"Movin' on up" ...Or trying to anyways

[ElSapo]

I decided this weekend to make the move from .5/1 to 1/2 on Party. It was, to say the least, different. The 1/2 game is dramatically tighter and slightly trickier, which is to say, as someone a while back pointed out, probably a lot of winning .5/1 players who moved up.

Anyways, I played my first session Friday night, and most of the weekend was a disaster. Memorable hands included AQ outkicked by an AK that didn't raise, my nut flush losing when someone filled on the river, and a set-over-set fiasco. That said, I like the 1/2 game a lot more. Raises get respect, less that 9 see the flop, and an EP raise can actually take down the blinds. So while it wasn't a winning weekend, I do think I played well. I got beat on some good hands. I also made my share of mistakes, to be sure, but I never felt like the level was above my head or anything. I'm slightly short-stacked for the game, I think, but recent posts on bankroll requirements and my own acceptance that poker will probably never be any real source of income for me have made me feel that perhaps this isn't a terrible thing. I also find myself playing tighter in some instances, observing the field more, paying closer attention, and getting a feel for when I think someone is making trying to make a move on the pot. A lot of these ideas were obscured at .5/1, simply b/c you'd average five or six to the flop instead of three at 1/2. I can't believe the difference is this big.
So my point was, I think until I get shown the door I'll play more at this level. I like the thinking at this game moreso than at .5/1. I like that there seems to be thinking, and you can put people on a hand. I suppose this is what 2/4 players say of 1/2, but who knows…

Anyways, a couple of hands from the weekend…All include mistakes I think, so any comments would be great.

One limper to me in MP, I raise with AQd. One cold caller, a raise from LP, limper folds, me and the coldcaller call the raise. Flop comes 347 rainbow, one diamond. Check to the LP raiser, who bets out, all call. The turn brings the 6d, makes a one card straight possible and puts four to my flush out. I bet, the guy in the middle folds, a pause from LP and he calls also. River is the 3c, I bet and am called. LP takes it with AKo.
I suspect had I bet the whole way, instead of checking to LP on the flop, I would get this one. On the other hand, maybe check-folding is the way to go… Is the bet after the diamond comes out good? And should I not even attempt the river bet?

In EP, dealt 88. One fold before me, I raise and it's folded to the BB who calls. Heads up, the flop comes A2T. I bet and am called. Turn is an 8. I bet, he raises and we cap it. Turn is jack, both literally and figuratively, makes a club flush possible. He bets, I raise and he just calls. I expect to see this pot pushed my way, but instead he flips TT for a bigger set. Ouch. In retrospect, I think just calling on the end is right, instead of raising…

EP raise, folded to me in LP and I reraise with KQs. He just calls, and it's heads up. Flop comes A6K rainbow, he bets and I raise, he just calls. Turn is the 7s, putting two spades on the board. He checks, and I check behind. Hard to call this a free-card play, since the board was rainbowed. I guess I didn't want to be check-raised, so I checked behind. River brings my backdoor flush, he checks to me again, I bet and he calls. My flush is good, of course, he turned over… KQs also.

[ResidentParanoid]

Trying to move up when you think you are playing badly is a classic case of what I'll "stakes tilt". I think Clarkmeister or Dynasty has railed consistently on this to anyone who says, "I can't beat a loose, passive LL table, so I'm going to move to a tighter, more aggressive higher limit to solve my problem." From some of your recent posts, I think this is what you are doing. Go back to 0.5/1 and figure out how to win there.

[ElSapo]

Maybe you're right (and I mean this seriously). I've seen other posts, I guess similar to mine. Perhaps this is what I'm doing without realizing it...

[kiddo]

Are you winning at .50/1 or not? When I started to play online I played .50/1 at Paradise Poker. I bought Lee Jones book: "Winning Low Limit Hold'em" and tried to play as he said, and soon started to win. .50/1 is very booring cause of all the calling stations, but I think its important to understand the things Jones and other talk about, and be able to use it.

If you want to learn to play good poker fast, try to play shorthanded (at Paradise Poker there is 5max table, at Ultimate Bet, 6 players table, UB is easier and lower limits). Then you will learn how to play each player individually. Often you will have like 1 calling station, 2 ok players, 1 weaktight, and 1 looseaggressive. This is very good practice.

About your hands:
AQd... Its not often that anyone 3bets preflop at 1/2 and if he wasnt a maniac he probably had AA, KK, QQ or AK. The table is 3467, only 2 suited. I dont think he will fold, but raise with a pair and you dont know what the coldcaller got and you want to see the river so... dont bet. If you wanted to see the turn (you checkcalled), bet on flop and see what they do. If they only call they have nothing and you will probably get your free card on turn since they dont want to be checkraised. You can of course bet turn, but I still dont think the player 3-betting will fold.

