Why Edmonton Has The Best Low Limit (1/2 or 2/5) Action in The World (Literally)
(also brag post)
I thought I would post this as we seem not to have many live cash game players on the forum. I think I am probably as good at live cash games as I have ever been. I have learned the following things about my poker game over the years:
I do not enjoy playing online poker at all. To me it feels like a second job. Grinding multiple tables in front of a computer is just not for me. I think another part of the problem with online for me is that I cannot escape it when I play. It is always there. The biggest problem is that I fell it takes away from my live game -- I just don't feel the desire to play as much when I can sit here and play online whenever I want.
I do not enjoy playing live tournies. I used to love small MTTs when I was learning poker, but have lost all interest in them. To me, a big part of being a good MTT player is playing tight at times and I love to play lots of hands. If you look at the WSOP ME final table, I think the chipleader had around 70bb which I feel is super shallow. Just not my game at all.
I love deepstacked live cash, so that's all I ever play anymore. I play the game I enjoy and the money just follows. If I have played too many hours in a week and no longer feel likel playing then I don't go play poker. I play when I am enjoying it.
I lost my old data and started using an App on my phone and also backing-up data online (pokerdominator.com is a great free record keeping program that you can obviously access wherever they haz interwebz).
Sick brag graph for my last 20ish sessions of 1/2 (you will have to believe me that this is my standard winrate +/- $5 over my last year in this city):
High std deviation due to small sample size on this tracker.
I know this is a crazy winrate. I view myself as probably the best live cash player where I play and I am pretty introspective/realistic about my game. I have played live cash for 7-8 years and lost interest for a while but am loving playing poker again. Everything in my life (personally, etc) is going great and I think that has a big reflection on playing live. I try and keep my sessions short except if I am at a really good table and am still playing my A game. I find as I get older that I can no longer play well in sessions beyond 6 hours or so and that I don't really have the time or desire to play extended sessions anyhow.
So, the reasons:
1. 1/2 plays at $500 max which gives skilled players a much larger edge over the lol regs that happen to be deep. A couple casinos in Calgary have now increased to $500 as well, but not anywhere I would ever play regularly (ABS and Cash Casinos, I believe).
2. Often times you are investing $2-$10 in a pot vs an opponent who will stack off light and is sitting with $500+. You're playing for 2/5 stacks and putting in 1/2 money preflop. This really decreases variance.
3. A lucky, but bad player that has a deep stack is quite willing to lose it all on one hand. This means that buying in for $500 at a good table can be way more profitable than at a typical 1 2 game.
4. With table selection it is quite rare not to find a good, very deep table.
5. Most deep players have no clue about stack sizes in relation to raises and intrinsic hand values. They don't understand that calling them with ATC can be profitable if we are both deep enough and cannot adjust.
6. Even "solid" regs can be outplayed fairly easily my shifting your style up. Where I play, regs NEVER change their style of play. This makes it very profitable to play in even the late night weeknight reg infested games if you are willing to shift between LAG and TAG in the right spots. I am almost certain that at least 3/4 of the regs I play with are losing players (being conservative).
7. I think that many not too bright players (sorry about the stereotype, but if you play with some of these players you will know what I am talking about) working in the oil fields have access to much more money than they rightfully should for their age and are very willing to play drunk a lose a couple thousand dollars in a night of poker.
Overall, these have to be the best 1 2 games on the planet if you are a decent live player. I think they are beatable for more money than the 2/5 games in Vegas. I used to sit in the 2 5 at my casino when it (rarely) went, but it is a much tougher game and I'd be shocked if it is beatable for more than the 1 2 games.
IMO you cannot find a regular 2/5 game anywhere on the planet more beatable than 1/2 in Edmonton.
As an aside, I'm moving away from here as soon as I find a decent job somewhere warm (-30C trumps all).
I thought I would post this as we seem not to have many live cash game players on the forum. I think I am probably as good at live cash games as I have ever been. I have learned the following things about my poker game over the years:
I do not enjoy playing online poker at all. To me it feels like a second job. Grinding multiple tables in front of a computer is just not for me. I think another part of the problem with online for me is that I cannot escape it when I play. It is always there. The biggest problem is that I fell it takes away from my live game -- I just don't feel the desire to play as much when I can sit here and play online whenever I want.
