the last few days we have all seen top cats blog on using a full buy-in for ring games. and the discussion we had in the comments.
if you want to read the comments they are start on page 2 and continue onto page 3 of tc's blog
this is the link to topcats blog
http://www.railbirds.com/blog/201540/50-to-500-you-can-do-it-too.html
this is the link to my blog the summery is the part you want to read.
http://www.railbirds.com/blog/201402/short-stacking-scenario-3-analysis.html
this is not trying to discredit topcat but i was asked to show that a smart short stacker can make money over the long term, these stats are taken from the railbirds ring game table on full tilt.
he challenged me to prove him wrong that if you buy-in for less then the full amount that you are going to lose money.
these stats are taken off a weeks play from either strategy
this is topcats ring game stats using a full buy-in.
as you can see he has made a lose of over $27 in 275 hands played
he also made a lose in 5 of the 7 days played
this is the stats for the short stack player over a longer hand time frame.
as you can see the short stacker has a longer hand history but shows a profit of over $25 for 1225 hands
if we use the same hand rate as top cat you will see that has made a profit of roughly $2 over the same amount of hands played
he also made a profit everyday he played.
this proves if you use the short stack strategy correctly you can make a profit.
© Copyright 2009
10 comments
no matter what the buy in very few can play loose bomb/ maniac style and show a profit in ring games.
jackal if you insist on using PHIL HEMUTH'S animal likness, that is useless without a 9x9 chart showing LAG or TAG
The reasoning behind topcats idea of coming in with a full buyin is disagreeable by some I think but hey each his own.
Az Hi Az I Am
Nice graphs BTW .
You are God, and I bow to you !..... I sure am glad you are not trying to discredit me !
....Topcat .....
i did what you asked me, too prove that using a short stack can be a good strategy if it is played the correct way
But againg i'll say here if u use a Full load, strategy correctly, and play that well, u gonna get payed off u'r hands at MAX.. not at 60 / 70 %, but offcuz a shortstack will after 1-2 hands well played get "full" loaded.
just imo..
This is a level right?
This is a result oriented post. How can you contest that this proves anything? Why not just post 1 hand someone with a full buyin lost? The sampling is insignificant. This looks more like a personal attack.
the sampling is small for the max buy-in but this is a quick way to show that playing a short stack well means you wont lose every session.
please dont tell me i must have sucked out everyhand to get the results