Losing too much money...

[dimitrix]

I fairly new to poker... Ive been playing for about 3 months, and i really want to get better and improve my game. Ive read a couple of books, try to count odds and I play fairly tight. The problem is i cant stop losing money. I had to re-buy 3 times this past week. I dont think im playing bad, and i think i have a good understanding of the game. Whenever i have a monster hand , it seems like i always lose it on the river.... usually to a weak flush. These big hands I play very aggressive so when i lose on the river it costs alot...
any advice would help ....

[dimitrix]

some more info.

I play very tight pre-flop. Always try to see the flop cheaply.

I dont play many suited connectors... havnt had much luck with them.

play less hands in early positions.

it seems like when i have a QJ ... AK falls on the flop.

I play .50/1.00 and preflop raisers has been the death of me

[thirddan]

post some hands in the micro forum that are giving you trouble. Most likely you are not playing as tight or as well as you think.

[Songwind]

You might want to move to a lower limit where the losses won't be as financially damaging untilyou're more confident.

[ewile]

[ QUOTE ]
some more info.

I play very tight pre-flop. Always try to see the flop cheaply.

I dont play many suited connectors... havnt had much luck with them.


[/ QUOTE ]

1)You need to raise fairly frequently pre-flop. Seeing every hand "cheaply" is a big mistake.

2) suited conectors are often fine to be played. Particularly in a loose, passive game you are loosing by not playing them

3) You need to move to a site with real micro-limit games and play the cheapest possible games (ie. .05/.10) untill you can beat them.

4)post hands in the micro-limit forum.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
havnt had much luck with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

You haven't played enough hands. AK you could lose 90% of the time in a small sample, doesn't mean you should play it.

[fluff]

How is your bankroll for .5/1? Ideally you should have $300 (300 Big Bets) for that level, and that way you will be comfortable with short term loses. If not, you should move to lower limits.

How much do you buy in for each game? Ideally you should buy in for at least $25 with a rebuy handy if you drop below $10.

Now to repeat some of the better advice already given: Go post some hands in the microlimit section. Especially hands that you thought you played well. Also spend some time reading some of the hands posted there.

[helpmeout]

1. Play free money games while you learn the basics. Learning to fold 80% of your hands preflop is a good skill to learn especially when everyone calls with anything.

2. When you can smash the freemoney tables go to micro limits. I'd suggest pacific poker as the easiest place to start your bankroll. Make sure you start with a 300BB bankroll minimum.

3. Move up when you have 300BB for the next limit, move back down when you lose 100BB.

4. Read, analyze and practice.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
Make sure you start with a 300BB bankroll minimum.


[/ QUOTE ]

I know many people post this because they saw someone else write it. I also think a lot of people didn't start with 300 BBs.

I know I didn't, I had a lot of play money poker experience and lots of home game real money low NL experience. I started with $100 and never went broke.

Yes 300 is for people to give cushion, and for bad runs of cards. I've stated it before, if you play .5/1 or below, and have a run of over 150 BBs downswing, I would like to review all your hands for that downswing as I question the player not the 300 BB rule. I think the player has weaknesses that he should study more and play less till he thinks he has these done. If you do proper research, then I think you can start with less than 300 as I didn't want to start with $300 into something I wasn't sure I would even like.

[helpmeout]

If you wanna go broke and continually put money into your account, tilt more often because you are underfunded then start with less than 300BB.

It is easy to lose 100BB and for a beginner with little knowledge of variance it is much better to start with a 300BB or more.

Sure someone with a lot of experience playing well below their limit can play with much less.

But a beginner with minimal experience its best to play it safe.

[Greg J]

[ QUOTE ]
I play very tight pre-flop. Always try to see the flop cheaply.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seeing flops cheaply is not playing tight preflop. Playing tight preflop is simply playing only good hands preflop. Playing KTo in MP becuase you can get in "cheap" (ie only one bet) is not tight play.

