Why do I suck at 10/20? (Long and cathartic)

[sammy_g]

I'm a breakeven player at 10/20 and up it seems. I admit it. If it weren't for rakeback I would be down, sadly. Here is the graph.

http://home.nc.rr.com/padgett/1020sucks.jpg

It looks like a sine wave, or maybe the output from a polygraph test. I'd rather look at a picture of the goatse guy. And yes that is a 350BB downswing.

Here is my 5/10 graph for comparison.

http://home.nc.rr.com/padgett/510yay.JPG

Now that's a graph! A nice, smooth upward gradient. 5/10 is like a vacation for me.

So what gives? I don't understand. How can I beat 5/10 for 2.5BB/100 and just break even at 10/20? Are the games really that different?

The frustrating thing is the average 10/20 player seems so bad! Some sharks inhabit these waters, but mostly it seems like guys with 40/20/1.5 type stats. It's not like they play well postflop. To me they appear bluffy, aggro, and, well, bad. How do they hold on to their money? Am I underestimating my opponents?

So judging from PokerTracker, I'm just a hair better than these folks. Not quite good enough to beat the rake. After 25k hands I can no longer just say to myself I'm running bad. I can't imagine that after this many hands my PT winrate is more 1BB/100 off from my theoretical winrate. At best I'm a small winner, but maybe also a losing player at these limits. I mean, look at the converging BB/100 graph.

http://home.nc.rr.com/padgett/1020converging.JPG

I'm not posting this only to whine. I'm actually looking for advice. I'm a reasonably smart guy. I refuse to believe my ceiling is 5/10. I don't want to play small stakes forever. I want to get out of the kiddie pool. So what do I need to do to improve and beat this limit?

I thought about posting all of my PT stats and asking for advice. The last time I tried to change my play based on PT stats was a disaster. (This was a major cause of that first horrible downswing at 10/20 in the graph above.) Also I think my problems are mostly postflop. PT stats are better for judging preflop play.

I could post hands, but I'm genuinely not sure which ones to post. I might have some leaks in plays that I think are routine. Maybe I am making some regular folds that are actually hideous or calling down in spots where I am almost never good.

I am often lost in hands at this limit since the games are so much more aggressive. If I fold to those bluffy turn check-raises, I feel like I'm getting run over. If I call down all the time, I feel like I'm paying off too much. Aggressive games have a way of turning you into a calling station.

So what can I do? Get a coach? Find a poker buddy so we can sweat each other and discuss hands? Move back down to 5/10 and try 10/20 again when I think I'm a better player?

These results are all from 4 tabling. Maybe I should play fewer tables?

For those of you who struggled at first at 10/20, is there any adjustment you made that helped? Did something ever just click so you got it?

I've hit a brick wall. What do I do to improve?

Thanks...

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I should play fewer tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

Also, FWIW, I was a breakeven 5/10 player at 10k hands, a slight winner at 25k, and am now a 2.3ishbb/100 winner at 45k hands. I haven't changed much but my results certainly have. Take that as you may and remember that 27k hands really isn't all that much. But play less tables until you know you're handling 10/20 well.

Rob

[wheelz]

I did a couple things to get out of my inital 10/20 rut: First off I switched to only 2 tabling, and started winning right away. Then I decided I could become a really good player if I really studied, so I bought like 12 poker books that I had heard good things about and read a bit every day (Inside the Poker Mind probably had the most profound effect on my winrate), and also really studied this forum, posting more hands myself and reading and posting my opinion in nearly every other hand posted. Gradually my game adapted and I became comfortable at the 10/20.

I really recommend you try 2 tabling for a while, see if you do better, and yes find some hands to post where you were unsure of yourself. Read this forum, reread some books, take a break if you feel the need to, just don't give up and don't tilt, as long as you're willing to put the effort in you can definitely beat this game.

[livinitup0]

Im in no way entitled to give play adivce to you...but 27K hands in almost 300 days? Im part time but still clear well over 7500 or so a month. Like I said Im not even close to your stakes but I didnt start to noticably improve until I made myslef play more than just a few hours a week. I think its especially important to play more when in the process of moving up stakes since there's so much more to learn than your usual stakes game that you have long run confidence in.

[yanicehand]

this is by far the best advice you can get... i refuse to think anyone can really do that well at 5/10 (is that like 5bb/100h over almost 100k?) has hit a wall when it came to 10/20.

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
After 25k hands I can no longer just say to myself I'm running bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes you can.

[sthief09]

1 of 2 options or maybe both.

1. you haven't adjusted and fold too much
2. you run bad at 10/20 and/or you run good at 5/10

[Victor]

keep pluckin is the best i can say. i got my head bashed in at 10-20 when i moved up the first 4 times.

its proly a combo of running bad, tougher/trickier players and minitilt due to the higher stakes.

