Who's the donk?

[ArtK78]

In the 2/4 limit games that I have played in (which has not been for some time), if you are heads-up there is no cap. So, if you wanted to go all-in, you could.

 

The rake varies from casino to casino, but it is pretty high compared to the pots. But the game is definitely beatable as there are so many bad players. I used to play these games frequently, and I am definitely ahead.

 

Also, the rake is capped, so once you get to the rake cap, the rest of the pot is for the players.

 

As for the hand, I would always assume that my Aces full is the best hand. The chances of quads are so small as to be almost dismissed. The fact that the player is raising doesn't mean he has quads, unless you get a read on him.

[jjbrr]

I don't know the exact numbers but quick research suggests that it is beatable, but it's not worth it. The general consensus seems to be to play 4/8 or 5/10 when you can and use good judgment for table selection.

[Jlall]

I'll find out what it is next time I play. I still think it's beatable. FWIW obviously I'm the worst poker player in the universe, and over the first 4 sessions totalling 6 hours I'm up $157. I have no idea what makes a good sample size though. Including probably 40-50 given away in tips as well.

haha, lets just say if you showed a sample of 10k LHE hands, you would get laughed off the planet for thinking that is a meaningful sample.

 

Obviously playing live you can pretty much never get a sample size large enough to know your true winrate, but 6 hours of live play is maybe a few minutes online, fwiw.

 

Also 40 bets is not much of a swing, you can easily go on 500 BB downswings as a winning player (obviously depending on your true winrate).

 

Not to be like "lol live players" but they really have no idea about sample size/variance/etc because they cannot play enough hands.

[Jlall]

I don't know the exact numbers but quick research suggests that it is beatable, but it's not worth it. The general consensus seems to be to play 4/8 or 5/10 when you can and use good judgment for table selection.

Even online, the HU games are not really beatable until 3/6 because the rake is too high, and online rakes are much better than live rakes. Of course online HU is much tougher than live full ring at the same stakes, but generally your winrate HU is going to have a higher possible cap than in FR.

 

Josh please report back when you get the numbers, assuming your winrate is something like a massive 6BB per 100 hands, we can see what your winrate would be after rake and tip etc and how beatable the game is.

[jdonn]

Btw when we say "not beatable" what do we mean exactly? Like you can't get rich off it, or you can't make a living off it, or you can't come out ahead at all?

[Jlall]

Btw when we say "not beatable" what do we mean exactly? Like you can't get rich off it, or you can't make a living off it, or you can't come out ahead at all?

I mean it wouldn't surprise me if the best player in the world did not have a positive winrate after rake+tip. So basically I mean it literally, although Jeremy seems to have searched 2+2 for this already so if they say it is beatable but not worth it I'm sure they're right.

[jdonn]

Ok for I'll find out the rake, and also the next time or two I play I'll (try to) keep track of how many hands per hour. I was thinking of everything in terms of time but of course it's hands that matter.

 

It's actually good to know. I'm fully convinced the level of play in certain places is so bad I can come out ahead, but if I have to move up to 4-8 or 1-2 NL or something then I want to know that. Of course I'll keep trying to get better before I do that...

[Lobowolf]

FWIW, I concur with "beatable, but not worth it" (apart from recreational benefit, obviously).

[Mbodell]

I'd raise the turn and re-raise the river. The odds that he has 66 are about 1% and certainly aren't greater than 5%. People will call with any boat, any straight, and most trips as well as some folks with something like AK. This is 2-4 limit we are talking about. There are twice as many A6 hands he could have that would play this hand strong as there are 66 hands, so both of those would play it like he did (as would 77), even by a reasonable player.

[jdonn]

I'd raise the turn and re-raise the river.  The odds that he has 66 are about 1% and certainly aren't greater than 5%.  People will call with any boat, any straight, and most trips as well as some folks with something like AK.  This is 2-4 limit we are talking about.  There are twice as many A6 hands he could have that would play this hand strong as there are 66 hands, so both of those would play it like he did (as would 77), even by a reasonable player.

You realize you were crushed on the turn, right? On the flop too, but by even many more possible hands on the turn.

