My micro limit ring game strategy

Just play one table at a time. Yes this drops your hourly win rate but it allows you to focus more on the process of playing poker (which you will definitely need to have a strong grasp on later on in the higher limits).

Another thing, don't let it discourage you when you've been playing for an hour or so and some one gets on the table and doubles or triples through his buy in over a period of 5 to 15 min. He got lucky may happen to get lucky again. But in the long run he will lose.

You really should be playing on the .01/.02 NLHE tables with a $25 bankroll. Just take your time and wait for the big hands and bet the heck out of them. The majority of your opponents will be multi tabling and most will not even realize that you've been a rock up until now and actually have a hand and you will get paid off.

Also, there is no reason to rush things as far a building your bankroll. You have $25. If you average $3 a day until the end of the year you will have a bankroll of 1k. Don't think, I've got to win big now or in every session. It's about the long haul.

One more thing. At those limits you will have quite a few people chasing Flushes or Straights with horrible odds. This is what you want. There will be times however that it will seem as though they are always catching on the turn or river. Don't let this discourage you and don't start chasing with bad odds yourself because of that. It happens and if you are down and even up and feel yourself getting frustrated because of this STOP PLAYING for the day or until you get this frustration out of your head and can go back to the tables and focus on playing your best game. Continuing to play will only cause you to lose more of your hard earned bankroll.

Tying in with the above statement. You will see a large quantity of cheese hands win pots. Don't start playing cheese yourself just because you see cheese winning.

Another thing keep notes on the players at the table. Their starting stack when you or they joined the table and the time. Have they reloaded, do they chase with bad odds, how are they betting when they have a winning hand, when they are behind in a hand and then catch up or end up with the better hand, Do they like to try and trap. Those are just some of the questions about your opponents you should be asking yourself and keeping notes on.

Lastly, one thing that I have noticed with ring games esp at the micro stakes is that a large bet usually is real and not a bluff. At these levels you should be playing ABC poker or Hit to win poker. The fancy bluffs and tricks are all just a waste. More times than not they guy will call when you don't want him to with bottom pair and win the pot. Unlike in tourneys, players in ring games are more likely to trap than to bluff.

Very good points. Yeah, patience is key. If you get discouraged from the new guy tripling up so quickly, you risk playing on tilt without even thinking you are on tilt. If you only play very good hands, you will do much better than the donk in the long run.

With regards to multi-tabeling, I agree that beginners shouldnt do it.

I think its better to concentrate on one table and learn to play poker to a high standard than to learn to multitable which means that the poker played will be at a lower standard.

I think that multitabling should only be brought in once a player has 'mastered' that particular stakes level.


So a 10NL player should concentrate on only one table untill he has a high winrate or bb/100 and has maintained that for a sustained period. Then rather than going up to 25NL, the player should then multitable at 10NL because they will be playing a lower standard of poker than they are capable at a limit they can easily beat. Once they have reached their maximum number of tables they have reached a point where they cannot extract any more money out of 10 NL, at that point its time to go to 25NL but to go back down to playing only one table.

Then repeat this cycle.

I think you guys have a misconception of how multitabling affects our play.

When playing full ring cash games, i do play better and less robotic if I play 4 tables instead of 12, and that does affect my win rate. On the other hand, I do not play any better or win more if i further drop down the number of tables from 4 to 1.

At full ring, i play about 16% of the hands, which is loosish already. It means with 4 tables, i'm not even involved in any hand something like 1/3 of the time. That's more than enough to check hand histories, review the HUD stats of villains, and all those things that allow me to play good thinking poker.

For the really hard decisions, having one table or 4 doesn't change much either as tbh, it takes a much longer time than available online to go into details into all the options and caveats of hand range estimation and line analysis. Decisions at the table are based on minimal math and a more intuitive understanding of the game, and then the tricky hands we take note of them and review them after the session is over. In depth analysis done offline is what helps you develop the right intuition when you play.

So in the end, if the point is to play 250 hands, i think i'll spend my time much more efficiently and will let my game evolve a lot better by 4 tabling them for 1 hour and then spending the next 3 hours analysing my play rather than by 1 tabling for 4 hours and not leaving any time for analysis.

