Why some struggle with the jump from Micro to SS games

[nolanfan34]

There have been a fair number of posts lately about people struggling to make the jump and adjustment from the .50-1 and 1-2 levels to the 2-4 and 3-6 games.

Going through that adjustment right now myself, accompanied by a bit of a downswing, I've been giving a lot of thought to reasons why it's tough for some to make the jump, like myself, while others seem to sail right through on their way to 15-30.

I'll present some thoughts below, and I'd love to get some feedback both from players who have made the leap, to see if this is off base, and also from players in the same boat as me, who might have other thoughts about the fundamental weaknesses in a person's game that gets them stuck at a certain level.

1. Inflated view of one's bankroll through bonuses:

For those starting at the micro level, bonuses are an easy way to build up the bankroll when starting out. Personally, my first $500 was really built through some casino whoring, so I could take advantage of the full amount of bonuses that poker sites had to offer. But because of that, I think bonuses have allowed me to play at a higher stake and move up levels before knowing if I was really "beating" them or not. Now that I'm hitting $2/$4, poor play results in losses outside of what a bonus would cover at the $1/2 and $.50/$1 level.

In essence, because I have the requisite 300 BB to move up a level, I think I might have a slightly inflated view of my actual poker ability - having the BR doesn't mean you're ready to move up yet.

2. Poor table management:

I think the 300 BB rule is a misnomer when people immediately jump into 4 tables at a new level. Others have mentioned in some good posts that tables at a new level should be eased in. Play one /4 table and 3 1/2s to get a feel for the new level. I think this is solid advice.

Yet I still see a lot of posts about people losing a chunk of their roll, invariably sprinkled with clues that they were 6 tabling at a new level, or something to that effect. 500 BB might be a better number if you're wanting to play 4 tables right away.

3. Recognizing tilt in it's most subtle forms:

Because the lower levels are so soft, I think the combination of slightly tougher play at 2/4 and 3/6, and the amount of money you lose when you play/run bad at that level, makes it even more important to have your emotions in check before moving up a level.

Personally, I find that tilt doesn't hit me in a maniac type of form, like playing crazy types of hands all of the sudden. Usually it's more subtle - starting to limp with slightly borderline hands in MP, "rounding up" my pot odds slightly and looking for a reason to call, and making what I justify as "value bets/calls" when I know I'm probably beat. These are small leaks in a single hand, but over the course of a session, I think they're killers when you play in a slightly tougher game.

I know I need to work on resisting those urges, and acknowledging tilt for what it is, based on a great definition in John Feeney's book - it's anytime you knowingly make a play with a negative expectation.

4. Lack of true evaluation of one's game:

Bernie made a good point in another thread that people don't bother to examine their game when they're running well, only when they're running bad. I think this is something I need to work on more. When I'm running good, the game seems easy, and I don't bother looking at big hands as much as I should, to see if I should have won more money in it.

And when I'm running bad, a closer look needs to be made at whether I'm really having downward variance, or am pressuring variance downward by my own poor play.

I hope others will post their thoughts here. Maybe this is common sense for many, but it was theraputic for me to put it into words. If you can think of other examples of mistakes people make when trying to jump levels, post them as well, I think it's a worthy topic.

[colgin]

All excellent points. Let me just add:

5. Not making necessary adjustments.

Your game at the microlimits might be quite good for those limits. However, even $2-4 and $3/6 will play differently from $.50/1 to $1/2.

For example, a lot of the hands that you can profitable limp with from EP at the micros often need to be mucked at the small stakes tables, particularly $3/6. In the micros you are generally correct to limp in EP with Axs (and even Kxs sometimes), as well as small pairs like 22-55. While this may still be correct at $3/6, IMO it generally is not.

At the SS tables you will encounter more aggression than at the micros. When you start getting checkraised frequently you need to learn to make certain adjustments.

While there are still plenty of poor players who will pay you off frequently, there are fewer of them. At the micros you can afford to make a lot of mistake and still be a pretty decent winner at the game because your monster hands get paid off so well. This is less true at the SS tables so you need to work a little to get the most out of your made hands.