88:
Normally a 88 raise in EP will get 2-4 callers so I wouldnt do it. What will you do in early position with a flop like 7TQ? Bet? Checkraise? Checkcall?... Impossible mission... Dont raise river, do you think he would have capped turn with only 2 pair or called your raise preflop with 22?

KQs
Not sure I would have 3bet this preflop. What is this player raising with in early position? Not many hands worse then KQs that is raised from EP? Good chance he is playing AK, AQ, AA, KK or QQ and then he is dominating you. If he is weak the raise is ok, but since he bet his KQ into AK-flop I guess he wasnt very weak and you cant put him on a hand that easily.

good luck,
kiddo

[cero_z]

El Sapo,
I assume you're winning at the .5/1 game, or you wouldn't have moved up. If not, go back and establish that you can win. I'm not familiar with the level of play in the games you mentioned, but against players who are trying to play well, KQs should be folded to an EP raiser, not 3-bet. If you'd had several callers between you, the suited nature of your hand would warrant a call, but as it was, your default play should've been folding. Now, of course this doesn't apply if people will raise with any old thing up front.
The reason I mention this hand is because I think it illustrates a common beginner's problem: you play the right hands, but you play them under any circumstances. Specifically, KQs is a raising hand if you're the first one in from MP (or EP in weak games), but if someone has already raised, you not only can't raise, you can't even call. HPFAP discusses this concept in the pre-flop section, and it's an absolutely critical one to understand in all poker games.
Still, you're definitely on the right track (good hand selection), which ought to be enough to beat the games you're in by itself, and which is always the 1st step to becoming an expert player. Stick with it, and Good Luck.

[pufferfish]

Hi ElSapo,

If you like playing $1/$2 and can afford to, why not play it? I’m doing the moving up thing as well. I would caution you not to stay at a table if something makes you uncomfortable or you start getting frustrated. Go find another $1/$2 table to play.

Also, pick out a couple of the players who are giving you the most trouble and really key in on their play. Watch their showdowns; check the hand histories to see what makes them tick.

As far as beating $.50/$1, I don’t think it proves much beyond an extreme tolerance for boredom.

Also, you can always drop back down to $.50/$1 for sessions here and there. I play everything from "play money" to $.01/$.02 to $3/$6.

Best of luck,
pf

[ResidentParanoid]

If you like playing $1/$2 and can afford to, why not play it?

Implicit translation: "Why not bring your winnings from 0.5/1 to 1/2, where I am known to lurk. Study my play as I take your money."

As far as beating $.50/$1, I don’t think it proves much beyond an extreme tolerance for boredom.

Implicit translation: "Why would you want to play at a level where you can beat the game? That's boring. Come to a level where some expert players will show you some real poker fireworks? The price of admission for a player of your obvious skill is only 1 or 2 BB per hour."

Also, you can always drop back down to $.50/$1 for sessions here and there. Implicit Translation: If you happen to run low on money, go back to 0.5/1 and get some for me.

Check out my post in the New, Views and Gossip Forum (http://www.twoplustwo.com/forums/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=gossip&Number=252761&p age=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=14) if you want to see more on the topic.

[Rockfish]

If you take all the advice into consideration as well as that of the Resident Paranoid you come up with a variety of conflicting opinions.

There are those who advocate moving up when you have the appropriate bankroll to sustain fluctuations as a winning player at the higher limits. There are those who advocate not waiting and taking a shot and staying if you feel comfortable. There are those who say, just play, you're not a pro, if you have the money to play a couple of sessions at a higher limit and that's how you get your jollies go ahead. And then there's the paranoid. Feed me, feed me...

I think that each of us can find the answer to the question "when should I move up?" by bounding the problem correctly based on our own individual priorities. You have to decide what's right for you based on whether you care whether you are a winning player or not, whether you care about doing things 'by the book' and so on.

For myself, I like the idea of moving up when I have the bankroll, when I am convinced I can beat the game I'm in and when I know why. Having said that, to move up I need a sufficient bankroll to beat the game I'm in if I'm a winning player, given the fluctuations I'm going to see as a winning player. Which leaves me only two problems. First is actually getting ahead enough to move up. I don't seem to be able to win enough to move up before I take a loss and end up at ground zero again. The second is, presuming I do get ahead sufficiently to play at the next level, how will I know whether it's not just a random fluctuation in my bankroll? Where does the long run begin? Am I good enough to move up or should I just accept that I'm not as good a player as I wish I were?

The answers to these and other questions are coming to a poker table near you...

Fade out...

[pufferfish]

If you like playing $1/$2 and can afford to, why not play it?

Implicit translation: "Why not bring your winnings from 0.5/1 to 1/2, where I am known to lurk. Study my play as I take your money."

My translation: There is no translation; I meant what I said literally. How do you know I’m not the biggest fish out there?