[JrJordan]

[ QUOTE ]

These results are all from 4 tabling. Maybe I should play fewer tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo!
I've had similar experiences lately at the 5/10 games. I had a decent upswing to start while I was developing, and then plateaued. I went break even (with a few 200BB downswings in between) for 26k hands. It took until about 7k hands ago for me to admit that I was an autopilot 4-table junkie. I had stopped developing as a player, was dependent on PV stats for reads, and was more tilt prone. Since then I've switched to two tables and the difference is night and day. I can tell in the way I observe, the way I play, and the way I participate in this forum. Running at 4.5BB/100 certainly helps too. Point is, dropping down the number of tables and learning to think again has made all the difference for me.

[kiddo]

U could very well be running bad for 27K, but this is not your problem. Problem is u are afraid of 10/20.

[ QUOTE ]
I am often lost in hands at this limit since the games are so much more aggressive. If I fold to those bluffy turn check-raises, I feel like I'm getting run over. If I call down all the time, I feel like I'm paying off too much. Aggressive games have a way of turning you into a calling station.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can u play 4 tables if u dont know what to do when aggressive players attack you? Makes no sense. I played 2 tables my first 10-15K at 10/20. There are a lot of adjustments u have to do since average player is different from average player at 5/10. There are a ton of posts about this in the archive.

U say players with 40/20/1.5 are "so bad". This isnt true. I would guess that normally u make nothing or very little from these players.

Say u got 25/15 and they got 40/20 and there are 2 loosepassive players in the game. The 40/20 guys will play these loosepassive guys much more then you. Even if u make a little from these 40/20 guys when playing against them, u loose a lot because they raise you out of a lot pots with the loosepassive ones. They play the really bad guys much more.

And also: You will often find yourself in a tricky situation where u have to be overly aggressive with a not very strong hand against the LAG but keep on valuebetting against the passive ones. You know that the LAG raising you on flop means nothing but u also know that the loosepassive one coldcalling in same hand means something, so, what to do?

Cut down on the number of tables and stop thinking 40/20/1.5 is a fish. And dont look for tables with big average pots.

If u got two 40/20/1.5 at your table these 2 guys will run the table. I much prefer to have to guys with 22/15. Yes, they are normally better players and yes, I will make less from them, but they will late me make much more from the really bad ones at the table.

On my list of worst player to have in your game I would say:

1) 31/23/2.5

2) 40/20/2

3) 22/15/2.5

This is if there is only 1 of them. If there are 2 of them I dont think there is a difference between (1) and (2) and (3) is way behind because the LAGs will raise each other making it extremly hard to play without good reads.

[Nigel]

This may sound crazy, but you could just skip 10/20. Like yourself, I did well at 5/10 and then hit a wall at 10/20. Maybe it was variance, maybe it was poor table selection, maybe it was me sucking at shorthanded poker. Who knows?

I moved past it and played 15/30 short instead of 10/20 and that made all the difference. Now the occasional times I play 10/20 6 max I do fine, and the demons seem to be exorsized, but for a long time it was a hump I just couldn't get over.

I hated that freaking level.

Good luck,

Nigel

[bugstud]

I give it another 20k hands before you need to worry

[Subfallen]

Maybe I'm just slow, but the difference in 2-tabling and 4-tabling is significant to me. Play fewer tables, bask in the pure joy of better reads. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Mr. Graff]

[ QUOTE ]
These results are all from 4 tabling. Maybe I should play fewer tables?


[/ QUOTE ]

[nervous]

This has inspired me to cut down my amount of tables. Me being the cock I am I started out in the 3/6 short game with 6 tables, and the swings were tremendous, I didn't know what I was doing most of the time, and to put it bluntly, I sucked. I have been 4 tabling the 3/6 game for the past few days with 4 tables of full games as well. I have to get out of the mindset of playing a ton of tables. I have to face it that my days of autopilotting 12 tables of 2/4 full are over.

Over my last 30kish hands at 3/6 6m when I was 4-6 tabling, I think my winrate would boast at around the .35-.45bb/100 level. Well, I'm going to take a shot at 2 tabling and LEARNING now just like you. Hopefully I will post a success story soon.

This is a great thread and an eye-opener for me.

[Guy McSucker]

It does seem likely that there's something up with your game that you can fix, and the other posts in this thread address that, but, just so you know...

[ QUOTE ]

After 25k hands I can no longer just say to myself I'm running bad. I can't imagine that after this many hands my PT winrate is more 1BB/100 off from my theoretical winrate


[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong.

Most players have a standard deviation of around 16BB for 100 hand samples, so for a 25600 hand sample, the standard deviation of your win rate would be 16/sqrt(256) or 1BB.