There are other things as well but you should begin to get the idea.

I hope this helps.

Colgin

[Vollycat]

I am in this boat. My biggest problem is that I still see the chips I put into the pot as money--not big bets. I start to limp or call when I know I should raise because I don't want to lose the money.

I am currently watching my wife learn the game at .25/.5 and am shocked at how infreqeuntly the hand is raised preflop (it's been a while since I've watched/played this level)--yet still have 7 people in the hand. I stand over her shoulder and yell "RAISE THAT!", where she gets all nervous because she is going to lose her money. Yet, still 7 people to the flop and she gets sucked out by J8 off with her KK. Then the evil glares start--she doesn't get the whole variance thing yet....

For me it's protecting the bankroll--I may need to stay a little longer at 1/2, but have found 2/4 is actually running pretty good--way to few of hands but still positive on most aspects. I just need help on relating to the swings.

[MEbenhoe]

Excellent post Nolan. I hope a lot of people considering moving up levels take this all in before they make their move.

[Sarge85]

Well Said.

I'm moving from $1/$2 to $2/$4 and see alot of truisms in this post.

Sarge/images/graemlins/diamond.gif

[B00T]

[ QUOTE ]
1. Inflated view of one's bankroll through bonuses:

For those starting at the micro level, bonuses are an easy way to build up the bankroll when starting out. Personally, my first $500 was really built through some casino whoring, so I could take advantage of the full amount of bonuses that poker sites had to offer. But because of that, I think bonuses have allowed me to play at a higher stake and move up levels before knowing if I was really "beating" them or not. Now that I'm hitting $2/$4, poor play results in losses outside of what a bonus would cover at the $1/2 and $.50/$1 level.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so frickin brilliantly put. No other way to say it.

I made a post a few days ago asking if there was a way PT can encorporate your bonus whoring money into your winrate. I have built my online bankroll up over the last year and a half and really have no idea how much of it came from bonuses and casino whoring. In Neteller its all the same whether it was $800 coming from a $1/$2 grind over a month, or spending 45 minutes ransacking BJ Ballroom in pounds (oh the good ole days). Many players just say oh I worked my roll up to 1500 from $50. Thats all well and good but when you break it down, after the $100 signup bonus, the $50 free some affiliate gave you into your acct, the IGM bonus you did, your reload, and 5 freerolls you won for a total of $25, and one casino whore, and a sidebet you made in Neteller on the Yanks/RedSox series, you really dont know what your winrate is.

If you play 100% on Party, or Stars, and have used Pokertracker for every single hand you may be ok but I am sure 90% of new users to this forum never heard of PT beforehand and thus dont know about their roll coming from where. If I played an hour at my gf's house it isnt recorded in PT.

Players must examine where their bankroll came from. If you have 300BB it doesnt mean you can move up. If you are up 600BB's at a previous level, then move up. People would be surprised how little they actually earned from playing compared to bonuses in some instances.

Good post Nolan.

[Rasputin]

Considering all the stuff in this thread, let me ask something.

I am playing the micros in an effort to implement the strategies in SSH cheaply while I internalize them. Should I not bother with the micros or are the games similar enough?

[B00T]

if you could afford to lose $200 in experimenting, give Party .5/1 a shot. The fact you made it to these forums alone is enough evidence you should be fine there. If you read SSH follow the tight chart as a guide and you should be fine.

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I find that tilt doesn't hit me in a maniac type of form, like playing crazy types of hands all of the sudden. Usually it's more subtle - starting to limp with slightly borderline hands in MP, "rounding up" my pot odds slightly and looking for a reason to call, and making what I justify as "value bets/calls" when I know I'm probably beat. These are small leaks in a single hand, but over the course of a session, I think they're killers when you play in a slightly tougher game.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true. It's very easy for a solid player to reach sort of a Faustian bargain on the tilt issue by making plays that he knows to be slightly -EV, on the rationalization that it might allow him to fend off making grotesquely -EV plays. I'd usually play A8s here; let's give K8s a try! It's almost the same hand!!