[Jlall]

Raising the turn is pretty lol...

[jdonn]

Raising the turn is pretty lol...

See, I did a lot of things right! :)

[Lobowolf]

Now, when's someone going to start a 7-stud high/low split thread, so we can REALLY get into it?!

[Stephen Tu]

2-4 LHE in Vegas is easily beatable IMO, no question about it, the players are LOL bad. Rake is 10%, $4 cap usually, it's just not a problem with the games this juicy (5 people cold-calling an UTG raise!). There are plenty of tourists there who came to play hands, not to fold them. 2-4 in California, with a killer flat $4 rake every hand regardless of pot size, that's potentially unbeatable depending on table conditions. Vegas should be beatable as long as you don't over-tip. Also avoid places with jackpot drop if convenient. Of course "beatable" < minimum wage = maybe $6/hr, this is for recreation not for a living. And really if you are a +EV player you should try to find a casino where the lowest is 3-6 or 4-8 (Bellagio), the level of play is the same since the casual players just pick the lowest limit offered where they happen to be.

 

LOL at "raising to reduce field size". In no fold'em limit hold'em, you are raising strictly to get more money in the pot. You might only get it back 40% w/ AA, but you are getting 6:1! Missing the pre-flop raise doesn't make up for any deceptive post-flop value you might gain, the players aren't paying attention anyway, and even the few that do can't exploit you for too many bets anyway since you can always just call down and only lose say 2 big bets on turn/river. how to play LHE vs. donks != how to play high-stakes LHE/NLHE vs. good winning regs. Also with aces, you actually don't mind the whole table coming along for as many bets as you can get in pre-flop. You get beat more often, sure, but the extra bets on every street makes the pots you still hold on to win enormous, and is greater EV than fewer people in the pot.

 

Josh get Miller's SSHE book. And w/ top boat please put in at least 6 BB before just calling the 7th bet, unless you have strong evidence that villain knows how to play.

[Jlall]

Maybe this was not clear but I was never suggesting not raising pre with AA, I was saying that in doing so you are acknowledging that you are playing vs people who will not later know in, say, a hand like this, that your entire range is now AA and nothing else. Ergo putting them on quads because they "know" you have AA and are playing perfectly against you is a big mistake.

 

$4 flat rake seems pretty lol, I don't see how anyone could possibly beat that. Vegas rake seems better, but you still have to have a massive winrate to overcome that kind of rake.

[Stephen Tu]

$4 flat rake seems pretty lol, I don't see how anyone could possibly beat that.

 

Maybe you are playing too much online and haven't played against live donks enough? With enough 5-6-way raised/capped pots, the average pots can get large enough that it can be overcome. Maybe for only $4/hr though rather than $6. Vegas rake is basically double of online, but VPIP of the players is also doubled, which more than makes up the difference.

 

But it is silly to fight against that for too long when the $6-12 game w/ $5 flat rake isn't all that much tougher. $2-4 kind of disappeared around here a couple years ago anyway, $3-6 is the lowest now ($4 rake).

[Jlall]

$4 flat rake seems pretty lol, I don't see how anyone could possibly beat that.

 

Maybe you are playing too much online and haven't played against live donks enough? With enough 5-6-way raised/capped pots, the average pots can get large enough that it can be overcome. Maybe for only $4/hr though rather than $6.

 

But it is silly to fight against that for too long when the $6-12 game w/ $5 flat rake isn't all that much tougher. $2-4 kind of disappeared around here a couple years ago anyway, $3-6 is the lowest now ($4 rake).

Yeah I have no live low limit experience, and only a little at Commerce and Bellagio, so I guess I could be underestimating your max potential winrate. $4/hr does sound like what others have said so far...beatable but not worth it heh.

[Mbodell]

Raising the turn is pretty lol...

Maybe. In the 2-4 games I've played I'd see enough people on straight draws and other overpairs that I'm not sure it is -EV. It might well be. But I think that is a closer decision than reraising the river.

 

Obviously against this specific hand you are crushed. I'm not sure you are crushed against the range of hands that bets. (things like 45, 89, 78, JJ, A5 are all betting this way IME).