Why do I suck at 10/20? (Long and cathartic)

[sammy_g]

I'm a breakeven player at 10/20 and up it seems. I admit it. If it weren't for rakeback I would be down, sadly. Here is the graph.



It looks like a sine wave, or maybe the output from a polygraph test. I'd rather look at a picture of the goatse guy. And yes that is a 350BB downswing.

Here is my 5/10 graph for comparison.



Now that's a graph! A nice, smooth upward gradient. 5/10 is like a vacation for me.

So what gives? I don't understand. How can I beat 5/10 for 2.5BB/100 and just break even at 10/20? Are the games really that different?

The frustrating thing is the average 10/20 player seems so bad! Some sharks inhabit these waters, but mostly it seems like guys with 40/20/1.5 type stats. It's not like they play well postflop. To me they appear bluffy, aggro, and, well, bad. How do they hold on to their money? Am I underestimating my opponents?

So judging from PokerTracker, I'm just a hair better than these folks. Not quite good enough to beat the rake. After 25k hands I can no longer just say to myself I'm running bad. I can't imagine that after this many hands my PT winrate is more 1BB/100 off from my theoretical winrate. At best I'm a small winner, but maybe also a losing player at these limits. I mean, look at the converging BB/100 graph.



I'm not posting this only to whine. I'm actually looking for advice. I'm a reasonably smart guy. I refuse to believe my ceiling is 5/10. I don't want to play small stakes forever. I want to get out of the kiddie pool. So what do I need to do to improve and beat this limit?

I thought about posting all of my PT stats and asking for advice. The last time I tried to change my play based on PT stats was a disaster. (This was a major cause of that first horrible downswing at 10/20 in the graph above.) Also I think my problems are mostly postflop. PT stats are better for judging preflop play.

I could post hands, but I'm genuinely not sure which ones to post. I might have some leaks in plays that I think are routine. Maybe I am making some regular folds that are actually hideous or calling down in spots where I am almost never good.

I am often lost in hands at this limit since the games are so much more aggressive. If I fold to those bluffy turn check-raises, I feel like I'm getting run over. If I call down all the time, I feel like I'm paying off too much. Aggressive games have a way of turning you into a calling station.

So what can I do? Get a coach? Find a poker buddy so we can sweat each other and discuss hands? Move back down to 5/10 and try 10/20 again when I think I'm a better player?

These results are all from 4 tabling. Maybe I should play fewer tables?

For those of you who struggled at first at 10/20, is there any adjustment you made that helped? Did something ever just click so you got it?

I've hit a brick wall. What do I do to improve?

Thanks...

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I should play fewer tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

Also, FWIW, I was a breakeven 5/10 player at 10k hands, a slight winner at 25k, and am now a 2.3ishbb/100 winner at 45k hands. I haven't changed much but my results certainly have. Take that as you may and remember that 27k hands really isn't all that much. But play less tables until you know you're handling 10/20 well.

Rob

[wheelz]

I did a couple things to get out of my inital 10/20 rut: First off I switched to only 2 tabling, and started winning right away. Then I decided I could become a really good player if I really studied, so I bought like 12 poker books that I had heard good things about and read a bit every day (Inside the Poker Mind probably had the most profound effect on my winrate), and also really studied this forum, posting more hands myself and reading and posting my opinion in nearly every other hand posted. Gradually my game adapted and I became comfortable at the 10/20.

I really recommend you try 2 tabling for a while, see if you do better, and yes find some hands to post where you were unsure of yourself. Read this forum, reread some books, take a break if you feel the need to, just don't give up and don't tilt, as long as you're willing to put the effort in you can definitely beat this game.

[livinitup0]

Im in no way entitled to give play adivce to you...but 27K hands in almost 300 days? Im part time but still clear well over 7500 or so a month. Like I said Im not even close to your stakes but I didnt start to noticably improve until I made myslef play more than just a few hours a week. I think its especially important to play more when in the process of moving up stakes since there's so much more to learn than your usual stakes game that you have long run confidence in.

[yanicehand]

this is by far the best advice you can get... i refuse to think anyone can really do that well at 5/10 (is that like 5bb/100h over almost 100k?) has hit a wall when it came to 10/20.

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
After 25k hands I can no longer just say to myself I'm running bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes you can.

[sthief09]

1 of 2 options or maybe both.

1. you haven't adjusted and fold too much
2. you run bad at 10/20 and/or you run good at 5/10

[Victor]

keep pluckin is the best i can say. i got my head bashed in at 10-20 when i moved up the first 4 times.

its proly a combo of running bad, tougher/trickier players and minitilt due to the higher stakes.

[JrJordan]

[ QUOTE ]

These results are all from 4 tabling. Maybe I should play fewer tables?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo!
I've had similar experiences lately at the 5/10 games. I had a decent upswing to start while I was developing, and then plateaued. I went break even (with a few 200BB downswings in between) for 26k hands. It took until about 7k hands ago for me to admit that I was an autopilot 4-table junkie. I had stopped developing as a player, was dependent on PV stats for reads, and was more tilt prone. Since then I've switched to two tables and the difference is night and day. I can tell in the way I observe, the way I play, and the way I participate in this forum. Running at 4.5BB/100 certainly helps too. Point is, dropping down the number of tables and learning to think again has made all the difference for me.

[kiddo]

U could very well be running bad for 27K, but this is not your problem. Problem is u are afraid of 10/20.

[ QUOTE ]
I am often lost in hands at this limit since the games are so much more aggressive. If I fold to those bluffy turn check-raises, I feel like I'm getting run over. If I call down all the time, I feel like I'm paying off too much. Aggressive games have a way of turning you into a calling station.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can u play 4 tables if u dont know what to do when aggressive players attack you? Makes no sense. I played 2 tables my first 10-15K at 10/20. There are a lot of adjustments u have to do since average player is different from average player at 5/10. There are a ton of posts about this in the archive.

U say players with 40/20/1.5 are "so bad". This isnt true. I would guess that normally u make nothing or very little from these players.

Say u got 25/15 and they got 40/20 and there are 2 loosepassive players in the game. The 40/20 guys will play these loosepassive guys much more then you. Even if u make a little from these 40/20 guys when playing against them, u loose a lot because they raise you out of a lot pots with the loosepassive ones. They play the really bad guys much more.

And also: You will often find yourself in a tricky situation where u have to be overly aggressive with a not very strong hand against the LAG but keep on valuebetting against the passive ones. You know that the LAG raising you on flop means nothing but u also know that the loosepassive one coldcalling in same hand means something, so, what to do?

Cut down on the number of tables and stop thinking 40/20/1.5 is a fish. And dont look for tables with big average pots.

If u got two 40/20/1.5 at your table these 2 guys will run the table. I much prefer to have to guys with 22/15. Yes, they are normally better players and yes, I will make less from them, but they will late me make much more from the really bad ones at the table.

On my list of worst player to have in your game I would say:

1) 31/23/2.5

2) 40/20/2

3) 22/15/2.5

This is if there is only 1 of them. If there are 2 of them I dont think there is a difference between (1) and (2) and (3) is way behind because the LAGs will raise each other making it extremly hard to play without good reads.