DYM's

HaveaA1Day

Can someone explain to me how these are supposed to be the lowest variance poker format out there?

11.50
-22
41
100.10
-61.50
-69
-83
-12.32
18
38
-88
-28
-125

In those earlier sessions, had a mix of £5-£20, but soon wised up that £5/£20 where reggy. Wish I hadn't found them tbh, they are more swingy than Spins, at least there if am making mistakes there super obvious, here just cant work out wtf **** am doing wrong.

robertod

maybe you're not as good as you think you are? Maybe?

conorshay1

In Response to DYM's:

Can someone explain to me how these are supposed to be the lowest variance poker format out there? 11.50 -22 41 100.10 -61.50 -69 -83 -12.32 18 38 -88 -28 -125 In those earlier sessions, had a mix of £5-£20, but soon wised up that £5/£20 where reggy. Wish I hadn't found them tbh, they are more swingy than Spins, at least there if am making mistakes there super obvious, here just cant work out wtf **** am doing wrong.
Posted by HaveaA1Day

think its just open first and go allin or fold

Jac35

I assume that you're talking about turbo dyms?

I would say that they're going up pretty hard to beat but possible. There are a few examples where players are doing ok at them 

Standard dyms are pretty low variance. As with any format there will be swings but good volume will see you make a profit if you're decent 

HaveaA1Day

Yeh I have just been playing the turbo's, my thought process was that I see the regular ones reaching high level blinds, so thought you was getting similar situations where you get 4-5 people hanging in there, so thought playing these would get me to this stage of the dym quicker, where its just push/fold time. But because the blind level lengths are shorter, it makes me think that your roi should be lower because there will be more variance involved.

swanstu

In Response to Re: DYM's:

Yeh I have just been playing the turbo's, my thought process was that I see the regular ones reaching high level blinds, so thought you was getting similar situations where you get 4-5 people hanging in there, so thought playing these would get me to this stage of the dym quicker, where its just push/fold time. But because the blind level lengths are shorter, it makes me think that your roi should be lower because there will be more variance involved.
Posted by HaveaA1Day

Adding in rake the turbo DYMs may well be Russian Roulette lotteries. Waste of time (and money) - the longer format slightly better argument for bothering, but even then if it's fold foldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfold...until the large blinds then there's less difference between the turbos, so prob depends on who you are playing against.

Jac35

In Response to Re: DYM's:

In Response to Re: DYM's : Adding in rake the turbo DYMs may well be Russian Roulette lotteries. Waste of time (and money) - the longer format slightly better argument for bothering, but even then if it's fold foldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfold...until the large blinds then there's less difference between the turbos, so prob depends on who you are playing against.
Posted by swanstu

You're playing them wrongly

MattBates

In Response to Re: DYM's:

Yeh I have just been playing the turbo's, my thought process was that I see the regular ones reaching high level blinds, so thought you was getting similar situations where you get 4-5 people hanging in there, so thought playing these would get me to this stage of the dym quicker, where its just push/fold time. But because the blind level lengths are shorter, it makes me think that your roi should be lower because there will be more variance involved.
Posted by HaveaA1Day

Your ROI may be lower but your hourly may be higher

MattBates

In Response to Re: DYM's:

In Response to Re: DYM's : Adding in rake the turbo DYMs may well be Russian Roulette lotteries. Waste of time (and money) - the longer format slightly better argument for bothering, but even then if it's fold foldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfoldfold...until the large blinds then there's less difference between the turbos, so prob depends on who you are playing against.
Posted by swanstu

If this was the case there wouldnt be long term winners in the games.

HaveaA1Day

*cough* TimmyRaRa, pretty sure a lot of his volume at £11 is turbo's and his roi is ridiculously good. Looking back at my time playing these, I think when I am on 10bbish stacks I was shoving to much, I think if you can get good notes on guys, that you dont need to risk so much to get them to fold. To a lesser extent think I was calling off pretty tight, but what can you do when there is 4 of you left and all on around equalish stacks.

hhamza162

You just need to look at timmyraras diary to know that they can be beat

Tikay10

In Response to Re: DYM's:

You just need to look at timmyraras diary to know that they can be beat
Posted by hhamza162

Yup, here's how Timmy does at DYM's, HERE

It's more about our ability than anything else.

swanstu

To be fair to Timmy, his performances with playing DYMs is very impressive.

Maybe he's found the golden way to beat those games, and if so then good luck to him. But for every Timmy there would be another 200 players just paying the rake and wasting their time. If you are a DYM genius who can beat it good luck to you (though I don't envy the grinding lifestyle even then). If you are like 99% of players (who most admit they play for fun only in any case) then forget ever trying to make any money playing DYMs especially Turbo ones.

The fact that everyone is so amazed by Timmy's results says a lot - most could only dream of breaking even with these games with such high rake, and most would be wasting their time trying to mimic his results.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: DYM's:

To be fair to Timmy, his performances with playing DYMs is very impressive. Maybe he's found the golden way to beat those games, and if so then good luck to him. But for every Timmy there would be another 200 players just paying the rake and wasting their time. If you are a DYM genius who can beat it good luck to you (though I don't envy the grinding lifestyle even then). If you are like 99% of players (who most admit they play for fun only in any case) then forget ever trying to make any money playing DYMs especially Turbo ones. The fact that everyone is so amazed by Timmy's results says a lot - most could only dream of breaking even with these games with such high rake, and most would be wasting their time trying to mimic his results.
Posted by swanstu

Methinks that's something of an exaggeration.

How did you arrive at the figure of 99%?
 
Did you really mean "quite a lot, imo?"

swanstu

Yep, not exact stats of course - I'd say more than 'quite a lot' though, I'd say the 'vast majority' would be wasting their time in a game heavily luck based (the turbos I mean) trying to win £4.50 and paying £5.50 to enter. You've got to be quite seriously beating the game to break even.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: DYM's:

Yep, not exact stats of course - I'd say more than 'quite a lot' though, I'd say the 'vast majority' would be wasting their time in a game heavily luck based (the turbos I mean) trying to win £4.50 and paying £5.50 to enter. You've got to be quite seriously beating the game to break even.
Posted by swanstu

So do you think folks are more likely to make money, or break even, playing MTT's than playing DYM's, then?

swanstu

I think some of the longer formats do allow for more 'skill-based' elements to come into it, yeh. Of course in any poker you can run crazy good or crazy bad, so there's never any guarantee in any format. But yeh, if someone was serious about making money I'd say pick a longer format.

swanstu

...or perhaps better play cash games instead. I think there's prob the best skill/luck ratio in cash play.

Jac35

So, this will go exactly the same way as all the other threads you get involved in Swanstu?

You're presented with facts but still argue the opposite 

In this case you've been shown rather emphatically that dyms can be beaten 

You reply that it's heavily luck based!

swanstu

One person in profit, or even a few, is not exactly a huge sample - should we also look at all the stats for the losing players?

Jac35

In Response to Re: DYM's:

One person in profit, or even a few, is not exactly a huge sample - should we also look at all the stats for the losing players?
Posted by swanstu

You can, not we

You can believe what you want. Entirely pointless replying to you