Will this strategy work in low NL?

[snappo]

[ QUOTE ]
When you have a pocket pair or Axs fold to a pre-flop bet greater than 10% of your stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about the rest of your post but you can't call 10% of your stack with Axs

[yvesaint]

I think it would definitely give you a positive BB/100, but I think it will give you a number much lower than you'd expect. For example, after you've pushed with the nuts in one hand, your chances of getting called again at that table will be close to zero.

[mother_brain]

So i'm watching the cardinals the other day and i say what if the batter only swung at fastballs that were in an exact spot. He could swing as hard as possible and just not swing at anything else. He would have lots of homeruns right?

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know about the rest of your post but you can't call 10% of your stack with Axs

[/ QUOTE ]
Good point. So maybe fold to a bet unless you have A10s
10-10 or higher.

[ QUOTE ]
I think it would definitely give you a positive BB/100, but I think it will give you a number much lower than you'd expect. For example, after you've pushed with the nuts in one hand, your chances of getting called again at that table will be close to zero.

[/ QUOTE ]
Another good point. But the considering the amount of time untill you get another set or nut flush their will probably be new people at the table. You can always just change tables after a call and doubling up.

[clutch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know about the rest of your post but you can't call 10% of your stack with Axs

[/ QUOTE ]
Good point. So maybe fold to a bet unless you have A10s
10-10 or higher.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you change from Axs to ATs when you are only playing Axs for flush value anyways? In your scenario A2s=AKs.

[ QUOTE ]
Why would you change from Axs to ATs when you are only playing Axs for flush value anyways? In your scenario A2s=AKs.

[/ QUOTE ]
I thinking that A10s could also give you the nut straight right?

[clutch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would you change from Axs to ATs when you are only playing Axs for flush value anyways? In your scenario A2s=AKs.

[/ QUOTE ]
I thinking that A10s could also give you the nut straight right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, of course. I was still of the mindset that you were getting away from all non-flush and set hands. I understand that you're not going to just muck flopped straights. I wasn't thinking about it because you hadn't mentioned straights specifically in the OP. My bad.

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Swedebubba]

When I was starting out with a small roll this was my strategy except I wouldn't go all in unless I was very certain the other guy would call - I would play for max value. Preflop though - same strategy.

It worked for me to the tune of 10.50PTbb/100 (37,000 hands)and really built my roll up at the 25NL tables.

Axs I would only limp and never call a raise except for minraises. Basically play all pps under 10 for setvalue and never raise preflop with them. I rammed AA, KK, QQ pretty hard. AK I played very weak tight with and it worked well at the 25NL compared to my previous aggresvive play with that hand.

Deffinetly a viable strategy at the ssNL tables especially when multi tabling.

[BruinEric]

Your attempt at a beginner's strategy seems close to Ed Miller's approach from his book "Getting Started in Hold 'Em."

There are certainly differences, so I would highly recommend at the least you read this thread:

Experience w/Ed Miller's Beginner NLHE Strategy

Miller recommends playing a few different hands than you, and he also suggests buying in short. IMHO, buying in short reduces your risk from inexperienced post-flop play, and it adds a psychological ingredient that will encourage callers.

No offense, but depending on how many hours you have played, that may not be a big return.

With regards to your strategy, take a look at the first few chapters of Ed Miller's new book. In it, he describes how following a very tight strategy puts you at very high odds to make money and how in his opinion, this makes NL a flawed game. Not sure I agree, but it is interesting.