Rake Simulation and Live Play
Posted by Tyler Forrester
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 24 Comments...
Fascinating to see that A2-A8s are losing money in small stakes games. Interesting too that suited connectors suffer the same fate when you 3B them, though if your population is folding too much to 3B's there's a case for 3betting them to take it down rake free preflop.
I'm sure everyone here will agree that we'd like to have access to that model, so we can play around with different structures and figure out the best sites for us.
Phenomenal work as always Tyler, you never fail to blow my mind with your next level shizz.
Thanks Zenful! That comment made my day :).
HTML version for the rest of us.
Rake HTML
It's a jupyter notebook for techies.
Rake Python Notebook
So sick Tyler, thank you!!!!!
Thank you so much for this video, wish I could 'heart' it more often than once :)
Thanks Sexy!
On Stars starting at what stake do you think it is fine to open A2s-A8s utg? Is it probably still fine to open them in MP? With a few big fish at the table would you still open A2s-A8s utg?
30:35 87 what would your call down range be here?
thanks
Hi Taiga!
All the numbers are based on my play at 2/4. In low rakeback environment, I would start opening these hands at 1/2. Anything lower, the hands would go negative.
It is true that if your game has several big fish, you could start raising. However, this happens virtually never in practice. If one big fish is sitting, then the table will fill pros.
@87 All Kx, most 9x, occasionally A7 or another 7 with no draw blocker. This spot is roughly neutral EV to call/fold, so we can call liberally.
When constructing a generic flop raise strategy, ROUGHLY* what should be our ratio of bluffs to value? (x:y)
Generic meaning an average of frequent situations (stack size between 40bb-150bb, cbet being 50% ish of pot, raise size being about pot, etc)
Depends a on bluff equity anywhere between 45% - 60% bluff.
Hey Tyler great work here I really enjoyed this video. I think rake effects are definitely something that many if not the vast majority of players put very little thought into when it comes to adjusting their strategy. Only recently have I been cutting down on cold calls, EP opens etc.. One thing I think to note is that Ignition's mid-high stakes population is pretty substantial given how under marketed/regulated it is. Its also impossible to see how many tables/people are playing at any given time. Because of this I think that its dangerous to make the assumption that players at different tables buying in for the same amount (in the video you point out a player that min buys, and a player that buys in for max, both very common buy in sizes that can be automatically set in the software settings) are the same person. I think you'll find that the biggest winners in these games put more weight into population tendencies when making decisions rather than trying to hard counter every anonymous individual they come across. Anyways thanks again for the great content, I really hope to see you making more ignition videos!
Hi Ken!
Thanks for your great comment!
Population reads are very important. However I think we can do better, I think its reasonable to assume that two 30bb stacks sitting down moments from each other at similar stakes could be the same opponent, and I give more weight to this evidence if they start to play a similar non-standard style (mashing pot all the time).
Hey Tyler, not sure if my logic is flawed or not but wouldn't it make sense to open larger in these high rake environments? It seems like 3x would let us take down more pots pre. Obviously we are giving up some EV by opening larger especially from late position so maybe it isn't worth it even with rake considerations.
Hi Biznitch,
Excellent point! Raising to 3-x in these games definitely makes more sense :)
Sauce demonstrated that in one of his most recent videos, it's great fun and informative, so I suggest you check it out! :)
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what HEM is saying, but isn't our winrate post-rake? As in your when your net amount won is $1200 and your rake is $800 you essentially won $2k.
* impatiently asked #2 with video paused and then you solved for higher limits. Thanks!
It is but it's post Stars take which is lower than ignition.
Do you think my winrate would increase as my effective stack size decreases in live games where people VPIP too wide preflop? I am considering buying in for 40 bb's instead of 200 bb's as my standard.
Don't join the dark side bro...
Only if you are on average worse than the competition. The short-stack strategy is all about not losing as much to better players.
The video features shorter play, because I want to keep the games from breaking and irregular stack sizes are heavily correlated with recreational players.
When you were calculating pokerstars rake did you use like 5'years database? My calculation (from 2017) give me 3,5bb/100 at this limit. The difference seems to be too high to be caused by vpip etc. Am i correct that you used old rake structure?
It is higher today. The main difference is rakeback .72 *3.5 is 2.52 which is slightly more rake as expected. Ultimately it's not so much about the actual rake level but the difference in hand profits betweening the sites
My 3,5bb/100 is after rakeback. Pre-rakeback is 4,7 :(
Yikes!!!! That's dreadful. I knew stars raised rake but I didn't realize it was that much.
The basic idea is that the ideas that I use for ignition will be applicable on stars now as well.
how does rake compare for plo on iggy? i am playing 2/5 there. thanks, interesting video.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.