You do have a sense of position which is good.

I think you might want to play at lower limits while you learn the game. You seem to have the will to become a winning player, but the best teacher is experience. PS has probably the most competetive nanolimit games at .02/.04 and .05/.1 (though I here UB also has these limits, and I have not played there). Softer nanolimits are at Paradise, where I tripled a $25 deposit when first starting out.

PS also has .25/.5 micro limit, that I have heard is tougher than the Party .5/1.

Don't take it personally that people on this thread have suggested you are not a winning player yet. This is not an insult, as no one (or very few) START OUT as winners. Some one told me the same thing a few months ago, and they were right, and I think that revelation helped me become a winning player.

One peice of advise I saw that I don't like is learning with play money... I don't think this is worth your time. Play for pennies instead.

Good luck man!

[pzhon]

The figure of 300 BB is appropriate only for established winners. Since you are new to poker, you may lose much more than that before you learn to win.

[ QUOTE ]

I play very tight pre-flop. Always try to see the flop cheaply.

[/ QUOTE ]
That is not tight play. Playing tightly is throwing away marginal hands like AT and 33. When you have a good hand, trying to see the flop cheaply is called "weak" or "passive" play. When you don't raise, you allow speculative hands to see the flop. That may explain why you lose to so many flushes.

[ QUOTE ]
it seems like when i have a QJ ... AK falls on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you playing QJ too much? It's poker, not blackjack. QJ is better than average, but it isn't a particularly good hand. Even in a weak game, I recommend folding KQo from outside the BB if someone raises in front of you, and folding KQo from early position. QJ is much weaker.

[ QUOTE ]

I play .50/1.00 and preflop raisers has been the death of me

[/ QUOTE ]
Limp less. Only enter the pot after a raise with a premium hand, and then you usually should reraise.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
folding KQo from early position

[/ QUOTE ]

Should raise.

[ QUOTE ]
I recommend folding KQo from outside the BB

[/ QUOTE ]

Not recommend, but do.

[ QUOTE ]
QJ is much weaker.

[/ QUOTE ]

QJs can be played any position, and often raised from late position.

QJo just sucks, be careful whenever playing this hand. I only do in the CO or Button and if I can raise.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
folding KQo from early position

[/ QUOTE ]

Should raise.

[/ QUOTE ]
That is a reasonable possibility, too. It depends on the table. I brought it up because many players overvalue every blackjack 20, and the idea that it may not be worth it to play even KQ from EP is worth keeping in mind. It makes it easier to let go of weaker hands like KJ, KT, QJ, QT, and JT. When you hear someone seriously recommend folding AJo UTG, it makes it easier not to play any ace.

Here is some actual data (http://teamfu.freeshell.org/poker_hands/ev_position.html) from a poker room.

UTG (position 3):
AA: 2.49 BB (That's big bets. The big blind is 0.5 BB.)
AKs: 0.78
AKo: 0.47
AJs: 0.28
AJo: 0.03
KQs: 0.40
KQo: 0.05
QJs: 0.16
QJo: -.11
JTs: -.04
JTo: -.13

This data is not completely reliable, but it agrees with the idea that it is not worth much to play AJo or KQo UTG. QJo lost not only UTG, but in several later positions, too.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
This data is not completely reliable, but it agrees with the idea that it is not worth much to play AJo or KQo UTG. QJo lost not only UTG, but in several later positions, too.

[/ QUOTE ]

This data actually proves that it's HUGELY profitable to play KQo UTG. A win of 0.40BB per play is humongous. Especially as this is an average of ALL players EV from that position/hand combo. So this is about as much as a clown would make on this hand.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
I play very tight pre-flop. Always try to see the flop cheaply.

[/ QUOTE ]

The second half of this statement is part of your problem.

