Is ABC poker the best strategy at Micros ?

E

enesem

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Total posts
204
Chips
0
What follows isn't a moan about bad beats or variance..

In my last 2 sessions I have lost 6 buy ins (so, 600bb)

KK - cracked by AK
QQ - 3 times, cracked by KK, and 2 sets
Sets on flop - cracked twice by runner/runner full house and 4 of kind.

In these 2 sessions I have had:
AA 4 times, each time everyone folded, either to me in BB or to my 3xbb raise.
AK 3 times when everyone folded to 3xbb raise.

And, while I type this, I have a game going on in the background, and I just lost another buy in to QQ losing to a set, and I have had AA THREE TIMES when everyone just folded, either to 3xbb raise pre flop or a cbet on the flop.

That now makes AA 7 times where I got no action, and QQ cracked 4 times.


The pattern fairly much seems to be:

Good hands tend to either win small amounts of money or lose a lot.

Bad hands that improve will disproportionally take out good hands and win far more.

Most of my wins seem to come from minor hands that miraculously improve against the odds. I should caveat that by saying that my wins are small, grinding wins. I can spend two hours turning $ 5 into $7, but lose the lot in the space of a couple of hands when I get killed by weaker hands improving.

So, my question is whether the strategy of ABC poker is actually a winning strategy ? It seems far more profitable to play more hands cheaply then look for miracle turn/river cards. Sometimes a complete fish will turn up at the table, play the most random hands and leave a short while later after doubling or tripling up.

The books say loosen up against the fish and bet for value, but I find when I do that I just gift them chips as my hands generally don't improve (especially drawings hands just don't get there), and they call everything and will end up claiming the pot on the river .

Has anyone ever toyed around with playing weak hands OOP and seeing if they do any better than playing tight, in position with premium hands ? If I run the stats of the wild players in my PT database they are nearly all winners.

I'll be updating my blog this weekend, but I can tell you that my figures aren't good. After a month of playing "by the book" ABC poker I am another 100 pounds down, that's about 25 buy in's down (I play 5 euro NL).

I would be interested in thoughts. Thanks.
 
Fknife

Fknife

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 26, 2013
Total posts
1,128
Chips
0
1. Ed Miller - "Playing The Player: Moving Beyond ABC Poker To Dominate Your Opponents"
2. Do you play Zoom Poker?
 
micromachine

micromachine

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Total posts
5,770
Chips
0
Playing ABC definitely does work at the micros either you are just running bad or you are making some big mistakes in the way you play your premium hands. Post some of the hands you refer to and we'll take a look. If you start playing weak hands OOP you are just as bad as the fish who have been sucking out on you, don't do it! This is not how to beat the micros.
 
E

enesem

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Total posts
204
Chips
0
Thanks for the advice -

FKnife - re Ed Miller...

I have two books of Ed's;

No Limit Hold 'Em Theory and Practice
Small Stakes No Limit Hold 'Em

Ed's books are great, but they deal with advanced concepts that just do not work on the micros. You can't bluff at this level, and working out hand value is useless as you can't price a player off a hand, even if it's niot a value call, you get called anyway.

I prefer Nathan William's "Crushing the Microstakes", I consider it a better place to start, I am planning on using ed Miller's ideas when I hopefully get to move up.

I am also engaging Nathan as a coach.

I do post hands for analysis, however I can tell you, I am much more positionally aware now, I don't play anything OOP apart from the premium hands which are getting beat regularly.

I have a starting chart I have been using and I follow it pretty rigorously. I am putting the beats down to bad licuk and variance, but the original questions was about the strategy of playing ABC (small wins, big losses, overall down in the long run) or playing wild (big wins, small to big losses, overall up in the long run).

I have over 30,000 hands now and from what I see, the wild players make way more money than the tight ones.
 
E

enesem

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Total posts
204
Chips
0
I think it will work if there is many fish.

On pokerstars I tag the players according to how many tables they play. I then look up their stats. There are not many fish at all.

Mostly I play with tight regs, and I can grind out small wins. When fish arrive, their wild play usually gets them big wins as they clear out the regs with hands you just don't predict.

This is my point, Fish occasionally spew, but mostly they leave the table much better off. Random, wild play pays.
 
Last edited:
micromachine

micromachine

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Total posts
5,770
Chips
0
I have over 30,000 hands now and from what I see, the wild players make way more money than the tight ones.

Trust me, they don't.

Maybe part of your problem is that you don't know how to adjust vs these wild, fishy players.
 
E

enesem

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Total posts
204
Chips
0
I am going to have Nathan do a review of my Pokertracker stats and see what holes he can identify,so I for sure know there are elements of my play that need work.

But, when fish double up it's not just me they take money from, it's many of the tight regs who get busted too.

Loose play works at this level.
 
micromachine

micromachine

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Total posts
5,770
Chips
0
Yeah GOOD lags are like likely to do well since they play the opposite style to the nits and Tags, which form a large part of the player pool. But there is a big difference between as good lag and an aggro fish who doubles/triples up by playing badly, they will lose in the long run.

