why you can not win at low stakes poker

demondave

Player	Action	Cards	Amount	Pot	Balance
church04	Small blind		£0.04	£0.04	£10.92
sol528505	Big blind		£0.08	£0.12	£1.48
	Your hole cards	K K
boboboya	Call		£0.08	£0.20	£7.18
KP03	Call		£0.08	£0.28	£3.26
cannibal03	Raise		£0.24	£0.52	£12.88
demondave	All-in		£2.80	£3.32	£0.00
church04	Fold
sol528505	Fold
boboboya	Call		£2.72	£6.04	£4.46
KP03	Fold
cannibal03	Fold
boboboya	Show	4 Q
demondave	Show	K K
Flop
		7 A Q
Turn
		4
River
		10
boboboya	Win	Two Pairs, Queens and 4s	£5.59

The_Don90

you can just keep playing like this and youll win in long term. Also this should be in area 51 should it not

tapeworm

unlucky again......it does level itself out!!! Area 51 tho

shelski

In Response to why you can not win at low stakes poker:

Player Action Cards Amount Pot Balance church04 Small blind   £0.04 £0.04 £10.92 sol528505 Big blind   £0.08 £0.12 £1.48   Your hole cards K K       boboboya Call   £0.08 £0.20 £7.18 KP03 Call   £0.08 £0.28 £3.26 cannibal03 Raise   £0.24 £0.52 £12.88 demondave All-in   £2.80 £3.32 £0.00 church04 Fold         sol528505 Fold         boboboya Call   £2.72 £6.04 £4.46 KP03 Fold         cannibal03 Fold         boboboya Show 4 Q       demondave Show K K       Flop     7 A Q       Turn     4       River     10       boboboya Win Two Pairs, Queens and 4s £5.59
Posted by demondave

At these levels opt for super pot control.
it's vey boring but if that's the discipline req'd to succeed then maybe view it in that way.
GL man.

DOHHHHHHH

someone must win.

thats why the title of this thread is wrong

mike1975

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

someone must win. thats why the title of this thread is wrong
Posted by DOHHHHHHH

lol i shouldnt laugh must be the lack of sleep :P

donkeyplop

The problem here is you had less than 30bb's!

You will get called light here, and your shove pre could of seemed weak by others.

Try playing with a full stack next time.

Ms_Chips

not just wrong, but, completely and utterly the opposite. It wouldn't matter a monkeys if you have 1 bb or an infinity gazillion bb's This is why you win at small stakes poker.

The_Don90

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

not just wrong, but, completely and utterly the opposite. It wouldn't matter a monkeys if you have 1 bb or an infinity gazillion bb's This is why you win at small stakes poker.
Posted by Ms_Chips

I agree however the more BB you have the more you can win Makes winning at the small stakes easier,

Ms_Chips

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker : I agree however the more BB you have the more you can win Makes winning at the small stakes easier,
Posted by The_Don90

hero's hand against the villains hand is what makes it easier.

shedhed

the only people winning are sky ... keep the money rolling around taking the rake ... the software is designed to create rake and try to create excitment with the river cards...  throw the pocket kings and aces pre flop ... you tend to lose more times than you win if you play them ...when you play them they are mainly all - in bets pre flop and a bad call because they can afford it or they just basically don't care about raises and your pocket kings/aces are busted.... throw them away pre flop and you'll not suffer .... cuts your big all in bad beats down and your major losses ...  remeber it's ON-LINE poker and probabilities go out the window ... rember the RNG has alot of cards to choose from and has choice of any cards not dealt after the community cards are dealt ... it's not an order pick like a real deck of cards... the rng has a choice of cards it is not a rigid deck ..... so you take your risk ... end of the day your playing against two players even when your heads up ...the players   the RNG  ... and it doesn't matter the stakes  low or high ..

NoseyBonk

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

... rember the RNG has alot of cards to choose from and has choice of any cards not dealt after the community cards are dealt ... it's not an order pick like a real deck of cards... the rng has a choice of cards it is not a rigid deck .....
Posted by shedhed

Actually on Sky Poker the card sequence is decided pre-deal and is set for the duration, just like in a live game. Other sites may 're-shuffle' down the streets but this site is not one of them.

shedhed

and how sure of this are you Noseybonk ...

KAM99

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker : Actually on Sky Poker the card sequence is decided pre-deal and is set for the duration, just like in a live game. Other sites may 're-shuffle' down the streets but this site is not one of them.
Posted by NoseyBonk

Yeah think I much prefer the constant shuffle method. Means its way harder for people to find a way to cheat it. A fixed deal can be much easier. Not suggesting anyone is, just that having a system that is in constant shuffle until a card is called for makes it more random and you can't even if you could hack a system know what cards are coming.

