2023-2024-2025-2026 NC/LC THREAD
once more do we meet in this place!
No I’m playing from BB obv. If SB folds you just win the $10. I guess I just didn’t understand your hand example. If SB limps and we raise, we are risking $20 to win $40. If they call and check flop and we bet, we are risking $20 to win $72. $8 only comes out of the pot if there is a flop.
I’m not trolling , I just played twice live in my life .
So a flop happens now u pay 8$ minimum .
But let’s say more bet happens on turn and river afterwards ?
Is it 8$ total regardless turn and river action or it’s 8$ on flop plus some rake from pot getting bigger on turn and river from further betting posflop ?
It is not hard to track results from the blinds in BvB hands. It takes like 5 seconds after a hand to put a result in my notes. I’m not tracking every hand from these positions - just the BvB ones, and only those that i previously would have chopped (so none when only six seats are filled).
Why wouldn't you track hands in BvB spots when you're short handed? It will build a larger sample much faster, can you can just normalize the results by adding phantom rake up to $8. So, if the rake was $6 and you won $160, record it as $158.
I suppose some people play differently, for better or worse, when the game is short, so your results short-handed might not be reflective of your results in full-handed BvB spots. But I think the benefit of building a larger sample will outweigh whatever differences there may be.
a) because I would rather play than chop. Playing is more fun than not playing.b) because it gets tiresome explaining that I play six-handed, but I’ll chop when it’s temporarily 6-handed in a full game, etc.c) my gut tells me that I will profit in BvB situations in these games, even with the cost of playing being $8 per hand. I could certainly be wrong. I’m okay finding out
A - ok, but do you still think it's fun if you're likely upsetting some of the fun players?
B - you don't need to make it that complicated. No need to have an exception for walkers. I don't chop 5 or less, doesn't matter if it's temporary. This is also much more common than 6, so doesn't need explaining.
C - you will never find out if it's profitable, the sample size will be extremely low and depend greatly on who the other player is.
D - you seem to think the other player did something wrong in that incident. He may be a douchebag, but you made the mistake not him (based on your explanation).
I’m not trolling , I just played twice live in my life .
So a flop happens now u pay 8$ minimum .
But let’s say more bet happens on turn and river afterwards ?
Is it 8$ total regardless turn and river action or it’s 8$ on flop plus some rake from pot getting bigger on turn and river from further betting posflop ?
If the $8 is taken on the flop, no more is taken later in the hand.
A - ok, but do you still think it's fun if you're likely upsetting some of the fun players?
D - you seem to think the other player did something wrong in that incident. He may be a douchebag, but you made the mistake not him (based on your explanation).
We are playing the biggest game in the room. Plenty of people don’t chop. No one cares. If they do care, they get over it. I don’t care if someone gets upset for a brief moment. It will be fine.
If you actually read what I wrote you will know I knew it was my own fault and I didn’t put up a fight about it. I knew he was in the right. Doesn’t mean I like giving some scumbag $10 because he’s being petty. I would normally chop in that situation. It has little to do with me paying attention or not. But sure, technically, he’s in the right. I don’t think many other players would have done that. And now I don’t have to worry about it.
Why wouldn't you track hands in BvB spots when you're short handed? It will build a larger sample much faster, can you can just normalize the results by adding phantom rake up to $8. So, if the rake was $6 and you won $160, record it as $158.
In my head, it’s because I would always play those hands and I was only curious about the spots I used to chop in. Also, it comes up way more often 6-handed or less and is more of a pain in the ass track lol. You make good points though. I will def consider it or just not track at all.
A - ok, but do you still think it's fun if you're likely upsetting some of the fun players?
B - you don't need to make it that complicated. No need to have an exception for walkers. I don't chop 5 or less, doesn't matter if it's temporary. This is also much more common than 6, so doesn't need explaining.
Also, FWIW, I think it’s more unfriendly to not chop for a single hand when the game is full but briefly 6-handed than it is to never chop. Now a fun player has to be aware of your own personal rules - which they certainly aren’t thinking about at all - rather than just knowing you never chop.
Also, FWIW, I think it’s more unfriendly to not chop for a single hand when the game is full but briefly 6-handed than it is to never chop. Now a fun player has to be aware of your own personal rules - which they certainly aren’t thinking about at all - rather than just knowing you never chop.
I've only every heard of one other person changing chopping practices based on if anyone is walking or not.
Certainly seems to me the standard is based on how many people are dealt into the hand. That's what the rake is based on, which is the reason for chopping to begin with. It's also a lot easier to count people present than people present + walkers.
you seem to think the other player did something wrong in that incident. He may be a douchebag, but you made the mistake not him.
I've only ever heard of one other person changing chopping practices based on if anyone is walking or not.
Certainly seems to me the standard is based on how many people are dealt into the hand. It's also a lot easier to count people present than people present + walkers.
[emoji2962]
Huh? Looks like your last post was just an emoji, and one that doesn't show up on my phone.
BTW though, I haven't been meaning to argue with you, just give the feedback / advice that you seemed to want.
