Why some struggle with the jump from Micro to SS games

[Dov]

Not only cheaply, but with enough callers behind you.

Good point Joe.

Dov

[6471849653]

It's mainly an IQ question; I never played games higher than 1-2, that being about the level my IQ can beat.

[Zetack]

Good points. Some more thoughts:

Patience is the supreme poker virtue. Most of us here aren't as patient as we think we are.

Discipline: most of us arent' as disciplined as we think we are.

Also, my feeling from reading the boards is that micro players tend to underestimate the value of position and tend to pay too little attention to game texture.

These factors become weightier as the games get harder.

--Zetack

[bernie]

Killer post, man.

[ QUOTE ]
1. Inflated view of one's bankroll through bonuses:

For those starting at the micro level, bonuses are an easy way to build up the bankroll when starting out. Personally, my first $500 was really built through some casino whoring, so I could take advantage of the full amount of bonuses that poker sites had to offer. But because of that, I think bonuses have allowed me to play at a higher stake and move up levels before knowing if I was really "beating" them or not. Now that I'm hitting $2/$4, poor play results in losses outside of what a bonus would cover at the $1/2 and $.50/$1 level.

In essence, because I have the requisite 300 BB to move up a level, I think I might have a slightly inflated view of my actual poker ability - having the BR doesn't mean you're ready to move up yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting point that i didn't really think about. Especially since i don't bonus whore. You can actually draw a parallel with having a great run of cards when first starting. A point you covered later in your post.

I think the underlying tone is to be brutally honest with yourself about your game. This is usually much tougher than it looks. You really have to put the ego to the side and admit your faults/holes in your game. Then you can assess them and their role in your game. (It's also good when looking for leaks to find the root cause of them. This helps to avoid them later on. Slavic and me found one that had developed in my game when i was on a horrendous run and we rooted it out. It helps it stick in your mind much more in doing this, imo)

At times after winning a hand, you should be able to go back rather quickly and see how you could've played a little better regardless of the fact you won the pot. Even so much as you might see where you really got lucky whether from a misread or whatever rather than just because you're a 'great' player. You might be, but it's not a default evaluation one should have of themselves when analyzing themselves.

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe this is common sense for many,

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's more a developed common sense. With all the stuff to learn, it's very easy to overlook these things. Especially if you're on a great run. Making money can be blinding. Why else do many players praise a book that makes them money instantly after reading it, regardless of how good/bad the book is, (because of a sudden good run of cards, let's say) then abandon it when the downswing comes? After you've been through it a couple/few times, you either know better and learn or you fall by the wayside.

This is one reason why i say the 'gambling concepts' at the front of SSHE is, imo, the most important part of the book. But will likely be the least reread. It talks about the bad swings a bit and how you play through them. It's not as sexy as the postflop part, but it's very key to winning. Otherwise, the postflop play part is just another postflop book on someone's shelf untiil the next flavor comes along. To me, this section stands out among books like it. Ed did a great job in explaining it.

b

[helpmeout]

1. Failing to adapt.

2. Limited study, SSHE isnt the be all and end all of Micros and Small Stakes. You wont find everything on 2+2 either most of the advice is biased towards SSHE. There is nothing wrong with that but you definately need opposing views on different situations.

3. Multitabling instead of concentrating on the table/opponents. It suprises me how many people want to 4 table at the micro/small stakes. You should be trying to analyze how you play each hand, if you 4 table it is much harder to recognise tilt because you are constantly playing hands.

4. Focusing on playing so many hands instead of improving their game. I moved up from $2/$4 after 2k hands, I felt there was nothing further for me to learn in those limits. I have to adapt to changing poker environments not play the same games for months.

If I feel the game is too tough for me then I'll move down, some of you guys seem to have a 10 year planner or something.

Just my 2cents.