I do not enjoy playing live tournies. I used to love small MTTs when I was learning poker, but have lost all interest in them. To me, a big part of being a good MTT player is playing tight at times and I love to play lots of hands. If you look at the WSOP ME final table, I think the chipleader had around 70bb which I feel is super shallow. Just not my game at all.
I love deepstacked live cash, so that's all I ever play anymore. I play the game I enjoy and the money just follows. If I have played too many hours in a week and no longer feel likel playing then I don't go play poker. I play when I am enjoying it.
I lost my old data and started using an App on my phone and also backing-up data online (pokerdominator.com is a great free record keeping program that you can obviously access wherever they haz interwebz).
Sick brag graph for my last 20ish sessions of 1/2 (you will have to believe me that this is my standard winrate +/- $5 over my last year in this city):
High std deviation due to small sample size on this tracker.
I know this is a crazy winrate. I view myself as probably the best live cash player where I play and I am pretty introspective/realistic about my game. I have played live cash for 7-8 years and lost interest for a while but am loving playing poker again. Everything in my life (personally, etc) is going great and I think that has a big reflection on playing live. I try and keep my sessions short except if I am at a really good table and am still playing my A game. I find as I get older that I can no longer play well in sessions beyond 6 hours or so and that I don't really have the time or desire to play extended sessions anyhow.
So, the reasons:
1. 1/2 plays at $500 max which gives skilled players a much larger edge over the lol regs that happen to be deep. A couple casinos in Calgary have now increased to $500 as well, but not anywhere I would ever play regularly (ABS and Cash Casinos, I believe).
2. Often times you are investing $2-$10 in a pot vs an opponent who will stack off light and is sitting with $500+. You're playing for 2/5 stacks and putting in 1/2 money preflop. This really decreases variance.
3. A lucky, but bad player that has a deep stack is quite willing to lose it all on one hand. This means that buying in for $500 at a good table can be way more profitable than at a typical 1 2 game.
4. With table selection it is quite rare not to find a good, very deep table.
5. Most deep players have no clue about stack sizes in relation to raises and intrinsic hand values. They don't understand that calling them with ATC can be profitable if we are both deep enough and cannot adjust.
6. Even "solid" regs can be outplayed fairly easily my shifting your style up. Where I play, regs NEVER change their style of play. This makes it very profitable to play in even the late night weeknight reg infested games if you are willing to shift between LAG and TAG in the right spots. I am almost certain that at least 3/4 of the regs I play with are losing players (being conservative).
7. I think that many not too bright players (sorry about the stereotype, but if you play with some of these players you will know what I am talking about) working in the oil fields have access to much more money than they rightfully should for their age and are very willing to play drunk a lose a couple thousand dollars in a night of poker.
Overall, these have to be the best 1 2 games on the planet if you are a decent live player. I think they are beatable for more money than the 2/5 games in Vegas. I used to sit in the 2 5 at my casino when it (rarely) went, but it is a much tougher game and I'd be shocked if it is beatable for more than the 1 2 games.
IMO you cannot find a regular 2/5 game anywhere on the planet more beatable than 1/2 in Edmonton.
As an aside, I'm moving away from here as soon as I find a decent job somewhere warm (-30C trumps all).
Comments
I mainly play at 2 different clubs in the GTA, with a player pool of 100 or so players. Honestly, of all the guys I see play weekly, there are probably 1 or 2 that make money on a regular basis and are 'winning' players. They do have losing sessions and the nights they do win, they really do need to hit some cards. It is hard to make consistent money playing cash games really due to a high rake and variance IMO.
So what makes these players so bad? Maybe you could provide some examples of big hands that you won which demonstrates their lack of skill. Are they getting all their money in the middle with no draws? Are they calling all the way down to the river behind the whole way?
Of these 21 sessions, what were the largest winning sessions and losing sessions?