I agree with Belgo 100% here. To the OP, you're definitely thinking correctly, just extrapolated it slightly too far. If you try playing even just 2 tables instead of one for now, you'll likely see that you can still concentrate just as well and get as many reads. If you can, then try three tables. After awhile, you should be able to get your reads going on all three if not right away.

If you can play four tables with anything more than 25% the bb/100 you make at one table, then you'd be better off playing the four. And, it's still quite likely that you can make solid reads.

Overall though, really sounds like you have a solid base to build from, good luck at the tables.

I think that you´re right xI Boris Ix when it comes to multitabling/one-tabling on higher levels, but as you say yourself when it comes to micro-limit you should play ABC-Poker and therefor I dont think that there will be greater profit by playing just one table.

When it comes to higher limits you gotta to have total control, I usually play 2-3 tables but the times I´ve taken shots at higher levels (3/6 - 5/10) I never multitable, not only because these short visits has been for large portions of my BR (sometimes all of it ) but the truth is that the higher you go in blinds-levels you also get higher in read-levels.

What I mean is simply:
1st level - I got this 3rd pair and think its enough
2nd level - What does my opponent have?
3rd level - I think that can make my opponent think I hited that river

The list goes on and on, but I´m just saying that the higher you get (not in blinds but in opponent-skill) the more attention you have to give your opponents in order to take advantage of every micro-mini-tell they might give you

xI Boris Ix said:

The majority of your opponents will be multi tabling and most will not even realize that you've been a rock up until now and actually have a hand and you will get paid off.

Click to expand...

Ever heard of a HUD?? I play 4 tables and i'd bet my whole bankroll, $154 , that i'd notice that you've been a rock, the little numbers above your name would tell me so.

I've noticed that the majority of players on a 5nl table won't be multi-tabling, the ones that are will be either

a) short-stackers who dont really care that you've not played a hand in ages b/c they probably havent either, and when the money goes in, probably preflop, you can be quite sure they have a hand worth playing.

b) regular multi-tablers who will most likely be playing with a HUD and like me, will notice your a rock so they'll either not pay you off or be coming in with sc's or pp's because they can flop hidden monsters that you're sure to pay off b/c typically 9/0 type players will not play a hand for an hour, fall in love with their AK or JJ and refuse to fold it b/c they feel they deserve to win with this hand.

There are some good points in this post and it'd definetly set a strong foundation but unless you have the patience of a saint it's very hard to stay disciplined and not lose focus with only 1 table open imo, i find 4 tables really easy and i'll quite happily play at a good 15/10 on all 4 without getting bored and still picking up a few reads here n there.

i think i'll spend my time much more efficiently and will let my game evolve a lot better by 4 tabling them for 1 hour and then spending the next 3 hours analysing my play rather than by 1 tabling for 4 hours and not leaving any time for analysis.

Click to expand...

Although i don't spend 3 hours analysing this is the best advice on this thread imo

Just my 2c's worth, GL

I agree you don't play your best poker when you are multi-tabling. If you want to play tight, but you get bored, subscribe to Netflix or sign up for Hulu, and watch tv during folded hands, and pause the show when you are in a hand.

I will, however, multitable in freerolls on different sites. Like I play the 11:00 Daily 80 Grand on PStars, the 11:40 Omaha on FTilt, and the 12:15 $50 Freeroll on Ultimate Bet.

The best tip I can give regarding the microlimit ring games is "Quit when you lose your buy-in." Don't rebuy or try another table. If you lose you have to quit and live with it. That keeps you from not caring if you lose, and it keeps you from throwing good money after bad when you're getting cold cards.

It's like when my Grampaw taught me to play pool. Practicing by yourself, you miss a shot, you rerack. That way you don't get sloppy in practice.

GDRileyx said:

I agree you don't play your best poker when you are multi-tabling. If you want to play tight, but you get bored, subscribe to Netflix or sign up for Hulu, and watch tv during folded hands, and pause the show when you are in a hand.

Click to expand...

Terrible advice, imo. Probably even more distracting than multi-tabling and yet you don't get the increased learning slope from playing many more hands that multi-tablers get.

