Advice for someone willing to put in the time/money

[homebrewer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2/4 full is the easiest to beat of the small stakes imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Got to agree with this - I've played 0.5/1 to 5/10 over the last few months and most of this was spent in 2/4. I'm well ahead at every level (except 0.5/1 lol) but 2/4was far fishier than 1/2 and 0.5/1. Not exactly sure why but my guess is that this is the sweet spot for "gamblers" and many of the super tight bonus whores probably focus on 1/2 or .5/1

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm new to the small-stakes forum. So, take my advice with a grain of salt. But, I agree with all of the above. It was very surprised that I could easily find fishy no-fold-em hold-em at 2/4. Much like I found at .25/.50 and .50/1. But, very different from some 1/2 full-ring games - which were VERY tight.

Like you. I felt that I was learning position, stealing, blind play, etc. However, the key learning experience started happening when I started on .5/1 6-max and 1/2 6-max. Now, the full-ring game seems "easier." I'm not saying I'm crushing 1/2 6-max or 2/4, but the hands played at 6-max have and continue to help my full-ring games at 2/4. In short-handed play, I learned many things that I could have and should have learned earlier, but for some reason position, playing out of the blinds, stealing, etc. just clicked more after 10K and counting hands at 6-max.

While I agree that 2/4 games are profitable and soft, I'm not sure if they provide the OP with the learning experience he seems to be seeking. In fact, I think that those no-fold-em types who feel comfortable playing 2/4 because that's what they play in B&M casinos could get creamed in the 1/2 full-ring or even 1/2 6-max games.

Haven't been playing 2/4 - decided to start with 1/2. Been focusing more on reading and studying than playing, although, the obvious goal is to make money AND get better at poker. Meaning, I'd clearly like to move up in limits and make some more serious money.

I have played 300 hands and am up the expected amount, but realize this is statistically insignificant. I'll wait until 10K hands have been played before posting any updates/results.

The advice I received here has been really helpful. I read on the forum about 1-2 hours a day (of not more). I've realized - just in the short time from my "start over" - that tilt might have been a big problem for me. Playing shorter defined 100-200 hand sessions and knowing that the hands were going to be forever saved in PT helped me play more cautiously preflop.

I'm still struggling with the right calldown percentage, but feel like I'm making mostly solid decisions. The early PT numbers seem in line with what should be expected from a winning player.

Anyway, thanks again to everyone for the comments and I'll keep people posted.

[JohnnyHumongous]

He's not an automaton, he's a human being. He's not going to be interested in playing .02/.04 if he's recently been playing 20/40. I'd be surprised if he ever even plays 2/4.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

2c/4c is way easier than 2/4

[habsfanca11]

Disagree. Both 1/2 and 2/4 are beatable (soft is realtive to skill level/ability) but 2/4 is not "looser" than 1/2, at least it wasn't when I made the jump to 2/4. Levels change, there's been a lot of talk about "the fish" all schooling over at 6 max and the impact on various levels, so maybe I'm out of touch. Still you'll have a tough time convincing me that 1/2 is tighter.