![]() |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
we gotta account for increased rake as well. blake [/ QUOTE ] This is true, the rake is huge at low stakes. Imagine paying 5% up to $300 at 25-50. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] we gotta account for increased rake as well. blake [/ QUOTE ] This is true, the rake is huge at low stakes. Imagine paying 5% up to $300 at 25-50. [/ QUOTE ] Don't forget all the bonus money for deposits, etc which offset this online. It is an insignificant % of a high stakes players profit, if they even bother with it, but makes a difference in profit at low stakes. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
just to answer op earlier question imo 20k hands is a long time to be consistently losing and i would look for another explanation than variance. this dosent rule out that variance is the aswer but id be assuming otherwise.
matty |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I would offer 2:1, but you would have to bet me at least 20K or the global situation is not worth it to me.
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
I would offer 2:1 [/ QUOTE ] Matt, did you ever played 100 or 200NL (I mean online) ? I think something like 5-1 would be more fair... Best wishes |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'm not sure, but I think BASIC strategy is to nut peddle (TPTK) and value bet at low stakes. [/ QUOTE ] By itself, that might work, but it works a lot better if you identify the set miners and don't pay them off, but do call against people who bluff frequently. [/ QUOTE ] being an SSNLer i can tell you that's hard to do when you have AA and the set miners are low stacked. 70-80% of the players buy in short, and i'm not laying AA down post flop to someone that has 20$ left behind in an 8-10$ pot... |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
being an SSNLer i can tell you that's hard to do when you have AA and the set miners are low stacked. 70-80% of the players buy in short, and i'm not laying AA down post flop to someone that has 20$ left behind in an 8-10$ pot... [/ QUOTE ] I found same when, for whatever reason, playing SSNL. I simply CANNOT make tough laydowns when it's only going to cost me like $20 bucks to see if I am, in fact, beaten. I think that can be a very serious leak for someone who has moved down from higher stakes to lower. Overaggressiveness can be another big one. Trying to "outplay" your opponents by representing hands that they simply do not have the ability to understand - or the discipline to lay down their TPNK. The mindset usually goes like this "Oh, [censored], the flush just got there... but I have top pair... but there's the flush... but I have top pair... I have top pair... top pair... top pair... I CALL!" gl, Kirk |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
most of us got to playing higher stakes by beating lower games. you acquire different skills moving up though. I played bigger, much more aggressive (and better) live games before I played alot online and really had to make some adjustments when I started playing at party. minraises were like a foreign language to me. it was frustrating at first because I was used to people playing back at me with lots of hands and in general having to make decisions in big pots with wide ranges of hands. I was not used to people calling me down with two pair and all the other nonsense that goes on.
basically when I started playing online I was the easiest person to trap on the planet, and would often have "twilight zone" moments where I was betting the pot on every street w/tptk for value and my opponent folds bottom set on the river and shows it. strange, but true. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
but I have top pair... I have top pair... top pair... top pair... I CALL!" [/ QUOTE ] Lol. How true... |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
basically when I started playing online I was the easiest person to trap on the planet, and would often have "twilight zone" moments where I was betting the pot on every street w/tptk for value and my opponent folds bottom set on the river and shows it. strange, but true. [/ QUOTE ] I call those a "glitch in the matrix". Also applicable when a newbie to 2-7 raises the river for value with a straight six, and you correctly read him for strength and fold. |
![]() |
|
|