I think this is a good summary:
The tough part about win rates in live poker is the fact that there is such a small sample size. On average, players see 20 - 25 hands/hr at a live casino. This is a nothing compared to the 60+ hands per hr/table you see online. So, you might be playing 4 times a week for 5 hour sessions over a period of four months and see that your win rate is 40/hr at 1/2 NL. Wow. 20BB/hr. This means your absolutely crushing the game. But in reality, you shouldn't take this number too seriously. Why? Because your sample size is too small. Assuming 25 hands, you only see 500 hands/wk and 8000 hand in the 4 month period. This is not close to the long run and solid online player can go 40k+ hands of breaking even because of bad variance or luck. Since it's tough to get a large sample size, just be honest about your skill level. Are you just hitting big hands? Are you giving beats to a lot of people? As a rule of thumb, if your winning 20BB/hr+ in a game, you are most likely on a heater (running really good). I think the best players in the game (over a large sample) probably win closer to 10BB/hr with the rare few (in really good games/very competent) winning closer to 15BB/hr. So, in conclusion, just be aware of yourself and be honest. It's the only way to get by with conditions given in live games. Don't let stats determine your skill level, especially when they are not over a significant sample.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/170/live-low-stakes-nl/official-winrates-bankrolls-finances-771192/
I can't wait to come back.
I understand the win rate live vs online isn't the same...Online your win rates aren't going to be as high, over time, as live...as I don't believe you are seeing the fish that you do in a live setting like one in Alberta. As GTA said..there are simply way too many people, that lack skill, willing to drop a PILE of money on the poker tables. These guys aren't playing online, they aren't studying the game..for many of them the last book they read was their grade 11 Science text...but on the weekend they go to the casino and spend a couple grand. It isn't a big deal to these kids making 10k plus per month, driving their 60k trucks, and drinking/partying every weekend (or week off from camp).
My sample size is actually over 3 years when you include Calgary (winrate $55/h over 2 years and mostly 1/2 and some 2/5). I lost my actual data set but I know that is the hourly there. The hourly here is $65-70.
I could be on a 3 year heater, but I have played poker for 8 years and am pretty confident that $50/h+ is sustainable for me at these games. The conditions are different than any other 1/2 games anywhere else. How often can you regularly sit in a 1/2 game where there is at least $3-4k on the table every night? On Saturday night I would say the table easily had $7k in play.
I don't sit at tables with a bunch of short stacks. If you sit in the last game then you will have a bunch of $100-200 stacks and the odd $300 stack, maybe some $50 stacks. I don't play in these games any longer than I have to -- note that these tables are the exception, not the rule. Last night I would say there was $5k on the table at my 1/2 game and the shortest stacks were $300-$400. You need to table select and get on a table change list as soon as you sit...it is rare that it will take more than 30mins to get onto a good table. You have to be able to know how to table select well. On a weekend there can be 8 tables going. The best table isn't always the one with the most money on it. You have to factor in the players and the stacks and go where you can make the most money.
In poker, cash games are and always have been the easiest way to make consistent money with the lowest variance. Are you saying that live cash games aren't beatable in the long run? They are the easiest and lowest variance games available to play. Sure, you can 10+ table lower limits online and get rakeback and have much lower variance, but I don't enjoy playing online. I really wish I did because it would be a much more flexible means of making money at poker. You can play MTTs live or online but I don't see what game is ever going to give you more variance than MTTs.
Deepstacked live cash games have to have the lowest variance of all forms of poker. I don't understand how you can state that live cash games have huge variance. Either you are playing in the wrong games (tough players, huge rake, etc.) or aren't a winning cash game player overall.
When I lived in Toronto I almost exclusively played at one club even though they didn't offer games as big as I would like to play. The only reason was that they charged a reasonable rake and that I could play insanely deepstacked 2/2 NL (no cap) at times.
Largest win $868, largest loss $475. Winning sessions 16, losing sessions 5.
I can post some hands in another thread if you want. Warning that some of my biggest pots are often won with Q3, J6, 65 and the like. I sometimes play 80% of my hands if there is a player at the table who is beyond terrible and has a huge stack. If we are both $700+ deep I will play a retardedly huge range to try and get into a pot with him. This is deepstack and player/position dependent poker. Against the worst players upi can often throw position out the window as well.
I'm sure any decent TAG could beat these games but you are going to make way more money seeing tonnes of flops vs incompetent deepstacked players with almost ATC in the correct situations.
Only problem is I would have to relearn how to play poker if the proper strategy is to see every flop.
That would be a lot of fun.
Also all of my experience is with 100BB capped games so I would have to learn how to play deepstacked poker better.
Obviously, I am not seeing every flop. There are times when I am seeing almost every flop and there are times where I see 3 flops in an hour. As always with poker it all depends. I would have to say that any skilled player will make more money more consistently in deeper games at any limit.