Also it's not just about starting hand charts and VPIP/PFR stats, you need to be able to know how to adjust to the different player types and the table dynamics at the time, maybe this is something you should give more thought to.
 
D

dad2adrina

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Total posts
34
Chips
0
I gotta say i agree that good lag players have higher upswings than tag players at micro levels. I too have spent quite a bit of time tilting at the micro levels knowing i play the hand well preflop, flop, and turn just to get sucked out on the river. My personal remedy is one i wouldnt suggest to most people, but i decided to just move up in stakes. Far less fish at 10NL than 5NL. Not to mention for the majority of grinders playing abc poker the win rate is slightly higher by the nature of a higher buyin. I could only do 5NL for so long.
 
E

enesem

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Total posts
204
Chips
0
This has long been one of my points, that it's difficult to learn how to play well at 5NL as good strategy doesn't count for much.

I can enter a pot thinking about formula, odds, implied odds, position, +EV raises and calls, the whole lesson plan.

The villain has hamburgers, ice cream and naked ladies in his head, so will call anything and generally will win. I know people talk about variance, but I need to play the same hand against the same guy a million times to show profit. Short term (what, 100,000 hands ?) it's a loss.

bluffing, barrelling, squeeze play and so on, all skills you need in higher stakes, count for nothing here.

It's a coin toss along these lines:

1: Big hand will win small amount
2: Big hand will lose a lot
3: Small hand will lose small, if you get out in time
4: Small hand will win big

If you play tight, you don't play small hands, so you don't get the opportunity for the random loose big wins.
 
honeycrush

honeycrush

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Jun 5, 2012
Total posts
1,488
Awards
2
Chips
26
I gotta say i agree that good lag players have higher upswings than tag players at micro levels. I too have spent quite a bit of time tilting at the micro levels knowing i play the hand well preflop, flop, and turn just to get sucked out on the river. My personal remedy is one i wouldnt suggest to most people, but i decided to just move up in stakes. Far less fish at 10NL than 5NL. Not to mention for the majority of grinders playing abc poker the win rate is slightly higher by the nature of a higher buyin. I could only do 5NL for so long.
You are right not to suggest your personal strategy of moving up to others because this is a really bad idea. If someone is losing at the lowest levels, eventually they will only be losing more at the higher levels. Of course there is variance but runbad or rungood can only last for a finite amount of time and eventually if you are playing well you will win and if you are playing badly you will lose - in the long run.
 
E

enesem

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Total posts
204
Chips
0
Y..... if you are playing well you will win and if you are playing badly you will lose - in the long run.

Do we know that for sure ? I would absolutely agree at higher stakes where players are more competent.

At micros like 5NL, I don't agree, for the reasons above - the hands that make the most money are opened for weak/random hole cards that improve. If you don't play those hands you don't get that opportunity, which leaves the following options:

* Win small
* Lose small
* Lose Big

I have been running my database over the players I regard as tight regs and they mostly seem to be following the same pattern of small gains, big hits. the only ones making any big pots regularly are the maniacs.

I would need to analyse deeper to fully back this up, however this is what I seem to be seeing.

I think I have a point here, hence me opening this up in the strategy thread. The point is this;

Is it better to not rely on big hands, but instead play a lot more speculative hands and hope for an improving hand ? Computer says YES.
 
micromachine

micromachine

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Total posts
5,770
Chips
0
This has long been one of my points, that it's difficult to learn how to play well at 5NL as good strategy doesn't count for much.

I can enter a pot thinking about formula, odds, implied odds, position, +EV raises and calls, the whole lesson plan.

The villain has hamburgers, ice cream and naked ladies in his head, so will call anything and generally will win. I know people talk about variance, but I need to play the same hand against the same guy a million times to show profit. Short term (what, 100,000 hands ?) it's a loss.

Bluffing, barrelling, squeeze play and so on, all skills you need in higher stakes, count for nothing here.

It's a coin toss along these lines:

1: Big hand will win small amount
2: Big hand will lose a lot
3: Small hand will lose small, if you get out in time
4: Small hand will win big

If you play tight, you don't play small hands, so you don't get the opportunity for the random loose big wins.

Sorry but this is complete bs

I have played a LOT of 5nl, with what I would call a fairly ABC TAG approach. During a recent period I beat it at 4.5bb/100 over the span of 100k hands. Of course the villains playing J4 while thinking about naked ladies and ice cream beat me sometimes but in general I won a LOT more from these guys than from the other TAGs or the nits. Learn how to beat them, embrace the variance and watch the BR grow, your thinking that these guys are unbeatable with a solid ABC approach is way off.

You say that bluffing, barrelling and squeeze play count for nothing at 5nl, this is also not true. These are not super-advanced strategies that only work at higher stakes, they can be part of your ABC approach, you need to identify the right spots to make these moves.
 
micromachine

micromachine

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Total posts
5,770
Chips
0
At micros like 5NL, I don't agree, for the reasons above - the hands that make the most money are opened for weak/random hole cards that improve.