[ QUOTE ]
it seems like when i have a QJ ... AK falls on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

The first half of this statement contradicts the first half of your first statement.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
This data actually proves that it's HUGELY profitable to play KQo UTG. A win of 0.40BB per play is humongous. Especially as this is an average of ALL players EV from that position/hand combo. So this is about as much as a clown would make on this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well the 0.40 was for KQs, KQo was 0.05BBs.

Still the fact that it is profitable for an average player would indicate that it should be certainly worth playing for a good player.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
KQo was 0.05BBs.

Still the fact that it is profitable for an average player would indicate that it should be certainly worth playing for a good player.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good point. That may be true. To play devil's advocate, I'll offer several arguments against playing KQo UTG:

/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Most players are too loose, so when they limp UTG I do not give them credit for a hand that is even as good as KQo. If you play tightly, and some people pay attention, you may not get as much action as a loose player would.

/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Since this is the beginners' forum, it is not safe to assume that everyone here is already a good player.

/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Against strong opponents, I don't think KQo is worth playing UTG. The +0.05 value is tainted by the players who overcall on the river with 66 unimproved. If you plan to move up, don't count on the concentration of bad players remaining constant.

My point was that KQo is not a great hand, and QJo is worse. These hands are often overvalued by weak players. They are much weaker than AKo.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG (position 3):
AA: 2.49 BB (That's big bets. The big blind is 0.5 BB.)
AKs: 0.78
AKo: 0.47
AJs: 0.28
AJo: 0.03
KQs: 0.40
KQo: 0.05
QJs: 0.16
QJo: -.11
JTs: -.04
JTo: -.13

[/ QUOTE ]

These stat pages always get to me. What is the basis here, an average player, a great preflop player, a great post flop player. They mean guidelines, but other than that to me, not much.

KQo UTG for me: only 15 times in over 58k hands. 1.02 BB

I feel that folding KQo UTG is giving up some money.

If the player is playing QJo UTG, they deserve to not be a winning player as this is a horrible call.

[helpmeout]

Im raising KQo UTG, folding it is weak. AA AK and KK dont come around that often.

If someone reraises then I will call and see how they bet after the flop, it also depends on what sort of read I have on them.

QJo is a poor hand though, worthy of a raise to steal the blinds and maybe limping from late position for its straight potential. I wouldn't play it UTG though.

[mrjim]

I agree w/ the others in saying you should probably play at lower limits. Try Pacific or Paradise for lower limit games (I assume you're playing Party). Others like Pokerstars, but I haven't played there so I can't comment.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This data actually proves that it's HUGELY profitable to play KQo UTG. A win of 0.40BB per play is humongous. Especially as this is an average of ALL players EV from that position/hand combo. So this is about as much as a clown would make on this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well the 0.40 was for KQs, KQo was 0.05BBs.

[/ QUOTE ]

My reading comprehension is through the floor. I'll go stand in the corner in shame for a while.

But still, if KQo is 0.05 for an average player, which probably means someone who plays 2/4 or even lower on average, it should be profitable for anyone who has read a couple of books and is interested enough to come here and read 2+2 and post questions.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
QJo is a poor hand though, worthy of a raise to steal the blinds and maybe limping from late position for its straight potential.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should not limp from late position with this hand, if you want to play it, and no limpers, raise it. If there were one or two in, and I were on the button, then maybe I would limp.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
Against strong opponents, I don't think KQo is worth playing UTG. The +0.05 value is tainted by the players who overcall on the river with 66 unimproved. If you plan to move up, don't count on the concentration of bad players remaining constant.

[/ QUOTE ]

Being that I know a lot of 15/30 - 30/60 players who preflop raise KQo UTG, is a reason why I don't agree with you not playing this hand.

If you go balls to the walls with KQo against a bunch of opponents, yeah you will throw away bets, you need to have good post flop play with this hand, especially if you get 4-5 people to the flop.

Paying attention if it's a rag flop or not and player reads/notes is also important.

