can't beat the 20/40

At our local casino i can beat the 10/20 game without much of a problem. I know were I am at, play tight, know when to check raise and can get free cards. Whenever I move up to the 20/40 games I get my ass handed to me. I would have no problem with this and can admitt when i play worse than a particular field---but this field should be beatable. On most days the game is looser than the 10/20. The pots are pretty big, many over $500 and sometimes over $1000. The main difference that I can see is that the 20/40 is an aggresive game. Does it sound like I am playing scared and shouldn't play at this level until I am more comftorable with the stakes? Or am I underestemating the (loose) play of others in this game? Any input would be appreciated thank you


PS---I didn't mention variance because I have a friend --one of the top pros in our area---that makes a prety steady income from this game without huge variance

"PS---I didn't mention variance because I have a friend --one of the top pros in our area---that makes a pretty steady income from this game without huge variance"


The hardest thing about trying to pick up on the good habits of a pro is that the most profitable plays he makes are preflop folds in the early seats with hands that most players play, and his cards are obviously never seen.


What turned me on to early-seat folding was the sense of frequency we all instinctively have. Like if a guy is raising raising raising preflop, we know he can't have a legit hand everytime. This goes in reverse. Early on, when I'd watch a respected player fold fold fold, I knew he had to be folding lots of hands that I would have played. DING! I was ready to do it, without even know why or caring. I just had to figure out which hands he was folding. Well, it turns out, the answer was, pretty much all of them. Duh. Obvious. I'd pay extra close attention when he got involved from up front and it came to a showdown. Sure enough, he had the AK, or the QQ, or whatever.


It is SO much easier to play out of position when holding a top hand. Even if they know I have a big hand. Heck, that makes it even easier, not harder.


Keep raising the bar for early opening. I remember when mine was right around 10-8 suited or thereabouts. Then it gradually inched higher, literally a card at a time. With each raising of the bar, I was playing fewer hands, less fluctuation, less headache, and less chip spraying. Right now my open-from-early bar would be judged as too high by most. But hey, it beats the heck out of having the bar too low.


Tommy

If the game is more aggresssive, this means your drawing hands go down in value because there are going to be fewer players per hand and it's going to cost you more to see the turn and the river. Where I play, the 30-60 is much more aggressive than the 20-40. So I play fewer drawing hands in 30-60, especially up front (as Tommy points out. You can never go wrong listening to Mr.Angelo's advice.)


Big pots don't necessarily mean a good game. If the pots are big because it's usually 3 bets pre-flop, it's a tough game. If they're big because 4-5 players are calling one bet pre-flop and one bet on the flop, then that's another story.


Another big difference where I play between the 20-40 and the 30-60 is the turn. This is where the players get real aggressive. Tommy's pre-flop advice is crucial, but the turn really separates the men from the boys. If you find yourself call, call, calling, you're going to have a hard time, especially if you're playing too many hands from the blinds. Re-read the section on loose games in HPFAP; there is a lot of good stuff there, especially on turn play.


As far as being "more comfortable with the stakes," this should be a given. If you're at all uncomfortable with the stakes, don't play. There should be no such thing as "more" comfortable. Either you're comfotable with the stakes or you're not.


If you posted a specific example or two where you got your ass handed to you, this might prove helpful.


Focus, focus, focus. Position, position, position.


Good luck.

"The hardest thing about trying to pick up on the good habits of a pro is that the most profitable plays he makes are preflop folds in the early seats with hands that most players play, and his cards are obviously never seen."


Disagree. Solid pre-flop play is a given. In other words, it is incorporated into one's game well before they are pro. Although I may be mistakenly inter-changing the word 'expert' where you mean 'pro'. At the expert level, there are many more profitable things to be implemented on later streets.

"Disagree. Solid pre-flop play is a given. In other words, it is incorporated into one's game well before they are pro. Although I may be mistakenly inter-changing the word 'expert' where you mean 'pro'. At the expert level, there are many more profitable things to be implemented on later streets."


I agree with everything, under the premise you set. Without saying so, I was off on a thin tangent about learning preflop play from a pro, simply by watching him play.


(Somewhat understandable because that's how I learned most of what I now apply preflop. Thing is, I had already read HFAP several times, but it didn't really sink in until I saw it in action and tried to emulate it BECAUSE I had seen it in action. I suspect the duel inputs were required because I had SO many bad habits. For a virgin player, I'd expect the book to have a quicker and better effect.)


Tommy

What you may be under estimating is that some of the seemingly loose players before the flop might be playing very well after the flop. You may be use to looking at players who if they are too loose before the flop also play poorly after the flop. But as you move up in limit you begin to run into players who are actually pretty good but still play too loose on the initial round. Thus you may need to play tighter than you think.

There's a top player in Las Vegas whose name I won't mention who plays exactly as you describe. That is he is deliberately too tight in early position. But his reason for this is a little different from yours in that he likes the idea of virtually always having the advantage in the hand. That is when he is first in early he has the best hand, and when he is in late position he has the positional advantage plus the fact that his opponents think that his hand is better than it frequently is.


Tommy, your advice is very good for many players.

This is also very good advice. In those aggressive games,especially if you are inexperienced and your opponents play well on the later streets, you should probably the Group Four hands UTG.

Amen to everything said so far, with one small asterisk. Beware of predictability. Position and quality cards are the two main elements of success, but you still have to have a fear/doubt factor going for you. It will cost a few chips early in a session, but showing down one not-so-good drawing hand from early position can come back to you quite profitably if you catch AA, KK, or AK suited later on and play it to the hilt.

Tommy: Where (roughly) would you set the bar for EP playable hands? Obviously we would play: AA KK QQ AKs Almost certainly: JJ AQs But how about: AJs KQs TT And any others????

This is a dicey area, for me and I suspect others, because, if we're really honest with ourselves, the things we type about at home are not what we actually do.


(I liberally say "we" because I've seen countless players who, after making sure everyone at the table knows they are booksmart, play these types of hands up front anyway: K-10 and KJ and QJ and Q-10.)


I think putting the bar above those hands is more important than fine tuning it into the next batch. This I can honestly say that I've done.


Only in the last two years have I begun to routinely fold A-10o and KQo when first-to-open up front. And I didn't go busted during the many years when I used to play those hands, so that implies to me that these hands are the borderline situations.


10-10 and 9-9, I don't think I've ever mucked as opener. Same with AJs for that matter. Though I do fold AJo about 1/3 of the time, I'm guessing.


Back to the self-honesty thing, I think there are many wise, well-read players who open with many hands up front that they would tell others in a bad play. I base this conjecture on a sense of frequency. Even though I DO play one or two hands that a self-proclaimed ultra-tight approach would require me to muck, I still play far fewer hands up front than almost anyone around here. That's because I DO muck the 10-9 suiteds, every time, just the types of hands that add chunks of playing frequency to the typical player.


Tommy

In the last post, I assumed we were talking about open-raising, not limping. That's a style thing, something I've given great consideration to after reading Mason's posts about limping with KQ. That I don't open-limp with high-card hands, and that Mason sometimes does, suggests to me that the "package" that is "our game" is a weighty parameter indeed on the borderline up-front openers. The reason I fold the KQ is because I just can't stand to open-limp, so the choice becomes, raise or fold, and in that rigid style-induced environment, folding seems best.


Tommy

This is an excellent point and IMO even more true in tournament play.