As far as beating $.50/$1, I don’t think it proves much beyond an extreme tolerance for boredom.

Implicit translation: "Why would you want to play at a level where you can beat the game? That's boring. Come to a level where some expert players will show you some real poker fireworks? The price of admission for a player of your obvious skill is only 1 or 2 BB per hour."

My translation: OK, what I said sounds flip. $.50/$1 doesn’t just “generally” represent a skill level, I think it also “generally” represents a type of table texture. I think only playing one table texture can get boring and frustrating after while.

Also, you can always drop back down to $.50/$1 for sessions here and there.
Implicit Translation: If you happen to run low on money, go back to 0.5/1 and get some for me.

My translation: Your username suits you. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif I was trying to say there is no shame in dropping back/or in playing lower limits than the one(s) you aspire to. Every limit that you can afford (monetarily and psychologically) has a place, at least for me it does.

I think your barking at the wrong cat, umm fish, umm 2+2’er, no fish was right.

[Homer]

If I were pufferfish I would be incredibly insulted and would be daydreaming about beating the crap out of you for having the nerve to insinuate that my comments were intended to be self-serving. But I'm not pufferfish.

-- Homer

[pufferfish]

If I were pufferfish I would be incredibly insulted and would be daydreaming about beating the crap out of you for having the nerve to insinuate that my comments were intended to be self-serving.

I’m not sure if ResidentParanoid’s comments were made with any knowledge of me (from my posts) or if he just saw an opportunity to pursue his agenda (whatever that is).

I’m actually kind of flattered that he wrote it in such a way as to imply I’m a good enough player to have an agenda. Thanks for the compliment RP! /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[Vehn]

I think you're nuts.

[Louie Landale]

I've not played online, but I find it hard to believe that a $1/2 game is "tight and predictable". Mmmmmm. Anyway, play at a level that you can usually and accurately put players on hands; at least predict the winning hand accurately.

Hand [1]. Look at this situation from the LPs perspective. You didn't cap the flop and checked-and-called the turn. Sure doesn't look like its a big pair deserving a turn bet. It sure doesn't look like you hit anything on that small-card board. It sure looks like you picked up a flush draw to me (and, obviously, to the LP) It would be better if you check-raised the turn; THAT would look pretty believable.

Hand [2]. Yeah, looks like you overplayed a little on this one. You have to decide if its realistic for him to put that much action in with, say, AT?

Hand [2]. I'd be tempted to bet the turn just because I picked up the draw. Only check if he's almost sure to play an Ace the way he did.

- Louie

[ResidentParanoid]

Pufferfish replied to my original post on this topic in the News, views, gossip forum, so I figured he would understand my intent and could handle the scrutiny. I think my read on you puffer as being thoughtful and level-headed, was about right.

Homer - dude, cool off.

In my little crusade on the topic of "moving up", I'm not pushing the idea that people are doing this maliciously. But when you send under-prepared players to limits they can't handle, you are giving their -EV money to the +EV players there. Bottom line, giving someone -EV advice shouldn't be acceptable - especially when it's clearly -EV as in this case.

[ResidentParanoid]

I used the word "implicit" purposefully here. I think you are sincere, but your advice on moving up is wrong and has the net effect that my translation gives. If you read 4 or 5 posts from ElSapo, you can see that he's having trouble at 0.5/1. He's a floating fish at 1/2.

[ResidentParanoid]

Well stated Rockfish. This a thoughtful and reasonable answer to the "moving up" question. This might be the most concise statement of the problem:

For myself, I like the idea of moving up when I have the bankroll, when I am convinced I can beat the game I'm in and when I know why

But advice that makes it seem that moving up is as clear- cut as raising with AA, is just plain dangerous, at best.

[Homer]

Okay, I've cooled off now. I still think what you said was ridiculous, though. Whether intentional or not, you made the claim that pufferfish's suggestions were intended to be self-serving and not to help the poster. That's not what this board is all about. I am certain that pufferfish's comments were intended to be helpful. It isn't some scheme for him to make an extra .01 BB/hr playing 1/2 online.

-- Homer

[pufferfish]

I used the word "implicit" purposefully here. I think you are sincere, but your advice on moving up is wrong and has the net effect that my translation gives. If you read 4 or 5 posts from ElSapo, you can see that he's having trouble at 0.5/1. He's a floating fish at 1/2.

You may be right, I don’t read every post. If my advice is wrong I apologize, particularly to ElSapo. On the other hand, it is advice that I am living.

I am taking shots at limits I may not be ready for. Why, because I can afford to and I want to. I play poker for fun and for the challenge.

pf

[Girchuck]

On the other hand, if I won 300BB at 0.5-1, but I only played for a month, is it time to declare myself a winner and take a shot at 1-2, or should I put in some more time to make sure it wasn't just a hot streak?

[ResidentParanoid]

Good luck and enjoy the adventure!