Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well, I think I'm done with 10/20, and am going to move up to 15/30 right now. Through 4k hands I have won at 4.3BB/100. I took a shot at 20/40 the other day, had moderate success, and found that the play was very similar to 10/20. So I'm gonna move t0 15/30 for now, drop back if I drop a large amount, and hopefully continue moving on up.Thanks to you guys for all your help in making me a better player.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4k hands? ... wait for it ...... wait for it ...
i don't have a problem with the small sample sizea lot of people losing out on potential profits by waiting for umpteen thousand hands at each limit and playing .5/1 with a 10k rollas long as you're willing to drop back down, there's no harm in moving up to the next limit when you've been beating your current game and have enough $$
Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to my former MTT success, I am quite overbankrolled even for 15/30. I have been absolutely killing 5/10 for 11k hands, and 10/20 for 4k now, and have heard from Specbrad that 5/10 through 20/40 are all very similar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Weren't you in that boat?Jeff
hahanot quite so extreme, but yes, i'm also talking about myselfright now my problem is i'm barely playing at all, although it's because i'm busy with something else
Link to post
Share on other sites

Kdawg gave advice in that one thread about palyeres moving up too quickly. Saying 10k hands even ,is not enough to know your true wr. Not that I agree/disagree but if Keith is reading this, maybe he can chime in with the counter-arguments to moving up.I fall into the safe category, but that's due to my conservative nature, not because I think it's best. $3200 + and playing 2/4.... BR earned thru winning, not bonus's or deposits (except $300)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kdawg gave advice in that one thread about palyeres moving up too quickly. Saying 10k hands even ,is not enough to know your true wr. Not that I agree/disagree but if Keith is reading this, maybe he can chime in with the counter-arguments to moving up.I fall into the safe category, but that's due to my conservative nature, not because I think it's best. $3200 + and playing 2/4.... BR earned thru winning, not bonus's or deposits (except $300)
i don't mean to say people should move up just because they have the bankroll, but i do think they need to consider what they are giving up by staying at their current limitsit's probably important for most people to put in a lot of hands (much more than 10k) at whatever limit they choose to start atthis is just to get a certain amount of poker smarts that you can't get from reading books or making forum postsbut once you've reached a certain competency in tactics and have learned how to adjust your play vs different player types, then you are probably set to move up and win through the next two or three higher levelsone very important thing to do when moving up is to practice good table selection. i can sometimes find 2/4 six max tables that play like .5/1 tables and i'm sure there are 5/10 and 10/20 tables that play like 2/4 full ring. so you can play higher limits only when juicy tables are available until you become more comfortable with the limit and make it your home.anyway, like i said, i have been playing very little this month, but when i get back to a regular schedule, i'll try to put this thinking into practice.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Timwhat have you done with Aseem ?
it wasn't meit was either his girlfriend or mock triali'm supposed to see him on friday, so maybe i'll find out what's upbut i don't think he's been playing poker much at all during the past two monthsi called him the other night to tell him about a super juicy live PLO8 game (a $600 pot was split between someone with A2-no high and someone with A2-pair of tens for high) and he didn't come out. maybe he's lost the eye of the tiger.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You make some good points, Tim, and it's something I've been thinking about recently. I'm winning at 2/4 but not a rate that think is acceptable for moving up. I know part of it is a cold run of cards recently, but I also know that I donk off a good 2-5BB every 500 hands or so and that has to stop.I'm reevaluating my game based on the next 20k hands and may very well move up to 3/6 or 5/10 full full time.Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites
ur amazing.wish I was in your shoes, age, etc... when online poker took off.i still would never have heard of actuarial science
Didn't Sklansky start out as an actuary?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually, it's advised that you wait for 10k-15k hands before moving up. However, Zimmer has 11k hands at 5/10 and most of the higher limit games at party until, like, 30/60 (at least), play like 5/10. After 5/10, I think it's just a matter of bankroll.I have absolutely no problem with Zimmer moving up in limits (granted, I've watched him play), but I would only advise it for special cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Zim,I don't know how dated this info is - I read it in Poker Essays II - but it says that a good player can make just as much at 15/30 than at 20/40, and assume less risk. This is because bad players fail to adjust to the 2/3 blind structure properly, and thus go broke more quickly.I don't know how true this is now, or in online games, but I found it kind of interesting. Maybe someone has pt stats to back this up?

