Is Low-Limit beatable?

[Fryguy]

I just moved up to 1/2 after not playing cards for 3-4 months and playing only microlimits before that.

So I deposit $100, get $60 in bonus, start playing at .5/1, go up quickly to 200, and then start playing 1/2. Sure my bankroll is a little small, but let's excuse that for a moment.

I quickly go up another $100 or so and have a nice day.

Next day I get EVERYTHING beat. I lost 5 full houses to quads, lost with Ace-high flushes 4 times, and lots more. It seems that no matter what type of hand I have, multiple donks are drawing to hands, at least some of which are surely better just because of the sheer number of donks, and one of them always seems to be making it.

With so many donks hurting pot equity, is Low Limit beatable?

Wow, that's a bit of a ramble, I guess I'm just frustrated at losing everything I went up and then some with solid play and just a ridiculous string.

[baronzeus]

I think the donks make it more beatable?

Like if you are 20% to win a pot with TPTK against 7 opponents, you are pretty much kicking ass pot equity wise. But then again, all the donks make it more swingy. GL

[JoshuaD]

[ QUOTE ]
With so many donks hurting pot equity, is Low Limit beatable?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. Move up to 5/10 6max, I'll let you follow me around and I'll show you the good tables.

[ZenMusician]

onlinepokerisrigged

-ZEN

[ThomasPHoolery]

This forum wouldn't exist if Low Limit were not beatable. The reason you need so many BB in your roll is because variance can be high ( lost 75 BB over 300 hands then won over 200 BB in 600 hands in the same session... swings like that can happen, and longer term swing happen as well.) We all hit stretches of bigtime losses, but learning how and when to push equity edges makes these games very beatable if you stick with it. Play within your roll, don't move up too fast, learn from your mistakes, and no one here cares about bad luck.

[Neal_Schon]

Dont. Stop. A-rockin.

[Fryguy]

I know nobody cares about bad luck. But losing as many big hands as I did I began to wonder if it was bad luck, or mathematically bad because of so many donks, and maybe justifying a major play adjustment.

I guess I'll just step down a limit and continue to grind I guess.

[I am fish]

In all seriousness, It is extremely beatable even with the rake. Unfortunately, you've been running bad. You do need to put some time into your game and play thousands of hands and study to become a winning player. You also won't know if you're a winning player until you've played about 20-30 thousand hands because of the natural fluctuations in wins and losses. If you are willing to put in the time and effort to become a winning player, I recommend investing in Ed Miller's Small Stakes Hold'em book and hang around these boards and ask questions. A solid low limit player 1/2$ player should be able to earn at least 4$ per hundred hands (2Big Bets /100)

[baronzeus]

It's beatable for about 4BB/100 I think, but you shouldn't stick at that level long enough to beat it that much.

[mosch]

[ QUOTE ]
So I deposit $100, get $60 in bonus, start playing at .5/1, go up quickly to 200, and then start playing 1/2. Sure my bankroll is a little small, but let's excuse that for a moment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming you're willing to re-deposit if you bust, it's fine. It's obvious you aren't doing this to pay the bills

[ QUOTE ]
With so many donks hurting pot equity, is Low Limit beatable?

[/ QUOTE ]

donks help equity.
low limit is extraordinarily beatable.
you are not thinking about poker correctly.