Then why are AA and KK my biggest winners over a huge sample at 5nl?
 
D

dad2adrina

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Total posts
34
Chips
0
I think i am going to do my own research at this level based off this idea. I challenge those who havent done this to do the same.

100k hands playing super tight aggressive jj and better pocket pairs with a,q suited and up being the only hands i play. Theoretically my variance shouldnt be too great allowing for more frequent/bigger gains within the hands i showdown with.

Adjustment poker to table dynamics is better poker IMO but that doesnt seem to be an option at this level due to the likelihood of being caught attempting to establish bluff equity and anything but the nuts is usually beaten by the river.
 
S

SpookMBluffwell

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
May 21, 2013
Total posts
70
Chips
0
It works

I have had some bad beats but playing ABC at the micros has worked quite well for me...for awhile now.
 
micromachine

micromachine

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Total posts
5,770
Chips
0
100k hands playing super tight aggressive jj and better pocket pairs with a,q suited and up being the only hands i play. Theoretically my variance shouldnt be too great allowing for more frequent/bigger gains within the hands i showdown with.

That's not tight aggressive, that's just uber nitty, you will miss opportunities to make money from fish and be exploited by the better players at the table.

Adjustment poker to table dynamics is better poker IMO but that doesnt seem to be an option at this level due to the likelihood of being caught attempting to establish bluff equity

It is very much an option, being able to adjust your play based on the other players is relevant at any level, even 2nl. As for bluffing, you just need to bluff the right opponents in the right spots with believable bet sizing.

the nuts is usually beaten by the river.

Disagree :hmmmm:
 
D

dad2adrina

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Total posts
34
Chips
0
I said "anything BUT the nuts is beaten by the river." Obviously the nuts are the nuts.
 
E

enesem

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Total posts
204
Chips
0
OK, how about this one point:

AA, KK or QQ, 3 times in every 221 hands. My last premium hands went like this;

AA - last 7 times, all folded to me.
KK - last 7 times, 5 times folded, 2 times all in cracked - 1 to AK, 1 to A3 getting A on river.
QQ - Last 7 times, 3 times folded to me, 4 times all in cracked (77 twice, KK, AA)

So, 21 premier hands, 15 times folded and won only the blinds, 6 times all in and lost each time, a total of 6 buy in's

Now, statistically, I need to wait nearly 3,000 hands to get this number of premium hands, so my loss rate on them is approx 600 bb per 3000 hands.

Contrast this to opening with 6-3o, 5-9o, hands that you normally get dealt most of the time. Limp or call min raise to see the flop, then if you hit you are holding a hand that will be difficult to read and you can go to town and take a huge pot.

Over the long run, it MUST be cheaper to enter these pots and hit big than enter strong but get suckered. At micro stakes, this is what I see.

Granted, at higher levels, you will easily be crushed, because you just don't waste hundreds of dollars on rubbish, but at 5 NL, it's easy.

My experiences back this up, it's good to hear positions for and against.

I would rather be a better player, but as mentioned earlier can you really learn at 5NL ?
 
Last edited:
S

ScottishMatt

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Total posts
2,394
Chips
0
Absolutely you can learn at 5NL. FWIW I've rarely played higher than 10NL yet I consider myself good enough to beat 25NL.

I see LD in here, he can explain this well to you cause he was in the exact same boat when he joined up. I'd like to see you post those 6 hands. Mistakes were probably made.
 
BearPlay

BearPlay

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Total posts
10,631
Chips
0
I have over 30,000 hands now and from what I see, the wild players make way more money than the tight ones.

You're only seeing a small, small part of the picture.. much like if you were to go outside on a day in March when it is sprinkling and assume that it rains there every day. You aren't seeing the loose wild players dip again and again (and then again) into their bankrolls, in sequential efforts to recoup their losses. One or two pot wins or SNG wins does not a profitable player make ;)
 
D

dad2adrina

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Total posts
34
Chips
0
@micromachine you love to disagree. Haha. Youre not wrong in your opinion and i enjoy reading your insight but i can definitely count on going into a thread knowing your against the grain on most subjects. Haha
 
L

lost2qandisa

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 19, 2013
Total posts
268
Chips
0
Let me start this by saying, I suck at holdem. However, you say AA got folded to 7 times. Well, that is a GOOD thing. You won small pots with each of those folds. Nobody sucked out on you. My great great pappy always said,

"It is better to win a small pot than to lose a big one."

You are expecting too much action from your big hands. The value in the top AA KK QQ is the fold value they hold preflop. After the flop, if you did not hit, you have to play it more cautious. I have seen it so many times when people have a primo hand that they can not toss even when a four card flush or straight is showing on the board. There are times that you have to fold these hands after the flop.

I have started playing top pair VERY conservative. Top pair has sucked money from me over and over to sets, higher pair, etc. Maybe you are over playing these hands.
 
E

enesem

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 15, 2013
Total posts
204
Chips
0
Doesn't that back up my point that big hands win small or lose big ?

So the money is from weak hands that improve....
 
Top