Where to go next? Trying to improve. (NC)

[fizzleboink]

So I've been playing poker for about 4 months now. I basically spent the summer studying poker like crazy. I've read ~10 books, gotten some tutoring, and lurked many of the 2+2 forums for some time with an occasional post, as well as idling #sstakes. One thing I'm lacking is a local friend who is into poker as much as I am that I can discuss theory with, but oh well.

Now since I'm busy with school I've slowed down the studying considerably and have just spent a couple hours a day playing. I've worked up to 12 tabling (now 10 because of Party) 2/4 and have done well I think. Here are some stats:





Almost all of it falls within CallMeIshmael's stats post.

Some comments about my own stats:

-I am about 2% tighter than I used to be since I started 10-12 tabling, so I am probably missing a bit of value there, but I do like the low standard deviation/100 (it's 14.6)

-I am quite aggressive postflop. But I find it is due to most people being very passive so I usually have to do the betting.

-My button winnings are a little low, which is weird. It could just be not enough hands, or maybe I play certain hands wrong from that spot.

-I think my play is rather straightforward, but it seems to be working.

Any comments or suggestions about my stats would be appreciated, but that isn't my main concern. I posted my stats so that people could get a feel for where my game is at right now, so that I can hopefully get some good answers to my current problem.

I want to move up. Mainly to make more money faster, but also to become a better player.

I've datamined 3/6 and I've noticed it's considerably tighter (avg. vpip in 2/4 is 29% while it is ~23% in 3/6). I'm not sure how to relate that into a reduced edge for myself, but it seems like a big difference.

Could I make more $ at 3/6 in the long run? Yes the stakes are 50% greater, but if I can only beat it for 1 BB/100 it won't be worth it compared to how I'm doing at 2/4 right now. I'm still going to have to be playing in the neighborhood of 10 tables at a time to be able to make more $ playing a slightly higher limit. I know adjustments to my game are going to have to be made, and that I will become a better player because of it. But it's more about the money for me. I don't have the skill or the bankroll to make too big of a jump to avoid an "unprofitable" game (if that actually exists on party or not).

I've heard 3/6 isn't profitable, and that 5/10 sucks. Does anyone have statistical evidence to the contrary that they would like to share with me? How do you think I would do?

I hear that the 6-max games are where it's at right now for being good games EV wise. I'd do it but the increased variance would suck and I wouldn't be able to multi-table nearly as much. Therefore my $/hr could theoretically end up being less than it is now, with greater instability.

So I'm sort of stuck right now. Leaving the comfort of my game is something I want to eventually do but I don't want to make the wrong move.

[Borodog]

What he said.

I am in the exact same boat. I took the summer off from playing online, took out a couple thousand to pay bills, not to mention the grand my wife lost playing $5+$1 SNGs off my accounts ("Sure honey, play as many as you want . . ."). After returning I played $2-$4 to rehab my bankrolls, and then moved back to my old stomping ground, 8-table $3-$6.

I could NOT have been more shocked at the state of full ring $3-$6 on Party and its skins. I really feel like the advent of the 6-maxes has killed my days of 8 tabling low limit. Most of the fishy players prefer 6-max, where they feel like they can play more hands like they want to (even though they go broke faster). While I understand theoretically that a good 6-max table is more profitable per hour than a good full ring, I personally would have to significantly reduce the number of tables I play to handle the faster orbits, increased number of hands, and drastic increase in the frequency of marginal situations that require full attention.

My interim plan is to move completely to $5-$10 in the short term, but even that seems like a poor way to go. After datamining 8-10 tables of $5-$10 all day long today on Party, I can definitely say, it sucks. There's almost never an open seat at a full ring $5-$10. The most I got going was 2 tables, and those games only stayed good for an hour or so.

My coach thinks that learning 6-max is the way to go because it should vastly improve my game anyway. But it seems like I'm going to have to forgo the earn to do it.

I too am kind of . . . stuck.

[Harv72b]

If it's all about the money, stay at 2/4.

Seriously...you know that the game is very beatable, and your opponents are bad enough that you can just autopilot 10 tables without having to worry too much about marginal situations. There are quite a few posters on this forum who full-time Party 2/4 & make good money doing it.