Where would be the best place to stay for a week if all you wanted to do was sleep and grind?
Fallsview seems to get tougher every month...
Looking over my play I made about $3K of mistakes last weekend.
I only play at one casino because the poker room is relatively nice -- Yellowhead. This isn't really close to anything very nice (far from downtown, Whyte Ave, etc) but if you wanted to just grind then google map the casino and see what's around there. I'm pretty certain there's a hotel very close by. It may be tough to offset the price of a week long trip and hotel. If I were you I'd rather head to Vegas or LA for a week.
Also note that almost all of my sessions are 10pm/12am til 2am/5am...I can't speak for the action during daytime hours.
Edit: this is the one I've seen...listed as 300m from the casino:
http://www.yellowheadinn.com/
Is it getting tougher or are you playing too many sessions or too many long sessions? Fortunately, I haven't played very tired or bored for months, but I have been there in the past. I am really enjoying the game right now, but that is not always the case. I find that it has taken me years to realize that the long sessions at bad tables trying to get even, etc are a huge detriment to my game and overall profit. I try and put myself in the most profitable situations at all times and sometimes that means not playing or leaving earlier than I had planned. Sometimes it means staying for a longer session than planned as well.
That beings said..while it is old and possibly a bit "divish"..I liked the action and the dealers at the Argyll as well.
The place is getting full of rocks. The lesser skilled players are fewer and its getting to the point that its worth it to fly to LA, Florida, now western Canada for a weekend to grind out there.
I've had the chance to play there during a series due to timing with work. I imagine the games would be great.
I played at Argyll once since I moved here a year ago. To me the room is just too crappy to play there on a regular basis when there are better options. I've heard there is great action there as well.
I would think that you would have to play 5/10 to make just a few days worthwhile factoring in all the expenses.
ORLY. Did not witness this.
Not every session?
Seems like a good theory though. Put a little in pre every hand and nobody realizes you only put you're stack in post ahead.
So looking at your stats, your averaging about a $300 profit in the winning sessions (excluding the $800+ win). If you are playing Q3, J6, etc. and winning these monster pots, why such a low profit on average? If you excluding these 'biggest pots' you are winning with garbage hands, are you a losing player with other decent starting hands? Not try to past judgement, but if the players are that bad, you would think you could squeek out a bigger profit on average than $300, especially with each player sitting with $700-$800 on average at the table.
Don't really think $50/hr is substainable in the long run playing $1/$2. You definitely have the confidence (or should I say ignorance) to be able to maintain that winrate.
Like to see an updated graph after about another 100 hours of play.
I find I have 4 hours of A game in me and then I need to take a break.
I hate the new Fallsview rule where they only allow you 45 min for a "dinner" break.
During series it can get as big 25/50 HO or PLO and has hit 50/100/200 on rare occasions when all the right guys are in town. Calgary and Edmonton have about 50 guys that like to get crazy, if the right ones head to Edmonton over a series it gets big. In April watched Kai play one guy 3 HU cash matches PLO, it was either 5k or 10k a match and this kinda thing alwaysd happens over series.
10/25 happens NL fairly regular in Calgary, pretty sure it would be spread in Edmonton and 2/5 or 5/5 NL will be running almsot any given night in either city
I think with good game selection, $40/hour is possible. Getting up to $50-$100/hour is stretching it though. Those stats are only based on <80 hours. I'll put in almost that much time during a single trip to Vegas. The sample size of hands is even smaller since I don't think Yellowhead uses automatic shufflers.
These players can get really deep (400-500BB) and they are willing to stack off with top pair, good kicker. Why? They don't want to get bluffed.
Sorry for bad grammar, and chopped up post, I'm replying from my phone...
Edmonton is good, but GP has so much easy money. Too bad our casino is terrible, but we have some good private games running.
Sessions: 242
Hours: 1258
Profit: 76486
Hourly: 60.8
Guess I'm just a losing player on a heater. If you need more data I can post my Toronto stats for comparison. This winrate is almost double that of my 4 years playing underground NLH in Toronto. I understand that this is basically only 7-9 months of a full-time live pro's hours and I don't have the number of hands to compare to an online pro, etc. I'm a recreational player and will never have pro hours. I have 8 years of live cash game experience and can tell you if a table is good or not after a short time observing the players and how much money they have in front of them. These games are almost always good. These stats include a brutal 13 session downswing a couple years ago in Calgary. The point of this thread wasn't to debate whether these games are crushable, but to point out why these games are so much more beatable than any other low limit games I have ever seen.