[charlie_t_jr]

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I find that tilt doesn't hit me in a maniac type of form, like playing crazy types of hands all of the sudden. Usually it's more subtle - starting to limp with slightly borderline hands in MP, "rounding up" my pot odds slightly and looking for a reason to call, and making what I justify as "value bets/calls" when I know I'm probably beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've done this...great post by the way. This is pretty much the situation I'm in. I've had a very frustrating time trying to break into 2/4. All that you've posted are key things to consider.

I've gone over my PT hands, but I still haven't been able to single any one BIG thing out, other than it looks like I haven't really gotten great cards, and most of my big hands have been drawn out on.... I'm losing at -3/100 at 2/4 after about 7500 hands...not anything to be too worried just yet, but it can't be all cards.

My frustration level is at an all time high. 20K+ hands at 50/1 at a "crushing" wr...25K+ at 1/2 with a "solid" wr...and then 2/4...very frustrating.

My latest run at 2/4 was this weekend...and by Sunday night I was ready to burn my copy of SSH /images/graemlins/smirk.gif....But I looked over PT Monday, and got a grip...I'll just keep plugging away...nice to know I'm not the only one though.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
This is very true. It's very easy for a solid player to reach sort of a Faustian bargain on the tilt issue by making plays that he knows to be slightly -EV, on the rationalization that it might allow him to fend off making grotesquely -EV plays. I'd usually play A8s here; let's give K8s a try! It's almost the same hand!!

[/ QUOTE ]

I need to start posting some specific hands, but for example ones for me that have been giving me trouble are ones where it's folded to me in middle position and I have a hand like QJo or A9o. I know I should raise or fold, but raise doesn't feel right when you're getting your hands cracked, and folding doesn't seem right when you're running bad and are eager to hit a hand.

So most of the time I end up calling, missing the flop often holding two overcards, looking at my six outs to a likely best hand, and either betting or calling, yada yada yada and I'm down another 2 BB in the hand.

One other addendum to my original post that I think is a byproduct of being on here so much actually, and is a small detriment.

- Believeing that people play as intellegently as we do:

I catch myself once in a while talking myself into continuing to lead with a hand because I've decided that my calling opponent can't have a hand that beats me, because they would have raised before the flop. Would they though?

Here's one from last night: Two limpers to me, I raise in CO+1 with KQs. Button cold calls, blinds call. Flop is K-high. I bet the whole way, because in my mind, someone with AK would have likely raised or reraised with that hand. Well, that sounds great until the button shows down AK at showdown. Now, I don't think I played the hand incorrectly necessarily, but I think with marginal hands like middle pair if you're getting called, you have to think a little more about the fact that a lot of opponents aren't going to be aggressive, and will call with better hands instead of raising.

Not sure if that part makes sense, but I just feel this is a small leak for certain hands, especially ones where you suddenly get raised by an opponent on the river. Can't remember the last time I called the raise that they didn't have the goods.

[lefty rosen]

The type of bad player, at 2/4 is very different than the average micro limit player. Most micro limit players are horrid chasers. At this level many are overly aggressive with AK or monsters. Reads are way harder as most micro players are extremely passive and once they attack you know they have the nuts, here they could be playing games.....

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
If you play 100% on Party, or Stars, and have used Pokertracker for every single hand you may be ok but I am sure 90% of new users to this forum never heard of PT beforehand and thus dont know about their roll coming from where. If I played an hour at my gf's house it isnt recorded in PT.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wanted to touch on this part as well. Good point BOOT. Personally, I've been lazy about making sure I'm inputting hands, and I need to sit down and take a night to figure this out. When I sit down at the computer, I usually want to play though, not tinker with PT.

And frankly, I think the PT interface is quite daunting for a beginning user. I'm a "who needs an instruction manual" kind of guy, and I think I should probably take time to read the PT forums, and figure out some of the bells and whistles that I've been neglecting.

