Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="F Paulsson, post: 1338342, member: 6979"]
Thought experiment time:

[LIST=1]
[*]Take the 24 tables that Jagsti plays.
[*]Now take away the 12 toughest ones.
[*]What will that do for his win-rate (not winnings, just win-rate)?
[/LIST]

That's without Jagsti changing anything in the way he plays. That's just him exercising the edge he has over weaker opposition, or at the very least in better relative position versus his weaker opponents. Whether or not his net hourly earnings will go up is debatable, but anyone who claims that his [I]win-rate[/I] is unaffected by this does not understand where the money comes from in poker.

Secondly, even if Jagsti plays with a near-computer-like efficiency, don't tell me that among all these 24 tables he never once mis-reads a stack size. Or a stat in the HUD. Or doesn't notice that the fish left and a tough reg sat down and the HUD just hasn't updated yet. Or times out on a decision on some table. If he makes no mistakes at all like this playing 24 tables, he'd play 25 tables. I find it obvious that reducing the number of tables will reduce the frequency of these mistakes, thus increasing the win-rate. Without changing his game plan.

40% rakeback (I believe that's what SNE is worth?) at 1/2 comes out to about 2 big blinds/100 hands. The idea that better table selection and less frequent mistakes couldn't make up for 2bb/100 seems outlandish to me, and that's without playing "better" at all.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us