KQo SHOULD be a winning hand for you UTG, the higher up you get, the more respect raises get. Even at 2/4 and 3/6, the good players will get out of the way of an UTG PFR, and there are very few hands a good player would ever cold call preflop, but bad players will call suited crap.

[ QUOTE ]
Against strong opponents

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you playing in such a hard game? I have yet to find a night where I can't find 4 good tables to play at 3/6 or below, which I think this audience is mostly at.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Against strong opponents, I don't think KQo is worth playing UTG.

[/ QUOTE ]
Being that I know a lot of 15/30 - 30/60 players who preflop raise KQo UTG, is a reason why I don't agree with you not playing this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
On average, 30-60 players are losers. On average, they make enough mistakes to allow a few 30-60 players to win despite the rake. The average level of play may be higher, but that a few 30-60 players make some play is a very weak argument.

[ QUOTE ]
KQo SHOULD be a winning hand for you UTG, the higher up you get, the more respect raises get.

[/ QUOTE ]
Non sequitur. That your raise gets respect means that people properly fold hands like K8o or QJo after you raise. You win more if people make bad calls. Bad calls are a huge source of profit for a player who is tight-aggressive preflop.

I maintain that KQo UTG is increasingly dangerous at higher levels. Here are some more figures from Pokerroom (https://www.pokerroom.com/games/evstats/pairStats.php).

KQo UTG, 10-handed.

$1/$2 0.10
$2/$4 0.02
$3/$6 0.09
$5/$10 -.05
$10/20 -.12
$25/$50 -.17 (few samples)

Doesn't this data support my argument that KQo UTG is more dangerous in higher limits? If you play KQo UTG at low limits, you may want to break that habit later when you move up.

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you playing in such a hard game?

[/ QUOTE ]
I usually don't, but sometimes I play at higher limits to win more ($, not BB/100), to clear bonuses, and to have more fun. You can act more creatively against thinking opponents than the usual routine of value bet, value bet, value bet in low limits.

Anyway, once again, I don't feel strongly about KQo. Other discussions on KQo on 2+2 have suggested that the decision is close, and depends on the game. I don't think QJo UTG is close. Here are the analogous Pokerroom data for QJo UTG:

QJo UTG, 10-handed

$1/2 -.09
$2/$4 -.05
$3/$6 -.05
$5/$10 -.31
$10/$20 -.19
$25/$50 -.86 (few samples)

I doubt I will convince you not to play KQo UTG, but I hope at least one person rethinks the strength of QJo as a result of this thread.

[MrHorace]

Helpme, will playing the free money games be a worthwhile experience, where much is "No Fold'Em Hold'Em", and could it cause bad habits?
Also, I like your idea to move to lower limit when you lose 100 BB. I would like to start at 0.50/$1 as I've been playing $2/$4 live, but of course need the $300 bankroll. Do you think this limit might be too high to start? It's comfortable for me, but welcome your opinion.
thanks.

[MrHorace]

Nottom did an awesome job of making the obvious obvious. I also thought I had preflop play down pretty well, and thought my problem was playing on the flop. However two things helped:
1) Right now I play live in a casino (soon to change though to online), and someone on 2+2 forum suggested waiting 2 orbits before playing ANY hand unless I had a monster. This exercise taught me that I'd been playing some marginal hands, QTo in mid/late position, etc.
2) In SSH by Ed Miller I just finished the section on dominated hands. This is an AWESOME section. Read it, and you'll gain a good understanding of why you may be having problems.

Good luck,
MrHorace

[Kopefire]

What is SSH?

I see that I think "secure shell" but i'm guessing that's not what's meant here.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
On average, 30-60 players are losers.

[/ QUOTE ]

This means little. At every level there are more losers than winners.

I find it funny for people who go on Pokerroom stats as those are general not concrete data as each game changes with level and players.

The rake has little affect at 30/60 since at most places lve and online have a rake cap is pretty small in comparison to these pots.

