Fast and fold (Zoom)
Was listening to a podcast from Jonathan Little, he said from an inside source that just 5 % win on Fast and fold (Zoom). He did not mention what kind of stakes and he also said that there is more edge in normal 6-max NL table.
What do you think about this? Is it more profitable playing the normal 6-max ? Is it just a small percentage wining?
What do you think about this? Is it more profitable playing the normal 6-max ? Is it just a small percentage wining?
Leave a Comment

Comments
Or something.
This is it right here. Especially now with the Corona-bump in online poker traffic. The player pool online (no matter the game) is now filled with players who used only play live, as well as online recs (probably losing players for the most part) who have dramatically increased their hours playing. No matter what you play, it's safe to say your online game is much softer now than it was a couple of months ago. And given that some of these players will stick around and others will drop off (at their own pace) I would guess that trying to get a reasonable metric around what percentage of "winning" players are out there at this particular moment would be impossible.
I think the player pool is much tougher because I would say that the format suits regulars more, plus you have zero option to table select (except maybe for site and time), so you'll play more against those regulars. I just never liked the format and preferred much much to exploit some recreational players at the classic tables.
As concerns rake: I only played zoom on NL5, but rake is same as normal tables with Pokerstars, 6.40 bb/100 as compared to 6,70 bb/100 on normal tables.
Yeah good point, the easiest way to squash the % winners is to make everyone the same skill level, but I would be surprised if that is the case below fairly high stakes. As I said above, stats like this are hard to interpret.
They used to be the same but I haven't look in a long time.