Marshmallowliebe's avatar


5 points

well let's see if I can see/feel any difference over the next 100k hands (:
thanks for the input

Nov. 29, 2018 | 12:39 p.m.

Thank you Bingo,
What you wrote is not new to me but thank you for your input. My question is more that if I want to only use one of the smaller betsizings what would be the best over "all" boards?

I understand that this doesn't catch all of the ev and that is not my goal but I don't want to remember on which boards to bet 20, 25, 33 or 40. I only want to use one small betsizing in my game and I am wondering which one is the best? If I understand David right 33 is doing the best job at this?

Nov. 29, 2018 | 12:31 p.m.

Thank you David, weren't you the guy with the great Pio guides?
I'll be honest I'm one of these Regs who love to study but to also minimize the gametree. I'm currently not capable to correctly use 25, 33, 50, 60, 75, 100, 120, 150 as Cbet sizings and try to make it as simple as possible.
For example in 3bet pots IP I'm only using 25% right now.
Given the great work you did: If I'd had to choose one size do you think I should swap 25% to 33% or 28% in my Gameplan?
I know that often times another betsize or 2 betsizes on the flop would have the highest EV but if I want it really simplified for my brain how would you approach this?
Thank your for your great answer David,
Have a great day

Nov. 29, 2018 | 11:29 a.m.

Hi Guys,
I was wondering why everyone is using 33% as a small cbet sizing.
Nearly all of the other Regs I play against (200z) use 33% as their small sizing of choice while Ben Sulsky and OTB Seem to use 33% and I myself usually use 25%. Pretty sure Paul Atwal also uses 25%.
There's no real reasoning behind this for me - I assume that the EV differences are very marginal but is there a reason why 33% is better than 25% or why 28% is better?
Has anyone done any work on that?
Thank you for your input
Have a great day

Nov. 29, 2018 | 1:57 a.m.

Dear RIO,
I'd like to ask you all about how you would approach my situation(the short'ish' version):
A year ago I was a student trying to become a professional when a Pokerpro came up to me and offered to stake me for higher limits.
The deal would look like this: I play NL200-NL1000 online and he'd pay me 12€/Hour and keep all the winnings and Rakeback. Every month I get 1€ more to my hourly and if somebody wants to reevaluate it has to be done 1 month in advance to the change of the system and after 1 year we will rediscuss everything.
I started playing and EV was pretty much break even. (Rakeback obviously already paid my Salary) However, the real numbers went down and I went about 9k below EV.
I told him I am not comfortable losing that much money anymore (as a student with no money losing 9k is absolutely insane!!! even though logically it shouldn't impact me.) and that my volume suffered a bit because of that. We stopped raising my salary at 15€/Hour because of that.
So I told him I'd rather play NL100z for a while where I grinded out a steady 5bb/100 Winrate and worked a lot on my game.(roughly 40$ EV hourly on Stars over 200k hands).
I made about 13k in EV and 9k in actual $$$ on 100z so again I am running very poorly.
I also made 5-8k in Tournaments during this time. (EV unmeasurable)
What is also important to know: Everywhere I play but stars he got extra Rakeback because of him having affiliate deals so Rakeback is a lot better.
A few weeks ago he told me to play on another side NL200-NL1000 again because I am way better now and he gets crazy Rakeback there. No sufficient sample size so far but I am up about 2-3k and it felt like I was running poorly. With his rakebackdeal, we get roughly 60-70% Rakeback or something like that so it might be possible for me to make him 10k+/Month without having a winrate! (I am pretty positive that I have a winrate but only time will tell!)
Now my question is:
I need to reevaluate the deal. I can afford nl100z by now which gives me an hourly of ~40$. I can not afford to play nl200-nl1000 on my own.
I got about 15000€ this year from him as salary.
I want him to make money on me but at the same time I am in my early twenties and want/need to make money. I do not how long this income will be an option and 15€/hour when I can make 40$ on my own is just weird. Nl100z is basically risk/variance free 40$ hourly!!! This is insane for someone my age!
10k+/Month ONLY with Rakeback? That is just nutttttttz.
How should I approach the situation, what deal should I offer him? What is reasonable?
Nl100z is basically risk-free for him so I need to get a huge cut if he wants to "stake" me there (which is basically me being nice)
NL200-NL1000 can go up or down no sample size yet so risk is higher. But I want to take the higher hourly option.
I really want this deal to end good for him, we became good friends along the way but at the same time, I need to ask for better payment or some kind of profit split.
What are your suggestions? How would you approach this situation? What should I offer him?
Excuse my bad English and this super long read
Love you all,

Nov. 22, 2017 | 2:23 a.m.

Load more uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy