15/30 questions

[BigEndian]

David, you already have the bankroll for 15-30. I wouldn't bother with stopping at the limits in between. Just set yourself up for the expectations of winning and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, losing more than you are used to.

Move to the 15-30, get adjusted, and don't turn into a LAG as a lot of people taking their first steps into 15-30 land are wont to do.

You will see that a lot more hands do not go to showdown, you will be 3-bet with AQo very often and mid-pairs down to 77 routinely. You will be put in more positions where putting in a value raise isn't truely as valuable as keeping your opponent around for more bets (the first time you wait to raise your overpair on the turn and get a fold, you will see this).

You will also get to know the biggest fish on a first-name basis and learn to seek them out and never be bothered when they put beats on you (and privately cheer them on when they are getting short-stacked and are in a hand against another player).

If you take a big hit financially, drop down to the 10-20. You'll be amazed how soft it will feel and you will crush it and be back at the 15-30 in no time.

- Jim

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
If you take a big hit financially, drop down to the 10-20. You'll be amazed how soft it will feel and you will crush it and be back at the 15-30 in no time.


[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sure this question has been answered about a zillion times, but is there a big differance between 10/20 and 15/30?

[obsidian]

I've only played about 13k hands at 15/30 but I don't think so. Other than the fact that it is full ring and I played 10/20 6-max.

[BigEndian]

The aggression level is generally less at 10-20 from my experience, which makes decisions easier and less costly.

- Jim

[SGS]

I really disagree with most of what you said. I think when going up in limits it is VERY important to take it in stages. Moving up from 2/4 to 15/30 with no stops in between just because you are rolled for the 15/30 is a bad idea.

When you move up in a limit you pick up different skills you didn't need to have to beat the limit before. Just skipping all these limits will cause you to miss some skills you will probably need to beat the 15/30.

Also I highly recommend the OP play the 6-max 5/10 and 10/20 games. This is because in those games a lot more pots are blind(s) vs opener (compared to 3/6 and 2/4) putting you in a lot more marginal situations as is the case for the 15/30. I would also like to add that I think the OP quest is possible though kinda of diffucult. You would have to run well and not have a extended break even stretch. Good luck.

SGS

[BigEndian]

I understand what you are saying. I'm in the move up as fast as your roll will carry you camp though.

Will he have to move down after taking a few lumps? Very possibly, maybe likely.

Will he learn his ass off and challenge himself? Obsolutely if he approches the game with the right mind-set.

It's not like he just crossed the $9k threshold, he has more than enough roll to play the game. I hope that I'm in the 30/60 game before my roll hits $36k.

If his financial situation depends on his poker earn, then I completely agree with you though. I should have said that to begin with.

- Jim

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
This is because in those games a lot more pots are blind(s) vs opener (compared to 3/6 and 2/4)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to address this issue.

In s/s 2, harman talks about playing hands like t8, jt, t9, 86, etc. from the blind.

She doesn't mention if they're suited, so I'm assuming that they're not, and that she defends blinds very liberally.

Does this seem to make sense? (I'm not asking if it's correct play, I'm just asking if I have to add "suited" to every hand she's talking about, when I'm trying to understand what her opinion is on correct play).

[obsidian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is because in those games a lot more pots are blind(s) vs opener (compared to 3/6 and 2/4)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to address this issue.

In s/s 2, harman talks about playing hands like t8, jt, t9, 86, etc. from the blind.

She doesn't mention if they're suited, so I'm assuming that they're not, and that she defends blinds very liberally.

Does this seem to make sense? (I'm not asking if it's correct play, I'm just asking if I have to add "suited" to every hand she's talking about, when I'm trying to understand what her opinion is on correct play).

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I believe she means unsuited. Defending with hands like that is good because they are less likely to be dominated than a hand like say K6 and are easy to let go from after the flop.

[AviD]

[ QUOTE ]
You will also get to know the biggest fish on a first-name basis and learn to seek them out and never be bothered when they put beats on you (and privately cheer them on when they are getting short-stacked and are in a hand against another player).


[/ QUOTE ]

Haha, I do this all the time!