Help w/ a live NL game

[WalleyeJason]

In my local B&M casino they just started to spread a live NL $100 buyin with $2-$4 blinds. Ya, the buy in
is 25x the BB.

So, I havent sat in the game yet, Just watched the action and the players. Seems to be loose-aggresive, and at
some time super fishy.

I'm having a hard time sitting down in this game cause the blinds are so huge compared to the max buy-in.
I have witnessed alot of pre-flop raising like 5-6x the BB.

What approch does one need for a game like this?

[sweetzer]

I'm a little confused with your post. Is the $100 a maximum buy-in as you have writen, or is it the minimum buy-in? I would think it's a minimum buy-in for a NL game of $2-4 blinds.

[sweetzer]

whops, written not writen. That's embarrassing.

[WalleyeJason]

No, its a $100 MAX buy in.

It's very hard to buy in for $100 and play 2-4 blinds.

Thats why I havent decided to sit down yet.

[muzungu]

Well, let's see...
Large blinds in relation to the max buy-in means you have to invest a greater % of your stack to see a flop. This cuts down on the implied odds of flopping big with your suited connectors and baby pairs. Not sure on the exact numbers here- Brunson says you shouldn't be putting more than 5% of your stack in on the flop with the suited connectors- perhaps with small pairs a little bit more, but in this situation you obviously couldn't call a raise with such hands. Perhaps limping in multi-way pots would work, but if the action is how you're describing that doesn't seem likely either. This leaves the premium pairs and biggest unpaired cards as the hands to play. Not sure how much action these pre-flop raises get, but it seems like you'd probably get heads up a lot, with all of the action happening on preflop and on the flop. (Again, you want the big cards and pairs, which play well HU) And, if it is super-fishy L/A, the hands you make a move with might not have to be super-good: if lots of people are pushing around chips with Ax your AQ might be able to dominate a lot of hands and pick up some pots. This would of course vary by the player, but since you're going to be waiting a lot you should have time to figure out who to tangle with...

Seems like about it- guess there's also the mental factor of being able to deal with the quick $ swings that this game would provide, or the stretches of cold cards and being eaten up by those big blinds.

Umm... and of course there's the caveat that I have played a grand total of 0 hours of B&M NL... but it all seems right in theory. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Actually, it sounds a lot like Party NL to me.

Cheers,
Dan

[Wheezl]

Jason, Im in Seattle and im 99% you are referring to the NL game up at Tulalip. To me the biggest problem with the structure and style of play isnt the fact that the blinds are so big compared to the ante, it is the fact that you can not replenish your initial 100$ stack. For those of you reading who arent clear on the structure, the way the game is set up is that you can only buy in for $100, and you can only rebuy once you are under some ridiculous amount (I think 10$). So while you are waiting to catch the premium hands that are good to go all in with you are getting eaten up by the blinds in a painful way. Then you catch QQ, KK, AA only to find that if you are lucky you can double up on your 30$ stack that is now in front of you. One positive aspect to the game I was in is that there were a few solid players who had built up stacks and could afford to splash around and bully a bit, and I think they were using their stack sizes in a smart way. I simply avoided those guys and actually doubled through a coulple of smallish desperate stacks with hands like AQo and AJo in an attempt to pick up the blinds and getting called by A4o and the like. This occurred 2-3 times and I had built up my stack to about 250$ before I dumped it all to one of the solid players when i slowplayed QQ and flopped top set. Long story short I played the hand terribly and dumped my winnings and my initial 100$ buy in to a made straight on the turn. All I know is that starting out is difficult, but I think that if we could figure out the most effective strategy to sit down and get to about 2-300$ we could then use our stack size to our advantage against all the newcomers who are in the same difficult situation. I think the structure will encourage the smaller stacks who are being ground down to often times take stabs at all in with weak aces, suited connectors, and the Q-10, K,J variety of hands. Isolating these guys with hands like A,Q, A,J (and of course your premiums) seemed to work ok for me.

[WalleyeJason]

Wheezl,

Indeed I am talking about he Tulalip Live NL game. I have talked with the managment abouth the blind structures and they said this is how NL is played. I think that they are a little inexpericed when it comes to running a big time poker room.

I refuse to play the tournaments there anymore. The blind structure makes it impossble to wait for the good cards to come. The NL tournament is basicly an All-In game. I played in the first few NL tournaments there and I seen 6 people go all in on the 4th hand of the tournament.

Allthouh the live action games can sometimes be so good its hard to get up, other times the suckouts pound you until you cant take it and tilt.(AA beat by 57off)

Anyway, Thanks for your help.

WJ

[Wheezl]

Yeah if they would just make the min buyin 100$ and even have a max buyin of say $300 I would be much more comfortable playing in that game.

[rodeoclown]

I actually play a somewhat similar game (theoretically at least) here on campus. We play $20 MAX NL HE with .25/.50 blinds, and the play is very loose aggressive, with notable exceptions. Maniacs abound, and it is not unusual to see 4 - 6 BB raises called by 4 or more players. Having taken some time off from school, I returned and went on a terrible streak. Not only was I not catching cards, I started playing horribly even when I did hit. It was as though I couldn't lose money fast enough. However, in my quest to return to previous form, I've discovered some things about this type of game.

1) It's very important to play uber-tight to the raises from the maniacs. Since they are raising all the time, why bother playing AQo when you can wait for better? Usually if I decide I have a hand strong enough to play to their raise (AA, KK, AKs, etc), I answer with a re-raise of at least 10 BB, putting them to a push or fold decision.

2) As long as the game is just as wild on the flop (as is the case with our game), it is definitely worth playing "prospect" hands, such as suited connectors down to 45 and low pocket pairs, as long as you can get in on a limp.

3) I have almost completely stopped raising preflop. My reasoning is as follows: at least a quarter of the time, I can get someone all in by the river if I want to (this is partly due to my established image, so % adjustment may be necessary). As a result, I don't need to raise the pot preflop to ensure a payoff if my monster holds up or improves. Also, I'm relatively certain I am NOT going to win the pot preflop, so there's no EV unless my hand holds up. Finally, the best opportunities to steal in these types of games come later, not earlier. If the pot gets built too early, it makes it more expensive to steal, and more likely you'll get called.

Realize that, though it's painful to "limp" for 4% of your stack, the first pot you win will likely represent almost a fifth of your buyin, so you really only need to win 4 or 5 pots to have a playable stack.

N.B. The best player in our game has suggested that it is simple to beat if you're willing to sit there and be a rock. I tend to agree, as loose aggressive players don't seem to mind paying off rocks, since they get some added pleasure when they manage to bad beat them. Food for thought.