BTW BOOT, were you on Stars last night? I think we were at a couple of the same tables, so you probably saw some shaky play on my part. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[B00T]

haha, I made a post to you on the Stars reload thread in the Zoo mentioning I was playing with you.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
haha, I made a post to you on the Stars reload thread in the Zoo mentioning I was playing with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh. I didn't see that last night, very funny. Yeah, down $28 at the two tables with you, and down more at the others. 90 minutes of banging my head against the wall.

Anyway, I'll be back at it tonight. After some of the words in this thread and others, I'm motivated to get back at it and play better. I won't be having a couple of glasses of wine tonight beforehand though - that's tilt-fuel for me.

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's one from last night: Two limpers to me, I raise in CO+1 with KQs. Button cold calls, blinds call. Flop is K-high. I bet the whole way, because in my mind, someone with AK would have likely raised or reraised with that hand. Well, that sounds great until the button shows down AK at showdown. Now, I don't think I played the hand incorrectly necessarily, but I think with marginal hands like middle pair if you're getting called, you have to think a little more about the fact that a lot of opponents aren't going to be aggressive, and will call with better hands instead of raising.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate to say it, but your desrciption of the hand here seems to be more emblematic of a sort of mini-tilt than the actual way that you played the hand. Betting top pair, good kicker is automatic the whole way through. There are certainly some weird, passive opponents (paricularly in live games) who will just call with something like TPTK, but they're usually also the sort who will also call down with ace-high. Certainly, you should take notice if one of these guys raises, but fearing calls is not good poker.

The reason that I mention this is that I think one of the primary ways in which good players tilt is to miss a lot of value bets when they're running bad.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason that I mention this is that I think one of the primary ways in which good players tilt is to miss a lot of value bets when they're running bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, right now my value bets aren't showing much value. I'm getting the 4 losing hands on my 5-1 calls, etc.

Anyway, I just posted a hand in micro that's probably a better example of being too aggressive against someone who is calling down, but I'm having a hard time determining when to let up off the gas.

[Joe Tall]

In the micros you are generally correct to limp in EP with Axs (and even Kxs sometimes), as well as small pairs like 22-55. While this may still be correct at $3/6, IMO it generally is not.

Be careful now, granted, as you move up the games are generally more aggressive but I've been in 20/40 games where I limped UTG w/22 because it was so passive. However, as you move up, you need to recognize what type of game you are in and what is likely the action going to be preflop if you hold such hands where you'd like to see the flop cheaply.

Peace,
Joe Tall

[skunkworks]

Let me chip in on this subject. I think getting some shorthanded experience can really help quite a bit at the 2/4 or 3/6 level. Although I've seen plenty of 2/4 tables that play like .50/1, there will frequently be times when hands are folded to late position and you have to learn how to steal/defend blinds and play well heads-up. I've dwelled at the 1/2 6-max level for some time now and I really feel confident about my approach to playing shorthanded.

Not only am I a much-improved shorthanded player, I now know how to recognize certain situations that occur and how to play them accordingly. I've really learned how to reason critically and logically about what the best play might be instead of looking for the default robotic play.

I just feel as though I've gotten more experience playing shorthanded than I ever could have gotten playing full-ring because 6-max puts you in awkward positions more frequently than playing in a ring game. It forced me to think.

A really good book to read is 2+2er John Feeney's "Inside the Poker Mind." There's a section where he breaks down how an average player might analyze/play a certain situation and compares it to how an expert player might see it. It really showed me how to start thinking at a higher level.

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
In the micros you are generally correct to limp in EP with Axs (and even Kxs sometimes), as well as small pairs like 22-55. While this may still be correct at $3/6, IMO it generally is not.

Be careful now, granted, as you move up the games are generally more aggressive but I've been in 20/40 games where I limped UTG w/22 because it was so passive. However, as you move up, you need to recognize what type of game you are in and what is likely the action going to be preflop if you hold such hands where you'd like to see the flop cheaply.