I tend to only play 4-6 hour sessions due to the fact that I generally can't start my sessions until 10pm-12am and I'm no longer into playing into the morning. Also, if I'm up $500 in a few hours that is sufficient for me if I'm tired at all and I leave. This isn't my full-time job by any stretch and if I'm tired or have things to do the next day then I leave at a reasonable time.
You can find 2/5 or 5/5 DC at Argyll almost every night (I have heard), but it is tough to find 2/5 NLH on a regular basis in Edmonton. Even if I could find 2/5 with these 1/2 games I'd probably just play 1/2 unless the 2/5 was a juicy table. Calgary has 2/5 almost every night these days.
I don't think anyone said you were a losing player. Winning players can go on heaters too.
My only disagreement about your post was in regards to what the max long term win rate is. I only read the OP and I thought you were implying that you could win at a rate of close to $100/hour. $50/hour seems high to me too but not going to say it's impossible with really REALLY good game selection. I'd think the ceiling's probably closer to $40/hour with super good selection.
I agree with all your comments about why the games in Edmonton are generally better than most places. For me personally, I still prefer Vegas action. There's lots of dead money in Edmonton with the oil workers but you can't really beat the action free booze will provide.
You think a $60/h win rate at primarily 1/2 is low now? Didn't you initially respond that cash games were rarely beatable due to high variance? If you can't beat live cash games then you are either playing in a ridiculously tough game or need to re-evaluate your game.
("It is hard to make consistent money playing cash games really due to a high rake and variance IMO.")?
I don't even know what that means and you haven't explained your thoughts on that -- they are counter to any view on poker that I have ever heard. Live cash games are hands down the easiest way to make money at poker, period. This isn't even debatable by any experienced player. This is why 5/10 live is compared to 0.5/1 online, etc, etc.
The point of this thread was to point out why 1/2 in Alberta is beatable for extraordinarily high rates, not to compare it to overall 1/2 rates across the country. I understand that small 1/2 games are beatable for much smaller sums...in fact, that was the point of the entire thread.
I do feel that $50/h is sustainable at these games for a very good player. Will I ever have enough hours to prove it statistically? Likely not. Am I happy that I make ok money playing a game I like, when I like and for the amount of time that I like? Sure. I've heard a very good and well respected midstakes live pro from the Bay Area state that a decent winrate is 3x the standard opening raise and that makes a lot of sense. The blinds are really irrelevant if the stacks are deep. In these 1/2 games at a good table this is usually $15-$20, so $50 should be a good and sustainable winrate.
What is "the long run"? I have been doing this part-time over 3 years in Alberta and for 8 years overall. I already explained this only represents 9 months or so of full-time hours. Who with a full-time job is playing full-time live pro hours? I can only summarize my thoughts and results based on experience of 4 years part-time play in Toronto, 3 years in Alberta, 1 year in WA state including samplings of cash games in Vegas, Fallsview, GBH, Brantford, NY State, etc. I feel that the hours I have logged make me a pretty good judge of a soft game. I'm pretty confident that my views are well informed and not ignorant on this subject.
I can update after another 20 sessions or so, but I have provided a much longer time period of results above which would make the next 20 sessions less relevant over the large sample. The graph was meant to be a small example as to how soft the games are here, not a definitive statement of my winrate.
True. I don't know that I will ever know what the max long-term winrate is as I will never have enough hours playing part-time to find out.
If I move to the states soon I may take a month off and play in Vegas or LA for a bit before I start another job. It would be nice to play somewhere that playing 5/10 on a regular basis would be an option. I've never sat in a tough game below 5/10 in Vegas. I usually play 2/5 or 5/10 in Vegas and the 2/5 is usually a bit smaller or the same as the 1/2 here.
Have never played at Aria. I usually play bigger in Vegas because it is my only chance to play 5/10. Will check it out when I'm there in a couple of weeks. I would sit in the 1/3 for fun only if there was no cap or a 200+bb cap, otherwise it would be lower than I'd want to play and wouldn't be any fun.