Moving up when starting out

[RockPile]

dude i started out playing .05/.10 with $20 about a year ago and am now finally up to 1/2.. yes i suck but it is possible, it just can take a long time

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're taken the right steps in realizing that you need to first beat the nano's before moving onto the micros.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

IMHO apart from learning the mechanics of the game, and learning to read the board (i.e spotting straights etc.) there is no financial purpose to nano-limits.
Flip burgers to bankroll yourself if you need more cash, it will take less time.

[/ QUOTE ]


Although I've never played nano-limits, I suspect the caliber of play is somewhere on the continuum between Play Money and micro-limits.

Therefore it's a useful stepping stone (for some) on the road to improvement. If a player can't beat the nano-limits, then he/she will most likely lose at micro-limits.


Adam

[hizo1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're taken the right steps in realizing that you need to first beat the nano's before moving onto the micros.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

IMHO apart from learning the mechanics of the game, and learning to read the board (i.e spotting straights etc.) there is no financial purpose to nano-limits.
Flip burgers to bankroll yourself if you need more cash, it will take less time.

[/ QUOTE ]


Although I've never played nano-limits, I suspect the caliber of play is somewhere on the continuum between Play Money and micro-limits.

Therefore it's a useful stepping stone (for some) on the road to improvement. If a player can't beat the nano-limits, then he/she will most likely lose at micro-limits.


Adam

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never played nanos either, and I agree to a certain extent that the learning curve is steeper in the micro limits; ergo you learn much quicker. However I disagree that there's nothing to learn at the nano tables. Not everyone can afford or wants to drop 200 on a game that they are just learning. It's still poker and the same rules and basic concepts apply.

To exaggerate my point slightly, let's say OP had a high paying salary (like a cardiologist or something) that enabled him to make 10x the amount of the average north american. Should he therefore buy in initially for 10x the typical buy in and jump straight into a game with 10x the typical initial limit, ie. should he jump straight into 2-4 or 3/6? He would certainly spend a lot of money learning the game and would arguably learn quicker and at a more advanced level than your typical buy in. Say his eventual goal is to play 10/20. If we follow your argument then he should go back to flipping burgers/fixing broken hearts until he has the bankroll to play 10/20 or whatever. However it would be much cheaper and probably less psychologically straining to begin at a lower level, like .25/.5 or .5/1, in order to eventually move up gradually all the while learning and building confidence whilst simultaneously winning against weaker players.

It's a stretch, I know, but my point is that that there is some value at playing at nano-limits before you move up to micros if it makes YOU more comfortable.

hizo

[hizo1]

nice. i'd wager that, given the number of posts you have, you have a considerably better foundation going into 1/2 than the average 2+2er. good luck. (this is dependent on not having posted too much under the computertechnicalhelp and gossip forums)