Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

That was inspiring!

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

tough to tell from just this info if you're a fish, you did play the last two hands like one though. try posting some pokertracker stats if you have them, if not get pokertracker !

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

if you are willing to push yiour whole stack in with aa unimproved postflop, then you better raise it preflop. i believe that paradise stacks are deeper, so you need to adjust accordingly. if you like to play low stakes nl, i would try out party nl25. the stacks are small enough that you don't need to be an expert nl player to do well. also, when trying to clear bonuses on party, the nl25 games are awesome. you can just play super-tight, play your monsters strong and do very well. plus, most pots are raked because of the low threshold where raking starts in nl.

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

$350 is way way too small of a bankroll to play $50NL. $25NL would even be pushing it if the money means something to you and you can't redopsit. And you played the last 2 hands pretty badly. Post in SSNL and they'll help with the hands.

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

[ QUOTE ]
Try again, but clear these signup bonuses on the lowest limit ring tables you can. Instead of trying to win lots of money through your play, instead try not to lose any money and be satisfied with finishing up the whole bonus amount.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is wisdom. My poker playing needs a lot of work, but this strategy exactly is putting $$ into my bankroll. I'm playing overall just a little better than break-even, but my $100 that I started with in late January is now at $600 and still climbing. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can't say it's untrue. If one single person has ever had a huge swing at NL that makes it true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Sponger is right, the variance in NL is less than the variance in limit.

Lawrence

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can't say it's untrue. If one single person has ever had a huge swing at NL that makes it true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Sponger is right, the variance in NL is less than the variance in limit.

Lawrence

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain this then :

If I play on $1-2 limit, the max I can lose on that hand is $24 and personally, I think you have to be mildly retarded to cap each round and lose. On a $1-2 NL table, I can lose my max buyin of $50 on 1 hand. I can lose even more than that if I win more than my max buyin.

So tell me, how exactly are the swings in NL less than those in limit?

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

I am always amazed by the people who say NL swings aren't as bad or worse than LHE swings. I think it's some sort of inherent need for LHE players to prove they're not p_ssies, and that LHE is just as dangerous, rather than it being a logical line of reasoning. In limit you can't lose everything you have on the table in one hand. (Unless you're only playing with 12 BBs)... and as you put it... "I think you have to be mildly retarded to cap each round and lose."

It's like saying that swings at 100-200 LHE aren't as bad as the swings at 1-2 LHE. The place you can lose the most money the fastest is the place where you're going to see the biggest swings.

Not comparatively to your BR, obviously.

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

if u r good on nl, u can easily win 2-3 buy-in per day in a 5 hrs/day. And only lost 1-2 buy-in when u have a bad day, usually it happen 1 time in 5 days, o it can say the variance is smaller

Re: So, Am I a fish??
 

I'm assuming english isn't your first language, so we won't go there. But saying "if you're good" is a moot point. If you're good at limit you'll win too. Except in limit you will win slower (and lose slower), and in NL you can win faster (and lose faster).