First 2 days of online play

[illunious]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I don't mind at all losing money as long as I'm improving my play. UB seems to have better players than a lot of places and so that's where I chose to play

[/ QUOTE ]

SoCalPat speaks the truth. Intentionally seeking out the toughest game your can afford is a little strange.

[Aviston]

[ QUOTE ]
You need to get over yourself. Quickly. Please tell me you're not serious about this comment.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see no where in the statement of mine you quoted where I say anything even remotely egotistical. I could be wrong, but stating that I'm willing to lose a little money to improve my overall playing doesn't sound the least bit self gratifying.

[ QUOTE ]
The goal in this game is to win money. Period, end of discussion. If you're playing for any other reason, you should just quit, or better yet, write us all a check.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed I need to get over myself. If money was all that concerned me I'd stick to the multitude of home games in my area that I have no trouble beating. My goal was to become a better overall hold 'em player, and thus far, I believe I'm accomplishing that (even though I'm losing money).

I'll try stating this again: my goal is to improve my poker playing. There was a time that I played a lot of chess. Now, as I'm sure you know, the goal of chess is to win. However, playing against people you can routinely beat won't improve your playing as much as playing against those better than you. So, I could of hung out eating those lesser than me in the game alive, or I could seek out tougher and stronger competition and improve my game by leaps and bounds. I agree this is a different situation as no money was on the line. However, I'll glady take some beatings at a lower limit table with the hopes of becoming a good enough player to 'hammer the fish' at a higher limit table in the future. You're right, poker is all about the money, but without the knowledge of how to play, one can't be expected to make it.

[detruncate]

I understand where you're coming from. It's necessary to push yourself if you're going to improve, and the thinking behind your choice of sites is fairly common. However, I think there's more to it than just seeking out good competition. You need to learn to beat the sort of players that are going to make you money. The loose players at the table make you money at all but the highest levels. They might get better as you go up, but it's still the "out to have fun and play a little cards" types that are going to finance your career... as you've probably already found out.

Before I started out playing more seriously, I read an article Mike Caro wrote on this subject. He talked about how he would go after the 'tough' games against good players when he was younger for the same reasons you mentioned, and how he now realizes what a mistake it was. He points out that he could have made much more money in games he could beat, and concludes that the education he got from the good games wasn't enough to make up for what he lost out on.

Look for the softest tables you can find at the limit you're playing. At the same time, read and post as much as you can. If you're after a tough game, sit at the weekly .5/1 2+2 table. You'll find more good players there than you'll stumble across at any of the micro tables at any site, with the added benefit of being able to talk about the hands that you've played with the people you're playing against. I've watched it quite a bit, and as soon as I can afford to drop a few bucks I'll be sitting down there for sure.

The more I play, the more I'm beginning to realize that the best skill you can learn in poker is how to make money, and I think that's all that people were trying to say.

[Aviston]

I agree with almost everything that you had to say. It's not so much that I'm after the 'tough' game, I'm just looking to learn what I can. I'm not going to hang out week after week losing money; if I don't improve my playing to a level where I can at least break even I certainly will move venues.

[SoCalPat]

[ QUOTE ]
There was a time that I played a lot of chess. Now, as I'm sure you know, the goal of chess is to win. However, playing against people you can routinely beat won't improve your playing as much as playing against those better than you. So, I could of hung out eating those lesser than me in the game alive, or I could seek out tougher and stronger competition and improve my game by leaps and bounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know exactly of what you speak. The same can be said about myself and basketball. I'd go into the inner-city to play pickup games because I knew it would make me a better player when it came to my games against pasty-white surburban high school teams.

Poker, however, is different. You come to sites like 2+2 to improve your game. I never sit down at a table with the first objective being "learning lessons." Any time spent at the tables should be done so with only one goal in mind: maximizing profit.

Pardon me for coming across as harsh. But make no mistake about it -- your original post said you would sacrifice winnings for improvement and gave the impression that your game was above earning money. It was just wrong on so many levels, I had to respond in the manner I did.

Another tidbit as to why you're initially losing money: You played that suited AT as weak-tight as it could be played, and your mindset ("I'm flopping two pair or a flush draw, or I'm outta here) is weak-tight. For micros, anyway.

That might be the proper mindset at a 30/60 game. Not at micros. You're killing yourself and your profits if you're unable to distinguish between the two and play accordingly. ATs, given the pure junk people will play at micros, is a monster. You got the flop you wanted. Play it accordingly.

Good luck.

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]
Figure it this way, suppose he has, I dunno, A-8. If you three bet the flop and he calls and you lead the turn, there's some chance he'll pack it in. But by just calling and then check calling the rest of the way now you've given him the opportunity to bet at you on every street.

[/ QUOTE ]

And hit his trips on the river!!! Life is grand. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[chief444]

I usually raise ATs pf if no one ahead of me has raised. ATo is marginal, ATs is much better. Also, ATs is probably a much better limit hand than NL hand, at least against decent NL players.

Also, many people assume that AT, AJ type hands are not that strong just because if you flop an Ace you may be outkicked. This is true but not really that common at all, especially with no pf raise. A bigger issue with these hands is that you have less of a chance to flop top pair. You can catch a T or J and still have to worry about overcards. But in general folding a pair of aces just because you're worried that the T kicker may not be good is a bad idea.

A T-high flop is very good for you. You flopped TPTK and need to be more aggressive with it. Either 3-bet the flop and lead the turn or at the very least call the flop and lead the turn. I would prefer the former, especially since you limped pf.

[Aviston]

Agreed, I did play that hand way too passively which is why I posted it here. If I had thought I played the hand perfectly, I wouldn't have posted it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. Thanks for the advice.

[ZootMurph]

As has been said... 3 bet the flop, then bet out on the turn. If you are raised again, then call and check call the river. Very doubtful someone has a 97, so you should be ahead. On the turn, your bet after showing strength will tell you if the opponent has the 7 or not because he should raise if he has a 7. You still should call down even if you are raised because some people at the lower limits will bluff at boards like this where a single card is needed to win.

As for the rest of this thread... I admire your willingness to learn by losing, but I don't consider that a viable plan of action. The best things you can do to improve your game are: a) Read here often... a LOT of good advice and good people are here. b) Read books, as you already are doing. I recommend Lee Jones' Winning Low Limit Hold 'em, Phil Helmuth's Play Poker Like the Pros, and Sklansky's Hold Em Poker. Once you have mastered some of the things in those books, you can move on to Sklansky's Hold Em Poker for Advanced Players. c) Move up in limits by making money off softer games. Getting into the game and getting a better feel against softer games will help you a lot more in the long run than getting kicked by better players. The reason is you will more easily find the holes in your game against weaker players, than you will against stronger players. It doesn't hurt that your chances are better to continue to learn with other people's money [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Figure it this way, suppose he has, I dunno, A-8. If you three bet the flop and he calls and you lead the turn, there's some chance he'll pack it in. But by just calling and then check calling the rest of the way now you've given him the opportunity to bet at you on every street.

[/ QUOTE ]

And hit his trips on the river!!! Life is grand. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep...but of all the things an oppenent can do that I don't like, betting into me when he has two outs, ain't one of em.

--Zetack