The best tip I can give regarding the microlimit ring games is "Quit when you lose your buy-in." Don't rebuy or try another table. If you lose you have to quit and live with it. That keeps you from not caring if you lose, and it keeps you from throwing good money after bad when you're getting cold cards.

Click to expand...

Terrible advice again, imo. you should not care if you lose, nor if you win. You should only care about playing good poker and playing at tables where you have an edge over the villains. Short term results have no significance whatsoever.

I'm offering advice because I am a successful player. Those strategies work for me.

GDRileyx said:

I agree you don't play your best poker when you are multi-tabling. If you want to play tight, but you get bored, subscribe to Netflix or sign up for Hulu, and watch tv during folded hands, and pause the show when you are in a hand.

Click to expand...

I don't play my best poker online unless i'm playing at least 4 tables, its so easy to get bored playing 1 table and there are so many distractions around you when your playing in your own home, in a casino it's different because typically theres not much else you can do when your at the table except concentrate and play, online though theres msn, pokertube, facebook, cardschat etc etc

I thought the strongest case for single tabling was to be able to focus 100% on whats going on at that table thus setting you up for hero calls/folds down the line?? Surely watching tv during folded hands defeats the object of single tabling?? You might as well substitute the tv for another table because the 1st tables going to be gettin just as much attention as when you were watching tv at the same time lol

Imo playing live is fun and i love the social side to the game but the biggest advantage to playing online is that you can multi-table, tbh the max i think i'll ever be able to play is 6 at a time but that'll do me

GDRileyx said:

I'm offering advice because I am a successful player. Those strategies work for me.

Click to expand...

What works for you doesn't mean it's gonna work for the majority. I mean come on, watch tv while your playing coz your bored! Is this serious advice to give a beginner?

GDRileyx said:

Waste of time! Good players vary their play. Just because they stole alot of blinds yesterday doesn't mean they are not playing squeeky tight today.

The only notes I make are on people who complain about slow play, so that if I get in a game with them again, I can play slow and try to get them on tilt.

Click to expand...

Taken from this thread, https://www.cardschat.com/forum/cash-games-11/notes-online-players-143430/#post1086886 , so you watch t.v. whilst playing poker and think taking notes on players is a waste of time???

GDRileyx said:

I am offering advice because I am a successful player.

Click to expand...

From the same thread, after being told (again) that your advice was terrible, big hint, i'm not saying i'm one of them but if experienced players on here keep telling you your wrong then it might be a good idea to start listening to them and stop giving bad advice to beginner players.

As you keep reminding us that your a successful player do you have anything to back this up at all?? I don't know what your idea of successful is but sharkscope begs to differ.

Pokerlistings doesn't think your that successful either, strange that??

I find when I do multi table I have a tendency to either just break even or go bust much faster, in the long run, as far as high stakes are concerned. I totally agree that single tables at higher stakes are a better way to go. Now as far as the .1/.2 tables are concerned I make much more in the long run playing multi table than what I do playing single table.

JohnSmith110 said:

I find when I do multi table I have a tendency to either just break even or go bust much faster

Click to expand...

fwiw, this notion of going bust should not apply to ring games. All the regular players auto-reload to the max buy-in. Sometimes we loose a stack, but we call it losing a stack, not going bust. Going bust would be loosing your entire bankroll, which does not happen when you follow bankroll management rules.

I like to split my time between 1-tabling and multi-tabling. I find that doing both for the right reasons is very effective.

1-tabling:
you can concentrate on how the other players at the table are playing. is it more profitable? in the short term... no. but, the information you get from paying attention is going to help you in the long run.

bottom line: 1-table when you want to learn skills like hand-reading

multi-tabling:
I find that if I'm sitting at only one table and I'm not specifically trying to work on some aspect of my game (learning), then I tend to play hands I shouldn't and make plays I shouldn't to keep from getting bored. If I have 2-4 tables open it forces me to make quicker decisions that are closer to ABC poker (this is VERY GOOD at micro tables). You still learn from just the sheer amount of hands/situations that you get into.. it's more about experience than trying to improve a specific area of your game.

bottom line: multi-table the micros to get experience, not if you want to improve specific areas of your game.

multi-tasking:
I think outside distractions.. ie. watching tv/surfing the net/etc.. is counter-productive when playing poker because it takes your focus away from poker and then you have to switch modes when it's time to play the next hand.

bottom line: don't do it, don't do it, don't do it! there may be a very small percentage of people who are extremely scatter-brained where it may actually be beneficial.. but i'll bet you 10-1 this isn't you.

