$160 starting bankroll

So yeah, instead of wasting my money with lots of small $10 deposits and letting variance bend me over and rape me repeatedly (bad beats ftw), I decided to make a decent size deposit and work my way up from the micros on stars.. (5NL+) was just wondering:
- if this is a decent size deposit
- at what levels should I start, when should I move up? etc
- is it worth making another profile JUST for rake back at micros?
- what software do I need, which ones would be helpful?
- how many hours should i be playing an day/week/month?
- anything else i'm missing/should be asking?



- Campbell92, CC Newbie

You can make something with that roll sir GL to you, study well

right, well I'm not a cash game newbie (I think?) I've been playing poker around a year and a half..(does that count as me being a newbie?) the 1st year was me messing around really and playing with friends, nothing serious, and a lucky score early on making me think I was a pro
I can play up to 10nl and not feel out of my depth, I haven't played any stake above that though.

haha nice! gl to you too I play both but I honestly struggle adjusting hand ranges from 6 max to FR lol (leak), I'm considering playing 6 max since the gap in skill is more pronounced in 6 max compared to FR, so playing short-handed can be a positive thing for me playing against weaker players?

You will learn SH ( short handed ) is not a good idea to do ( many players here will tell you why ) 6 and FR are 2 different games.

In 6h you need to be playing more hands, and have a wider range, and expect more varience.

9h you can be a solid tight palyer all the time. And if you are patient come up with a nice profit.

But I swear if your playing more hands, hand reading and skill comes more into play than in FR?

and sorry can you rephrase the 1st sentence? I'm a bit confused with that..

6max ranges are wider, hand reading + skill is required = bigger edges = more $$$
$$$ -> (.) (.)

Might be a good idea to start at 2NL, just to be sure you can beat it, especially if you are making the switch to FR or 6max for good and need to get used to the starting hand ranges etc.

Yeah I would choose now and stick with it. Go for 6max IMO...but I am biased!

QFT

$$$$$$ -> ( . ) ( . )

IMO, your bankroll is all the money you have allocated for poker. It can be the amount you have deposited if you're not willing to deposit more. But if you have more to play with that you just haven't deposited, that counts too. As a simple example, if I have about $100 on site A, $50 on site B, $200 in my e-wallet and $250 still in my pocket that I've budgeted for poker, my roll is $600.

As for where you should start, if your roll is under $500 or so, I'd begin at the lowest stakes. Definitely with $160, you should play .01/.02 if available or .02/.05. If you find it easy, it won't be long until you have enough buyins to move up to .05/.10 anyway.

And I'd suggest full ring. Strong players can win more at 6max, but that means poor players lose more. As a beginner, you're more likely to be one of the poor ones than one of the strong ones. In addition, you can hold your own at FR by playing a solid, relatively straightforward TAG style while you improve and learn how to adapt your game so that if/when you decide to try 6max, you'll have a better chance of being one of the better players.

I used to be afraid of 9 ring, 1/3 of deck out preflop looks scary. Now I found that it is way better, 50% less BB and SB means I can play longer before suck out and wait for good hands.

0.02/0.05 100 hands

BB+SB 6 ring = $1.12 sacrifice to poker Gods
BB+SB 9 ring = $0.77 savings $0.35 over 100 hands if you never VPIP thats a 31% savings, move up in limits and you are talking real money.

Prove you can beat 2NL before you go to 5NL.

may not make sense or seem like a weak strategy but i play 2NL 6 man 4 tables to get a feel for the tables and its players and how the cards are falling for me. i will eleminate 2 tables after a short period of time and play the 2 that seem to be to my advantage. crazy thinking but has been very profitable for me. as always what works for me may not work for you,lol

I was saying that playing SH ( short handed ) is not a good idea. Many Regs here will tell you all the reasons why playing Short handed is dumb

( more clear? )

please give me one reason why playing SH is dumb

so many things to reply to..
right.

^^ this makes a lot of sense, though at 2nl doesnt this mean almost a full table of limpers every hand? (from what I've seen whenever I've played on pokerstars that's what its like)

Yeah it was thankyou
umm, everyone's got their own opinions, but I'm with Jurn on this one. Got any examples?

how many hands counts as proof? what would be a solid win rate?

I'm not that much of a newbie IMO, and I comfortably beat 5nl, I just never had the bankroll to take the swings, so I guess I'll start at 5.. but how many buyins should I have before I move up?

Lol. I think there are more 6max regs here then FR players.


OP, if you are comfortable with nl5 then just start there and drop down if you need to. You shouldn't have too big of swings at nl5 unless you're doing something wrong.

For starters though, how about you list your default opening range for 6 max, or FR if thats what you decide to play.

Also, post hands in the HA(hand analysis) section of the forum when you have difficult decisions.

What site are you playing on?

Yeah you pay blinds more often in 6max but you can also steal blinds more often.

Anyway why would you want to never VPIP over 100 hands unless you are a crazy supernit?

Also you get more rakeback/VIP reward per hand at 6max, which should also be considered.

Sounds to me like you're mixing up shorthanded and short stacked?

Yes Yes i was :P Thanks for clearing up my Typo. Short Stacked is what i ment to say xD sleep deprivation lol

Short Stacked is never a good idea. Because when you do hit your hand and the money goes all in, you can only win the minimum rather than the max.

Get AA with only 3$ or when you have 10$

What would you rather have? Then if someone ships 8$ you have them covered. With 3 most you can win is like 5.60 ( after rake )

Ok this'll take a while, over 2k hands (I know its not much) I'm a 31/29 haha..

and I'm gonna be playing on Stars, and Full Tilt when/if they come back, I found Full Tilt tables soo much easier than Stars ones and I final tabled like all of the 45 mans on there, the competition was so weak.. I miss it there

Hand Ranges:

BB/SB: AA-88, AK, AQ
BT: AA-22, SC (56s+), A10+
CO: Pretty much same as above
HJ: AA-55,SC (87s+), AJ+
UTG/UTG+1: AA-10s, AK, AQs
MP (rest of table): AA-77, AJs+, SC (J10s+)

as always, it changes according to the table.. I open up my range a bit at loose passive tables which you get a lot at 2nl/5nl so I include a lot of SCs earlier in if I've got the stack for it.

Any good?