QJo UTG is just retarded. There is no sound argument to make to make this a playable hand consistently in a 10-person game. Yippie.

And no, your arguements (or lack there of, except if you count a lot of stats) have not changed my opinion.

Regardless of how high you get in limits, there are always people that play bad, maybe less as you go up, but people cold calling or 3 betting you with weaker hands than KQo UTG can be found on a common basis.

[ QUOTE ]
I usually don't, but sometimes I play at higher limits to win more ($, not BB/100),

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes me lose a lot of value in your post. Why not keep playing in the highest game you can if you win more $? This shows me you probably have little playing experience, or are just a break-even or slightly winning player. Someone can crush .5/1 for 4 BBs over the long run but won't be anywhere close to that at 30/60, but if they can beat both, doesn't mean you should play .5/1 because your BB/100 is higher.

[stripsqueez]

[ QUOTE ]
If you wanna go broke and continually put money into your account, tilt more often because you are underfunded then start with less than 300BB.

It is easy to lose 100BB and for a beginner with little knowledge of variance it is much better to start with a 300BB or more

[/ QUOTE ]

i think so too

[ QUOTE ]
Sure someone with a lot of experience playing well below their limit can play with much less.

But a beginner with minimal experience its best to play it safe.

[/ QUOTE ]

people with lots of experience play with 600+BB's

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
What is SSH?

[/ QUOTE ]

Small-Stakes Hold'em by Ed Miller + S&M

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
people with lots of experience play with 600+BB's

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true once they settle into their comfort zone and need to sustain a BR, but if I were to have to start over, I'd feel quite comfortable starting at 2/4 with 800 or so.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On average, 30-60 players are losers.

[/ QUOTE ]

This means little. At every level there are more losers than winners.

[/ QUOTE ]
I brought it up to discredit your reference to several 30-60 players who play KQo UTG. I'm glad you agree that 30-60 players make many mistakes and are often losers. That means they are not automatically authoritative sources. They may be playing hands that were winners for them at lower limits, but lose at higher limits.

[ QUOTE ]
I find it funny for people who go on Pokerroom stats as those are general not concrete data as each game changes with level and players.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what you would call concrete. Why would you prefer a statistically insignificant sample of the 15 times you had KQo UTG (all 10-handed? all the same limit?) rather than data from thousands of times people have had KQo UTG in a 10-handed game, sorted by level?

[ QUOTE ]
And no, your arguements (or lack there of, except if you count a lot of stats) have not changed my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you think the only arguments I made were statistical, you may want to reread what I wrote.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I usually don't, but sometimes I play at higher limits to win more ($, not BB/100),

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes me lose a lot of value in your post. Why not keep playing in the highest game you can if you win more $? This shows me you probably have little playing experience, or are just a break-even or slightly winning player.

[/ QUOTE ]
Let me clarify what I expected you to be able to get out of the above phrase: You asked why anyone would play in a tough game. A tough game means that you can win fewer BB/hour. Sometimes a tough game is more profitable because the stakes are higher. This shows up in $/hour, not BB/hour. However, sometimes the good higher limit games don't exist. Sometimes, a tough game is beatable, but not for as many $/hour as a lower level game. Further, sometimes it is correct to avoid a +E$ game if you make more elsewhere or your bankroll is insufficient. The same correct ideas show up in essays on this site, and in many 2+2 books.

[stigmata]

OK I am a newbie...

What do UTG, MP and CO stand for?

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
What do UTG, MP and CO stand for?

[/ QUOTE ]

There may be an abbreviations link (http://www.twoplustwo.com/abbrevs.html) in the frame to the left. It is not very good, though.

UTG means under-the-gun, the first position to act preflop. UTG is part of early position. UTG+1 is the position after UTG.

MP means middle position, acting after early position and before late position.

CO means cut-off, the position acting just before the button. CO is part of late position.

[MrHorace]

spoken like a true programmer. /images/graemlins/smile.gif