[/ QUOTE ]

Joe,

This is a good clarification and what I should have said. I often find myself in games where these hands are playable regardless of limit, but increasingly I find them unprofitable at the $3/6 tables I am at. (Now granted that my game selection is not the best given my extremely narrow time frame of late for playing online.) My point is that these are no longer pretty much auto limps like they were in the microlimits when I started.

[Dov]

Not only cheaply, but with enough callers behind you.

Good point Joe.

Dov

[6471849653]

It's mainly an IQ question; I never played games higher than 1-2, that being about the level my IQ can beat.

[Zetack]

Good points. Some more thoughts:

Patience is the supreme poker virtue. Most of us here aren't as patient as we think we are.

Discipline: most of us arent' as disciplined as we think we are.

Also, my feeling from reading the boards is that micro players tend to underestimate the value of position and tend to pay too little attention to game texture.

These factors become weightier as the games get harder.

--Zetack

[bernie]

Killer post, man.

[ QUOTE ]
1. Inflated view of one's bankroll through bonuses:

For those starting at the micro level, bonuses are an easy way to build up the bankroll when starting out. Personally, my first $500 was really built through some casino whoring, so I could take advantage of the full amount of bonuses that poker sites had to offer. But because of that, I think bonuses have allowed me to play at a higher stake and move up levels before knowing if I was really "beating" them or not. Now that I'm hitting $2/$4, poor play results in losses outside of what a bonus would cover at the $1/2 and $.50/$1 level.

In essence, because I have the requisite 300 BB to move up a level, I think I might have a slightly inflated view of my actual poker ability - having the BR doesn't mean you're ready to move up yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting point that i didn't really think about. Especially since i don't bonus whore. You can actually draw a parallel with having a great run of cards when first starting. A point you covered later in your post.

I think the underlying tone is to be brutally honest with yourself about your game. This is usually much tougher than it looks. You really have to put the ego to the side and admit your faults/holes in your game. Then you can assess them and their role in your game. (It's also good when looking for leaks to find the root cause of them. This helps to avoid them later on. Slavic and me found one that had developed in my game when i was on a horrendous run and we rooted it out. It helps it stick in your mind much more in doing this, imo)

At times after winning a hand, you should be able to go back rather quickly and see how you could've played a little better regardless of the fact you won the pot. Even so much as you might see where you really got lucky whether from a misread or whatever rather than just because you're a 'great' player. You might be, but it's not a default evaluation one should have of themselves when analyzing themselves.

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe this is common sense for many,

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's more a developed common sense. With all the stuff to learn, it's very easy to overlook these things. Especially if you're on a great run. Making money can be blinding. Why else do many players praise a book that makes them money instantly after reading it, regardless of how good/bad the book is, (because of a sudden good run of cards, let's say) then abandon it when the downswing comes? After you've been through it a couple/few times, you either know better and learn or you fall by the wayside.

This is one reason why i say the 'gambling concepts' at the front of SSHE is, imo, the most important part of the book. But will likely be the least reread. It talks about the bad swings a bit and how you play through them. It's not as sexy as the postflop part, but it's very key to winning. Otherwise, the postflop play part is just another postflop book on someone's shelf untiil the next flavor comes along. To me, this section stands out among books like it. Ed did a great job in explaining it.

b

[helpmeout]

1. Failing to adapt.

2. Limited study, SSHE isnt the be all and end all of Micros and Small Stakes. You wont find everything on 2+2 either most of the advice is biased towards SSHE. There is nothing wrong with that but you definately need opposing views on different situations.

3. Multitabling instead of concentrating on the table/opponents. It suprises me how many people want to 4 table at the micro/small stakes. You should be trying to analyze how you play each hand, if you 4 table it is much harder to recognise tilt because you are constantly playing hands.

4. Focusing on playing so many hands instead of improving their game. I moved up from $2/$4 after 2k hands, I felt there was nothing further for me to learn in those limits. I have to adapt to changing poker environments not play the same games for months.

If I feel the game is too tough for me then I'll move down, some of you guys seem to have a 10 year planner or something.

Just my 2cents.