I have seen videos of people playing 20+ SnG's at the sametime. I don't quite understand the concept. I play them one at a time, reason being is that when the blinds get really high you need to know who you can steal from and you is going to steal from you. I have been at the bubble a bunch of times where it becomes shove or fold. I don't know if you are going to be able to effectivly observe other players if you have to make a decision every 0.5 seconds at 20 other tables.

But if it works for you, so much the better.

GDRileyx said:

It's like when my Grampaw taught me to play pool. Practicing by yourself, you miss a shot, you rerack. That way you don't get sloppy in practice.

Click to expand...

Exactly, when you miss a shot you rerack, and do it again till you get it right and can run a few racks consecutively. When you misstep at the poker table, you re-rack your chip stack, and start shooting again.


And I mean, I'm not one to judge, I've played some CC freerolls here and there, but if freerolls are in your daily poker regiment, gotta ask yourself how successful you really are right now.

This discussion is very helpful. I have been playing freerolls and have built up a little money and I am about ready to start playing for "real" money. Is it best to start at a micro limit cash table or do low stakes MTT?

I have accumulated about $100 across a number of different poker rooms - mostly from playing freerolls. Now where do I go from here?

I appreciate any advice in starting out.

Jagsti said:

What works for you doesn't mean it's gonna work for the majority. I mean come on, watch tv while your playing coz your bored! Is this serious advice to give a beginner?

Click to expand...

Yes, it is serious. I did not mean to imply that it would work for everyone, but it works for me and it might be a better option for some people than multi-tabling.

Patience is an important quality for poker players, especially neophytes. Boredom is the enemy of patience.

I'm not saying to ignore the poker table. Pay attention to who bes what and use the graphic hand history to review what cards were revealed at showdown.

orangepeeleo said:

Pokerlistings doesn't think your that successful either, strange that??

Click to expand...

I am in the black and in the top 15% of all players. That is "successful". I didn't say I was "very successful" or claim to be a pro.

I am more successful with live cards than I am online, and more successful at Second Life poker than on the big online sites.

I also know that you "wear sunglasses", not "where sunglasses" and that you're is the conraction of you are, not your.

On one hand I am tempted to respect your big wins last week, but on the other hand I look at the huge string of goose-eggs on the rest of your record. My theory is that you know a real pro, and sometimes let him use your account to bushwhack people in major tournaments. For that, you get a piece of his action, which you consistently blow playing for yourself.

Just a theory.

Put your claws away, i just wanted to check up how successful you actually were and alert newbies to your somewhat unsuccessful credentials.

I really wish i did know a pro because he/she would be a great mentor, unfortunately i dont and i've had to learn the majority of what i know from this site.

Over time i've found that there are people worth listening to on here and people who are trying to get up to 50 posts so they can go have fun in the freerolls, at the minute i can quite confidently pigeon hole you into the latter category, i was just trying to point out to beginners that there are people with better records than yours that they can listen to on here and gain a lot of very good advice from.

GDRileyx said:

My theory is that you know a real pro, and sometimes let him use your account to bushwhack people in major tournaments. For that, you get a piece of his action, which you consistently blow playing for yourself.

Click to expand...

That is a crazy ass theory, i'm guessing your a big fan of the x-files right??

I commend you for your brilliant imagination and as your grammar is so good i think you should leave the freerolls behind and concentrate on writing fiction, either that or proof read for an author and inspire him with your creative genius.

orangepeeleo said:

I really wish i did know a pro because he/she would be a great mentor, unfortunately i dont and i've had to learn the majority of what i know from this site.

Click to expand...

You do. ChuckTs, ChrisTC, zachvac among others get their primary incomes from poker, so you can consider them pros. And a lot of other people here such as bw07507, Fredrick Paulsson, ... basically all the people listed as 100nl regs and above in this thread have hourly winning rates that are worthy of decent salaries, and therefore could be considered semi-pros.