You sure about SKy's RNG ssystem? Can't say I have read their details on it, though have to say I've not thought it felt as good as others in its random nature. Not rigged, just not that great an RNG.

NoseyBonk

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

and how sure of this are you Noseybonk ...
Posted by shedhed

100%
It's documented on the site.

shelski

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker : Yeah think I much prefer the constant shuffle method. Means its way harder for people to find a way to cheat it. A fixed deal can be much easier. Not suggesting anyone is, just that having a system that is in constant shuffle until a card is called for makes it more random and you can't even if you could hack a system know what cards are coming. You sure about SKy's RNG ssystem? Can't say I have read their details on it, though have to say I've not thought it felt as good as others in its random nature. Not rigged, just not that great an RNG.
Posted by KAM99

Does the constant shuffle method change the likelihoods of the outcomes ? I'm not really a maths person but you know that maths probability question centered around a game show in the film 21. The one where if you get to change your mind etc if given a choice then you must take it to improve your odds.The constant shuffle method reminds me of this but on a much more complex level.
Why does the constant shuffle exist ? Does it matter ?
This has nothing to do with Sky at all because we have discussed the seeming randomness of other sites on another thread and Sky looks really cool to me in comparison with a few others. I guess i just don't like it in principle because it does not attempt to replicate the realities of live play and therefore " the game " so to speak .
Maybe i'm being superstitious. A classic symptom of ignorance but these things are there to be understood so i'd be a bigger fool not to try right ?
I have also enjoyed your views in a constructive way too so thanks for that btw.

shelski

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker : Actually on Sky Poker the card sequence is decided pre-deal and is set for the duration, just like in a live game. Other sites may 're-shuffle' down the streets but this site is not one of them.
Posted by NoseyBonk

Ahhh  just read this. Makes sense.

KAM99

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker : Does the constant shuffle method change the likelihoods of the outcomes ? I'm not really a maths person but you know that maths probability question centered around a game show in the film 21. The one where if you get to change your mind etc if given a choice then you must take it to improve your odds.The constant shuffle method reminds me of this but on a much more complex level. Why does the constant shuffle exist ? Does it matter ? This has nothing to do with Sky at all because we have discussed the seeming randomness of other sites on another thread and Sky looks really cool to me in comparison with a few others. I guess i just don't like it in principle because it does not attempt to replicate the realities of live play and therefore " the game " so to speak . Maybe i'm being superstitious. A classic symptom of ignorance but these things are there to be understood so i'd be a bigger fool not to try right ? I have also enjoyed your views in a constructive way too so thanks for that btw.
Posted by shelski

No, the constant shuffle shouldn't make any difference to an RNG that has a predetermined set of cards as to how random the cards are dealt, as long as the RNG is good of course. I think one of the main reasons for it is that it provides that much more security due to the fact even if you could hack the system you would have more difficulty cheating as you still could not know what cards were going to be dealt on flop/turn/river. Even if you fold or play on sites with a constant shuffle it likely means that a flop you see when you fold wouldn't have beeen the same if you had decided to play the hand you were dealt.

shelski

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker : No, the constant shuffle shouldn't make any difference to an RNG that has a predetermined set of cards as to how random the cards are dealt, as long as the RNG is good of course. I think one of the main reasons for it is that it provides that much more security due to the fact even if you could hack the system you would have more difficulty cheating as you still could not know what cards were going to be dealt on flop/turn/river. Even if you fold or play on sites with a constant shuffle it likely means that a flop you see when you fold wouldn't have beeen the same if you had decided to play the hand you were dealt.
Posted by KAM99

k man i dig. but surely these sites are impregnable, like the banks ?

KAM99

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker:

In Response to Re: why you can not win at low stakes poker : k man i dig. but surely these sites are impregnable, like the banks ?
Posted by shelski

Sure, with encryption used these days it is highly unlikely, but that doesn't mean impossible. Look at what happened at UB as an example. Think that was one reason for changes that were made in RNG's, and most sites are always trying to improve security etc.

Sad thing is that there will always be a small minority that want to try to cheat to win. Vegas doesn't spend millions on security because they are expect everyone to be honest. I know I've personally got two people banned for collusion on FT, and know of others that have got people banned for the same thing.

So in short, for me anything that sites do to make their software secure is fine by me.