Tell me what to do with $200....

[ElSapo]

Thanks to everyone for their suggestions so far. All of them are good, and all of them have given me a lot to think about.

I wanted to respond to some of Bob T's comments...


I think you need to figure out why it is that you are playing, and what made the game enjoyable. Then you can redirect your efforts, in a way that you find rewarding.

You're right.

I started playing at the beginning of the year, and made my first deposit back in March, I think, onto Party. After a small bump, I became a consistent winner. And while the money was always nice, it didn't seem the real -reason- I was playing. The game was new and novel, the other players not really a threat many times, and I was learning something new.

Fast forward to August-September-October, and it was a part-time job. I was basically making, playing 2/4 and 3/6, another 50% on top of what my employer pays me. I had some good weeks, some great weeks, a few amazing months. Like many posters, I started to up the hours I was playing and entertained (for myself) some unrealistic (for the moment) thoughts about playing full time.

To some extent, I burned out. You may recall a post from a month or so ago when I essentially played an absurd amount of hours and broke even, seeing lots of little ups and downs over the course of a session. But the problem wasn't cards, it was me and tilting, and being tired and frustrated at times.

I took a break, and then I took a vacation. Both times, the pattern was the same -- I'd return from a break, play well, post some wins, seem to be back on track and then fall into another slump. That happened twice.

I think my results, following running perhaps overly-good, led me to a series of unreasonable expectations. No longer was I playing because I enjoyed it; I was playing for the money, and if I wasn't winning it was frustrating.

I think that you might have found some things that seemed to work, and then tried to apply them mechanically to a lot of situations. Then the game got boring, you didn't play well, and you ran poorly.

One post stands out in my head right now -- the whole 57s debate v. two EP limpers. I think I read this post and thought about it, and tried to incorporate some of the ideas, and essentially misunderstood and misapplied some of the concepts. And then, when I would be frustrated, I think I would use ideas like this to play more hands when I should have.

A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Frankly, at the limits I was playing, with possible exception of agressive 3/6 games, weak-tight can bring home the money. Weak-tight at Party 2/4 may not be good poker, but it works. But when I tried to really branch out and become more creative, more agressive, I found myself getting smacked around.

A return to ABC poker would get me winning again, and then I'd three-bet a late-position raiser with 99 (not that this is wrong)... In some respects I began, and am, trying to force things at the wrong times.

My game may still be improving, I think sometimes, and I'm missing a piece that lets me know when to make certain plays and when to leave it alone.

The funny thing is...

...on an intellectual level, learning limit hold'em is arguably one of the most rewarding things I've done in a long time. I've been posting on 2+2 for about a year now, and when I go back and look at my first posts they're almost comical.

These days I find I have something to say, reasons behind my analysis, and an understanding that not everyone will agree with me. People think differently, and the thought process on some of the hands is fascinating in an abstract, river-card-be-damned, way.

This is all quite a bit of rambling, I know. That may have been a long way of saying these days I'm posting better than I'm playing.

I have a lot of thinking to do. I am, I think, in a big slump. It may have begun with a bad run and I am continuing it myself. It may have begun with myself and been exacerbated by a bad run. It may just be me me me.

On the idea of playing one table: I agree, but frankly, after playing 3 tables, it's like having an attention problem. It is difficult to adjust to.

On dropping in limits: I am comfortable with the play at 2/4, and I don't think it's a matter of being outclassed (though some may say I'm deluding myself).

The problem with dropping back in limits is how it coincides with that first issue I mentioned... Money. I need to return to playing poker for the sake of the game, and let the money come. But this is a hard adjustment to make.

Sorry to ramble, I know this is long. You guys should just be glad you don't get the emails my friends here in D.C. get... now those are long.

[Michael Davis]

Play $10 no limit tournaments.

Play super tight for three rounds, give or take a round or so depending on how many are left.

When it gets to the fourth round, push in on every hand you play and some you really don't want to play if you are in late position, if you are on the small blind and it has been folded to you, or if you are on the big blind and there are some weak limpers.

You will have a new, large bankroll in no time.

-Mike

[Pjer d'Brt]

This post is exactly what i wanted to post and then i saw your post.I was beating the 2-4 game at party with an ease. In 3 months (sept to nov) i made 11000$ and i was doing really well so i become over confident. I played 5 tables at once when i was at my best. In december i dont know what is happening to me since i lost 1000$ on same limits. My confidence is down and i dont find the right motivation to win again like i was used to. What do u sugest?

[Dylan Wade]

I've found that taking up Omaha very kind to my bankroll.
Play .5/1 Omaha (hi/lo obviously... hi only is a joke) for a week just to learn the game so you don't make too many mistakes.

Then go play 3/6 omaha and you'll be shocked how easy it is to beat this game at low limits.

I find it's a great game to learn because if I'm taking big losses on Hold'Em I'll go to the Omaha table and rebuild my bankroll three times as fast as if I played lower limit hold'em.

The only disadvantage to the game, I hear, is that nobody can win at the higher level games(not including pot limit). Supposedly the rake wins when everyone knows what they're doing. Fortunately, most omaha players have no concept of drawing odds.

Oh, and if you're playing on partypoker, don't even think of playing stud. The ante on the stud games there is stupid- and with loose players, it's like a slot machine.

Good luck.

[nyholdem]

"Frankly, at the limits I was playing, with possible exception of agressive 3/6 games, weak-tight can bring home the money. Weak-tight at Party 2/4 may not be good poker, but it works. But when I tried to really branch out and become more creative, more agressive, I found myself getting smacked around. "



El Sapo
I think this hits the nail on the head, it did for me. I was playing 2/4 on Party for a while and doing very well. I was basically following the advice in Jones book and playing some draws when the odds were right.

I started re-reading HEFAP and trying to be more creative in that game and it was actually hurting my win rate.

I have since moved to the 3/6 game and although in many of the games the weak/tight strategy works I have found many more opportunities to be creative.

I am wondering about the differences between those levels and the 5/10 game.

Good luck
Scott