It would be no surprise at all to find you were a 1BB/100 player running bad; slightly surprising to find you were a 2BB/100 player running really bad; pretty shocking but not impossible to find you were a 3BB/100 player running extremely terribly awfully bad; and a real stretch to find you were better than a 3BB/100 player.

But that's just stats. It's pretty meaningless in the context of your extended struggle.

Guy.

[jdock99]

I have played both 5/10 and 10/20 online, and like you my results are much better at the former than the latter. My take on it is that in 5/10 most of your profit comes from bad players making ridiculous mistakes, like chasing inside dummy straight draws heads up or capping turns w/ JT on a AAJT board. In 10/20 on the other hand, although most of the "fish" play loose preflop, they do not make these fundamental errors postflop, so you have to beat them by outplaying them, like when a TA donkbets a turn scarecard and you realize he is trying to freeze you and will fold to a turn raise, so you make the move and it works. I believe this is a fundamental adjustment that is much harder to make than just jumping up one level like from 3-6 to 5-10, and I honestly do not think I have fully made it yet. In live games (in Los Angeles at least) I think this "jump" takes place when you move from 30-60 to 40-80, where you have to start outplaying the players and not just sit back and wait for them to hand you their $$ with bad play.

[kamelion44]

While I think it's good policy to always look for holes and leaks, you certainly can run bad for 27k hands. I mean, don't automatically assume you're playing perfectly, but if you have a losing 27k hand period, it doesn't follow necessarily that you're playing poorly or even sub-par.

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]
While I think it's good policy to always look for holes and leaks, you certainly can run bad for 27k hands. I mean, don't automatically assume you're playing perfectly, but if you have a losing 27k hand period, it doesn't follow necessarily that you're playing poorly or even sub-par.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, El Diablo has reported a 30k break-even stretch.

[tongni]

As easy as everyone says 10/20 6m is, I think it's a reasonably tough game, especially when you are first coming from 5/10. It plays a lot different and you have to become a much better hand reader. Many of the players you will be up against have some leak, whether it is overaggressiveness or bad preflop play, but most of these players are pretty good hand readers and a fair amount of the time even the LAG's won't pay you off if you've been quiet for a while.

Well, the thing that jumps out at me is:

1) Play fewer tables. You're not going to improve running lots of tables at once.

2) It's not that bad. Think of the first 10k hands as 10/20 poker tuition. From 10k hands onward, you've got a very reasonable upward trend. A blip there at the end, but if your next 15k hands are like your last 15k hands, you're in good shape.

[bds]

I've been in your situation. I played 5/10 for 80000 hands and won 2.31 BB/100. Then, I moved to 10/20 and for the first month had 34000 hands at .91 bb/100 and felt that I was not adapting well to the 10/20 game. I have always included daily reading and study in my plan, so I then hired a coach. I hired kiddo. Since my first coaching session, I've played 200,000 k hands at 10/20 at an avg 2 BB/100. I'm still working on improvement and work with kiddo. Recently, I also hired Joe Tall to do some coaching on the theory that two perspectives would be valuable. I think all the money has been extremely well spent. I can highly recommend both these individuals and found it made the difference for me in adjusting to the 10/20 game, which is very different than 5/10.

So, if you don't already read and study, add that component. Cutting down on the number of tables if you are not comfortable is also important. If you already do those things, consider a coach. It is a relatively small investment that can pay off big rewards.

I sound like a "coach" advertisement, since I've posted this message a couple of times before. But I really have no personal interest in whether other folks hire a coach or not - actually it would be better for me if noone else chose to do so. LOL But, the folks on these boards are so generous with time and talent, I'd like to "give back" to the extent possible. And I'd like to include a big thank you to all the knowledgable posters for all their wisdom shared.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]

These results are all from 4 tabling. Maybe I should play fewer tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I just hear my cue?

[arkady]

kiddo great post. excellent points and with the use of GameTime this information can and should be utilized quickly.

[Surfbullet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

These results are all from 4 tabling. Maybe I should play fewer tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I just hear my cue?

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread wasn't complete until Gris showed up. Now all is right with the world!

Surf

[Surfbullet]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm not posting this only to whine. I'm actually looking for advice. I'm a reasonably smart guy. I refuse to believe my ceiling is 5/10. I don't want to play small stakes forever. I want to get out of the kiddie pool. So what do I need to do to improve and beat this limit?

Find a poker buddy so we can sweat each other and discuss hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post struck a chord - I posted something nearly identical a bit over a month ago, when I hit the bottom of a 400BB downswing at 10/20 after moving up. I've altered my play since then, and posted nearly non-stop, and I feel I've got a much better hold over how to play at the 10/20 now.

I'd be willing to work together with you on beating the 10/20. PM me if you are interested.