But....whoever told you that Party 3/6 isn't profitable doesn't know what they're talking about. Admittedly, I only 3-table so I can do better with table selection/playing marginal hands, but I have never had a problem beating Party 3/6 full. It's gotten tighter since they opened up the 3/6 6max, true, but it's still easily beatable for a good WR.

I don't really have enough hands at 5/10 to say anything more than that, so far at least, it's been beatable too (today being the exception--yuck!).

My own goals with poker are similar to yours--I like the money. I also enjoy trying to grow my skills, but that's because one day I'd like to be able to make a living at poker without having to 10-table for 40 hours/week. The easiest way to do that is to keep building up my skill and eventually work my way up to high limit games, where I can (theoretically, at least) make very good money while only "having" to play 10-15 hours/week, and even then only 1- or 2-tabling.

BTW, your stats do look very good so far...a litle on the weak/tight side, but that's to be expected while playing that many tables (I can't even comprehend 12-tabling). And I think that your relatively poor WR on the Button is probably linked to not playing enough hands there. But again, that's likely a result of the multitabling.

[fizzleboink]

"Weak" in what way? Surely you don't mean my aggression. I do know that my went to showdown % is a little low and that is something I've been trying to improve in my game. I still sometimes fold the occasional winner because somebody went way out of line in a multi-way pot on the big streets.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
"Weak" in what way? Surely you don't mean my aggression. I do know that my went to showdown % is a little low and that is something I've been trying to improve in my game. I still sometimes fold the occasional winner because somebody went way out of line in a multi-way pot on the big streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's basically what I meant--the low VPIP, the slightly low PFR, and the low WtSD numbers. Like I said, I think this is just a byproduct of playing so many tables; you don't have the time to sit there and carefully calculate your odds on every marginal situation, so you're obviously going to fold more often than someone just playing 1 or 2 tables (to say nothing of the unavoidable misclicks).

Your postflop aggression looks very good, as do most of your numbers. And you obviously can't argue about the results so far. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Rootabager]

I'm doing the exact same thing as you right now. Whenever I take shots at higher limits I only 4 table especially 6 max. I'm in the same dilemma, 2-4 is so easy it makes playin alot of tables so mindless. I dont really have any advice on higher limit full becuase i always play 3-6 or 5-10 6 max. They didnt seem that tough to me.

[Stealthy]

This may be an unworkable plan if you consider the games to be too different but why do you need to 'jump' your entire playing time to a higher level?

What I mean by this is that if you are comfortable 10 tabling at $2 $4 then why not 7 table the $2 $4 and 3 table at $3 $6. You can focus 90% of your attention on the bigger games whilst only viewing the $2 $4 when a decision needs to be made. It may be that with 10 tables you are ALWAYS making decisions allowing no time to concentrate anywhere, if this is the case then you can drop the numbers of the $2 $4 games a little until you do have time.

You could even view it as the $2 $4 games subing the $3 $6 game whilst you learn.

[fizzleboink]

[ QUOTE ]
This may be an unworkable plan if you consider the games to be too different but why do you need to 'jump' your entire playing time to a higher level?

What I mean by this is that if you are comfortable 10 tabling at $2 $4 then why not 7 table the $2 $4 and 3 table at $3 $6. You can focus 90% of your attention on the bigger games whilst only viewing the $2 $4 when a decision needs to be made. It may be that with 10 tables you are ALWAYS making decisions allowing no time to concentrate anywhere, if this is the case then you can drop the numbers of the $2 $4 games a little until you do have time.

You could even view it as the $2 $4 games subing the $3 $6 game whilst you learn.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is something I've considered doing. The thing is I am not sure how much actual concentration I could put into those higher tables. I am barely able to check if I won certain big pots because other tables are waiting for me. It's actually kind of nice that way because I have become less results oriented. I'll actually open up PT afterwards and be surprised that I had a downswing as I didn't realize it while I was playing.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
This is something I've considered doing. The thing is I am not sure how much actual concentration I could put into those higher tables. I am barely able to check if I won certain big pots because other tables are waiting for me.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm probably not the most qualified person to say this since I only 4-table, but I think playing 10-12 tables and getting better at poker are not really mutually compatible goals.

[fizzleboink]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm probably not the most qualified person to say this since I only 4-table, but I think playing 10-12 tables and getting better at poker are not really mutually compatible goals.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're probably right.

Thanks a lot for the help guys.