The only feedback I care about is if it’s profitable or not to always play from the blinds.
Well, OK then.
This post doesn't have anything to do with chopping the blinds at 20/40 with an $8 drop. Take that **** somewhere else!
Yall are weird. I meant in regards to the original question I posed. Only a few people have attempted to answer that and there have been many comments on the topic, most of it useless to what I want to know. I guess I just said “is there any merit?” but what I really meant was “is there any financial merit?”
Well, it seems pretty rude to me, in response to some good faith responses from others, to say their responses are "useless" and you "don't care" about them. I know your comments were directed at others, not me, but there's much more polite ways to go about it. For example, I'd probably have said, "I appreciate everyone's thoughts on chopping, but I've made up my mind to not chop, so I'm really just looking for feedback on whether I can beat the $8 rake, not on whether to chop or whether my old approach to chopping was sound."
Very fair. I was mostly just annoyed that I was having a back and forth with someone that said he always plays 5-handed regardless if it’s temporary or not, but also said he’s basically never heard of someone basing their chopping decisions on how many people are walking, but also says he thinks it’s standard to chop or not chop based on number of players dealt in. Hard to not think I’m being trolled there. I suppose the polite play would have been to just stop interacting. Having pointless arguments with people online is easily one of my biggest character flaws.
Very fair. I was mostly just annoyed that I was having a back and forth with someone that said he always plays 5-handed regardless if it’s temporary or not, but also said he’s basically never heard of someone basing their chopping decisions on how many people are walking, but also says he thinks it’s standard to chop or not chop based on number of players dea
Maybe I didn't explain myself well, but I don't think I said anything contradictory, and I certainly wasn't trying to troll you. I play if there are 5 or fewer people dealt into the hand. I don't look around the table at stacks to figure out how many people are walking. Seems to be fairly standard practice to me.
I figured you might want more of my input as I am the only one here who has played a significant amount of time in your regular game, AFAIK.
I was the first one to answer your post and said right away before any other comment that I did not think it would be a benefit financially to stop chopping when at full rake.
Other tangents that I and others took are what people enjoy about online forums. You can't expect to just get a yes or no from several people with no explanation, nor would I think you would get much benefit from that anyway.
I play if there are 5 or fewer people dealt into the hand. I don't look around the table at stacks to figure out how many people are walking.
You indicated that fun players may get upset that I don’t chop. I pointed out that it is arguably more upsetting to a fun player when someone that normally chops suddenly doesn’t want to chop because only six players got dealt in (even though the game has been and still is full). I’m not talking about your perspective or my perspective. I’m talking about the perspective of the fun player that you seem to be worried about upsetting. They don’t care that only six people got dealt in. In their eyes the game is still full. But now here’s this guy they’ve been chopping with all day saying he’s not chopping this hand. I know you said 5-handed. I’m using a 6-handed example because the game has the appearance of being full and 6 is where I used to draw the line. But again, I chopped in these situations because the game condition is only briefly changed and will be back to normal in a few hands and that seems like the friendly approach. They aren’t paying attention to your chopping rules, nor should they have to. In their eyes there is a big difference between a game that only 5 people are playing in and a 7-handed game that has two people walking for a few minutes.
You indicated that fun players may get upset that I don’t chop. I pointed out that it is arguably more upsetting to a fun player when someone that normally chops suddenly doesn’t want to chop because only six players got dealt in (even though the game has been and still is full). I’m not talking about your perspective or my perspective. I’m talking ab
Yeah, I saw that, but it doesn't seem to happen in games I have played with that I have noticed. As I said, I have only ever had one person get salty about it, and he is the farthest thing from a "fun player" there is - Plays fairly tight, often berates bad play, and gets annoyed about every little thing.
You do know your pool of players better than I do, but based on my play overall, in several different cities and venues, the majority of people do what I do (that is why I settled on it myself) - play when 5 or fewer dealt in, for whatever reason, because that is the standard the house uses for reducing the rake. Honestly I often don't even notice if someone is walking or has picked up his chips and left. I just watch the cards as they are dealt. The first hand that is 5 handed, I note to the people sitting next to me that I don't chop 5 or less, so they know I'm not doing it based on my cards.
So Harbaugh. having soared to the pinnacle of coaching an elite Big [s]Ten[/s] Fourteen team, is now slumming again in the NFL. Who thinks the Chargers are paying him more than Michigan was?
So it's been common knowledge for a couple decades that we need to chop when there is oppressive rake at live 20/40. Some estimates of how bad it is to play:
Rake when I open BvB and see a flop at Stars 10/20 in 2010/2011: 2.27%, 5.5 BB/100
Rake when I open BvB and see a flop if I was paying the equivalent of a $4 drop in these same 10/20 games instead of the friendlier 2010-2011 Stars rake structure: 4.65%, 11.17 BB/100
There's just no way it is possible to overcome such absurd rake if you never chop. It would would only be possible to beat huge whales or maybe a super tight old man coffee type.