Surf

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

These results are all from 4 tabling. Maybe I should play fewer tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I just hear my cue?

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread wasn't complete until Gris showed up. Now all is right with the world!

Surf

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you know my spiel on this. Don't play 4-tables at limit X until you are sure you know what you're doing. And if you know what you're doing you won't need to make long whiny posts about how bad you're doing at limit X but did SO much better at limit Y. (no offense, sammy! I was, um, talking about someone else . . . )

[Lmn55d]

in what ways did you alter your play

[sammy_g]

Thanks, Surf. PM sent.

[sammy_g]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, you know my spiel on this. Don't play 4-tables at limit X until you are sure you know what you're doing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. Actually, most of my 5/10 results are from 6 or more tables, so recently I've been playing "only" four. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

But you're right. I'm going to try two for a while even if it's like watching paint dry. And I'm going to focus.

[ QUOTE ]
And if you know what you're doing you won't need to make long whiny posts about how bad you're doing at limit X but did SO much better at limit Y. (no offense, sammy! I was, um, talking about someone else . . . )

[/ QUOTE ]
Whiny? I think you mean "theraputic."

OK, whiny, you're right. I did get a lot of good advice, though.

[sammy_g]

[ QUOTE ]
It would be no surprise at all to find you were a 1BB/100 player running bad; slightly surprising to find you were a 2BB/100 player running really bad; pretty shocking but not impossible to find you were a 3BB/100 player running extremely terribly awfully bad; and a real stretch to find you were better than a 3BB/100 player.

[/ QUOTE ]
This makes me feel better. Thanks.

I do want to be a 3BB/100 player at this limit, though, so I have some work to do.

[sammy_g]

You're right, kiddo. Nice post.

[Surfbullet]

[ QUOTE ]
in what ways did you alter your play

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Tighten up preflop. I was 25/18 at 5/10, and opened up to 30/20 upon moving up to 10/20 6max - I read lots of posts talking about how 20/16s get "crushed" at 10/20...it's utter garbage, you can be quite succesful with numbers that tight, and I spewed lots of chips playing too loose preflop while being unfamiliar with the aggression levels postflop.

2. Bet-fold MUCH less against LAGs. It's almost always more profitable to check and induce a bluff than bet-fold with a marginal hand, because these LAGs will bluff with nearly anything when they smell weakness. 5/10 bad players call with anything. 10/20 bad players bet with anything.

3. Corrolary to 2: check through more turns, especially in small pots, with the intent of calling a river bet. Again, marginal hands (maybe even A-hi), and especially vs LAGs.

4. Better table selection - I don't just fire up 4 tables anymore.

5. Get to showdown more - this is aided by 2 and 3 but is a general understanding that flop bets and raises mean much less at 10/20 than they do at 5/10, and my relative made hand value goes up accordingly, especially heads-up.

Surf

[maxpowers21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
in what ways did you alter your play

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Tighten up preflop. I was 25/18 at 5/10, and opened up to 30/20 upon moving up to 10/20 6max - I read lots of posts talking about how 20/16s get "crushed" at 10/20...it's utter garbage, you can be quite succesful with numbers that tight, and I spewed lots of chips playing too loose preflop while being unfamiliar with the aggression levels postflop.

2. Bet-fold MUCH less against LAGs. It's almost always more profitable to check and induce a bluff than bet-fold with a marginal hand, because these LAGs will bluff with nearly anything when they smell weakness. 5/10 bad players call with anything. 10/20 bad players bet with anything.

3. Corrolary to 2: check through more turns, especially in small pots, with the intent of calling a river bet. Again, marginal hands (maybe even A-hi), and especially vs LAGs.

4. Better table selection - I don't just fire up 4 tables anymore.

5. Get to showdown more - this is aided by 2 and 3 but is a general understanding that flop bets and raises mean much less at 10/20 than they do at 5/10, and my relative made hand value goes up accordingly, especially heads-up.

Surf

[/ QUOTE ]

Great advice. Although don't overdo checking thru the turn, in positiion heads up vs a lag. i will still force him to checkraise me to push me off a hand, I hate giving free cards in these situations, but you will get checkraised much more here from opponets at 10-20.

The key is to call down more on turn checkraises, this is the most difficult adjustment to make, when to call down crappy 1-pair, no pair hands against a LAG type player, it is very difficult to get a read, reading board texture is critical.

[mperich]

I have run breakeven for that long before, and I am not a breakeven player in the 10/20. Not that I'm giving you an easy scapegoat (variance), but it IS possible. A lot of people don't understand just how huge the swings in this game can get, unless they have experienced it.

That being said: value bet the river more, and bet the turn more headsup with position and a showdownable hand, even if its not the greatest showdown hand.

-Mike