Link to post
Share on other sites
of course, I won't be "getting permission" from Doug or anyone when I move up.not that you meant it that way.i'll go broke on my own, tyvm
:club: I didn't mean it like you had to get permission or anything. You were looking for input from Keith. Well, I'm kinda like Keith.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know how dated this info is - I read it in Poker Essays II - but it says that a good player can make just as much at 15/30 than at 20/40, and assume less risk. This is because bad players fail to adjust to the 2/3 blind structure properly, and thus go broke more quickly.
You mean in the sense that they play too tight out of the small blind?I cant imagine it accounting for that much of a difference...
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know how dated this info is - I read it in Poker Essays II - but it says that a good player can make just as much at 15/30 than at 20/40, and assume less risk. This is because bad players fail to adjust to the 2/3 blind structure properly, and thus go broke more quickly.
You mean in the sense that they play too tight out of the small blind?I cant imagine it accounting for that much of a difference...
There are a lot more hands good players can see the flop with.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know how dated this info is - I read it in Poker Essays II - but it says that a good player can make just as much at 15/30 than at 20/40, and assume less risk. This is because bad players fail to adjust to the 2/3 blind structure properly, and thus go broke more quickly.
You mean in the sense that they play too tight out of the small blind?I cant imagine it accounting for that much of a difference...
Maybe not.I would guess that it provide a small increase for your winrate though. Bad players who can't adjust properly will be giving even more up. Of course there are probably some players whose poor blind strategy works better with this structure.Come to think of it, I'm going to read the article again. Didn't make too much sense the first time around.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know how dated this info is - I read it in Poker Essays II - but it says that a good player can make just as much at 15/30 than at 20/40, and assume less risk. This is because bad players fail to adjust to the 2/3 blind structure properly, and thus go broke more quickly.
You mean in the sense that they play too tight out of the small blind?I cant imagine it accounting for that much of a difference...
Maybe not.I would guess that it provide a small increase for your winrate though. Bad players who can't adjust properly will be giving even more up. Of course there are probably some players whose poor blind strategy works better with this structure.Come to think of it, I'm going to read the article again. Didn't make too much sense the first time around.
it would have to do with not defending the SB often enough to raises, but i doubt thats enough to overcome a 33% big bet increase.
Link to post
Share on other sites

just reread the article. Mason doesn't go into detail as to why the games are better, but he says the blind structure generates more action, and the bad palyers can't play their blinds as well. Same with 30/60 and 40/80 apparently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but how much are they giving up?You pay 2/3rds of a small bet instead of 1.5/3 of a small bet as you would generally expect. The difference is .5/3 of a small bet, or 1/6th. That is 1/12th of a big bet. Because you play 10 hands in a full ring, that accounts for 1/120th of a big bet for an average hand.When you look at that figure off the bat, it seems huge.That's .83BB/100!But that's nowhere near what you're actually giving up.Because the hands that you do opt to play, you're going to be winning marginally larger pots. And of course you will always adapt at least in some way or another. People will be rightfully far more inclined to complete the SB without a raise, and at least somewhat more inclined to defend against raises; even if they arent defending quite as much as they should.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Abbaddabba,While Mason doesn't go into the reasons for his statement, I think the basic idea is that poor players will either be too tight in the sb, or more likely, too loose.Also, when the bad players figure out they should be calling with more hands pf due to the blind structure, this may be detrimental to them. Because they end up playing more weak hands OOP, they will end up losing more money. They will end up chasing weak hands more often incorrectly, and will overall be involved in more pots which will cost them more over the long run.It's hard to quantify exactly how much of a difference this makes though. I'm interested to see if anyone has pt stats that show something similar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...