full house, Queens full of Jacks
____________________
That's actually an indication of the generosity of the bonus/rakeback postion at the moment. There appears to be a war going on for market share, and the much-playing customer is the beneficiary. And since there's only a fixed number of short-stack rakeback/bonus specialists, this is all good news. There's a lag effect which means that, if the benefits continue, more people become short-stack rakeback specialists, but that's probably three to six months-worth.
The biggeest surprise I got was that a hundred bucks a month was being deposited into my Party account. I ignored it last month, but when it happened again, I emailed Party to find out why. And I'm getting it from the affiliate with whom I signed up to Party.
So, not only has Party moved over to one of the best bonus schemes going, but it's once more paying the affiliates that were giving rakeback! This is on a par with a Damascene conversion.
I reckoned that I was getting three cents a hand rakeback already, so this pushes it up to four cents a hand. If I move up to the famed "Palladium" level (ya gotta love that element), which is quite feasible, then I could be looking at five cents a hand.
Of course, I am playing $200 and $400 buy-ins, so I suppose a slightly higher refund could be expected, but, looking at the rake I am paying, it still seems to be about 30% to 40% rakeback equivalent.
Stars can't match that, but it's still considerably better than it used to be. At the moment I can get £250 for 25,000 FPPs, and that takes me 12,500 hands. That is likely to be about $1,250 in rake, so we're looking at little more than three cents a hand. I've got a $300 reload bonus that will take about 15k hands, so that's another two cents a hand. And that's just at my current Gold Star level. If you move up to Supernova (as I should do this month or next) then I'm probably looking at five cents a hand, without the reload bonus.
In a sense it's important not to lose sight of the trees here, which is that finding weaker games are always more important than good rakeback and bonus schemes. That was the reason I walked away from NoIQ, despite its fantastic rakeback. But I need to play on about three different sites to stop boredom setting in. Playing on different sites also makes it harder for opponents to completely suss you out. Since my own game also changes over time, there's a "hidden" advantage in playing more than one site, in that regulars are fractionally more likely to make mistakes against you.
However, I'm beginning to feel that the poorer Rewards scheme on 888, its weaker software and the lack of liquidity above $100 buy in could mean that I will be giving that site a rest in the near future. I've got several other sites awaiting my custom (Mansion, for example), but once again, liquidity might be a problem. $200 full-ring buy in games do not appear in large numbers outside the four major sites.
For that reason I'm seriously consdering a return to my bete noire site, Full Tilt. They too are playing the bonus wars game, and there's certainly plenty of liquidity. And the software is v good.
What's most pleasing about this month, in a paradoxical way, is that I am running bad. I had a genuine two-outer beat me for a $400 pot two days ago, which pushed me $300 down on all-in EV overall this month, and $600 down on all-in EV at Stars alone, and I'm still breaking even there. This is where Hold Em Manager is pure gold. I can carry on playing at Stars with a reasonable degree of confidence that I am good enough at this level.
On the other hand, I think that I am benefiting on Party not so much because I am running good there, as that my good cards have come at the $400 buy-in level. Just checked, and in 3934 hands this year, I've had Aces and Kings 47 times (expected occurrence 38 times)and have won the hand 95% of the time that I've had them. Half the hands went to showdown, and I won 84% of the hands at showdown, as well as 93% of the hands when I saw the flop. For an average of $40 a hand. That, in any poker language, is running good.
Another interesting point is the extent to which variance can influence your performance over a LOOONNNNG time. I've played 31,000 hands on Stars this year and I'm a staggering $1,500 below all-in EV (or, to give it a percentage term, I'm winning 20% of what I "should" be winning). Over at Party, I've played 66,800 hands, and, yes, I'm $2,400 AHEAD of the amount that I should have won (or about 160% of what I "should", be winning).
If we merge these into a similar number of hands played, it means that an unlucky player at 50c/$1 could be level after 40k hands, while another player could be $2,000 up, and both would have the same "expected" win. Playing live, 40k hands is about six months' "work". That's why the myths of "lucky" and "unlucky" players abound. Because, in the land of live poker (and particularly live tournaments), it is true. What is untrue is that the "lucky" player is any more likely to be lucky tomorrow than the "unlucky" player.
Here's the hand, jst so that you can have a laugh. The other "good" news about this was that it didn't have any emotional impact. Having five figures in your online account is a good way to make you sanguine.
Hold'em No Limit ($1/$2 USD) - 2009/08/13
Table 'Phemios IV' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: HERO ($195 in chips)
Seat 2: thapuss ($119.45 in chips)
Seat 3: BRzRoll ($220.15 in chips)
Seat 4: Villain ($227.15 in chips)
Seat 5: studboy1 ($220.45 in chips)
Seat 6: mr.flopswell ($200 in chips)
Seat 7: czyrsk23 ($200 in chips)
Seat 8: vinivici9586 ($400.30 in chips)
Seat 9: KingDanne ($229.50 in chips)
studboy1: posts small blind $1
mr.flopswell: posts big blind $2
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to HERO [K♠ K♣;]
czyrsk23: folds
vinivici9586: folds
KingDanne: raises $5 to $7
HERO: raises $15 to $22
thapuss: folds
BRzRoll: folds
Villain: raises $15 to $37
studboy1: folds
mr.flopswell: folds
KingDanne: folds
HERO: raises $23 to $60
Villain: calls $23
That would appear to rule out Aces, although I know of at least one player who would flat-call with Aces in this spot..
*** FLOP *** [T♡; J◊; 5♣;]
HERO: bets $80
Villain: calls $80
I think I am winning this. The only decision is whether to shove or whether to go for all his money (but risk mine in the process). If opponent has a set or has played Aces cannily, it makes no odds (I'm going broke anyway), so the question is, does he have two outs or six? I really like the guy for Queens here.
*** TURN *** [T♡; J◊; 5♣;] [J♠]
HERO: bets $55 and is all-in
Villain: calls $55
*** RIVER *** [T♡; J◊; 5♣; J♠] [Q♡;]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
HERO: shows [K♠ K♣;] (two pair, Kings and Jacks)
Villain: shows [Q◊; Q♣;] (a full house, Queens full of Jacks)
Villain collected $397 from pot
Hmm, ok, everything went right there apart from when the fat lady sang….
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $400 | Rake $3
Board [T♡; J◊; 5♣; J♠ Q♡;]
Seat 1: HERO showed [K♠ K♣;] and lost with two pair, Kings and Jacks
Seat 4: Villain (button) showed [Q◊; Q♣;] and won ($397) with a full house, Queens full of Jacks
____________________
